Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8913 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-16-2019 7:12 PM
26 online now:
4petdinos, AZPaul3, Coragyps, DrJones*, edge (5 members, 21 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Arnold Wolf
Post Volume:
Total: 853,868 Year: 8,904/19,786 Month: 1,326/2,119 Week: 86/576 Day: 86/50 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1011
12
1314
...
21Next
Author Topic:   Should the Public Airwaves be More or Less Censored?
ringo
Member
Posts: 16621
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 166 of 310 (394575)
04-12-2007 11:03 AM
Reply to: Message 162 by riVeRraT
04-12-2007 9:43 AM


Re: No to Censorship
riVeRraT writes:

I do not intend to "sheild" children from life, but make life relative to their age.

But you don't get to decide what's appropriate for the age of my children. If you censor the public airwaves, you're taking away my right to raise my children as I see fit.

A five-year-old driving a car is a poor analogy. He presents a danger to society at large - a five-year-old watching pornography does not.


Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by riVeRraT, posted 04-12-2007 9:43 AM riVeRraT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by riVeRraT, posted 04-13-2007 10:17 AM ringo has responded

nator
Member (Idle past 333 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 167 of 310 (394603)
04-12-2007 1:48 PM
Reply to: Message 153 by riVeRraT
04-11-2007 8:03 PM


Re: No to Censorship
I don't have TV in my life, by choice. We have a TV in the house, because we love movies, but that's all we use it for.

quote:
I actually admire that. I think about doing that often, but it never seems to happen.

Well, maybe you actually like TV. Neither Zhimbo nor I care about sports the way that you seem to, so I can understand someone who likes to watch sporting events wanting access to ESPN and the like.

BUT, if it is broadcast during prime time, then you tak your chances that prime-time-rated stuff will be shown.

The point is that when we realized that we didn't like most of the content that was available on TV, our reaction was very different from yours.

Your reaction was to censor what is broadcast to match Riverrat's sensibilities.

Our reaction was to not have it come into our house in the first place, because we have the choice to do that.

Why not?
It was my answer, and Brenna's answer, and NosyNed's answer.

quote:
Well, it's just part of life. It's like anything else.

It is only a part of your life if you choose it to be.

You can also choose to not have it be part of your life.

Nobody has a gun to your head to force you to pay for or watch TV.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by riVeRraT, posted 04-11-2007 8:03 PM riVeRraT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by riVeRraT, posted 04-13-2007 10:25 AM nator has responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 333 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 168 of 310 (394605)
04-12-2007 1:52 PM
Reply to: Message 154 by riVeRraT
04-11-2007 8:06 PM


Re: Apology
quote:
I just want to apologize to anyone who thinks that I want to restrain peoples right to free speech, that's not my intention.

That's wonderful.

But then you go on to say:

quote:
And I still don't think that you should have a right to offend people, ON PURPOSE.

You want to criminalize bad manners now?

Welcome to Riverrat's dictatorship, where you can be thrown into prison for being rude!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by riVeRraT, posted 04-11-2007 8:06 PM riVeRraT has not yet responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 333 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 169 of 310 (394606)
04-12-2007 1:59 PM
Reply to: Message 155 by riVeRraT
04-11-2007 8:08 PM


Re: No to Censorship
And I'll bet that there were beer commercials showing just as much women's skin during the game.

quote:
Childrens shows have women in bathing suits, I find nothing wrong with that.

Beer commercials are notorious for lots of really blatant sexual innuendo, rat. The implication of the ads are, basically, if you drink our beer, hot women will think you are cool and want to screw you.

In other words, many beer ads have just as much sexual innuendo as that desperate Housewives commercial.

You know this. Therefore, for you to pretend that that beer ads broadcast during sports programming depict women in bathingsuits similar to how they are depicted on children's shows is dishonest.

And what about the cheerleaders?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by riVeRraT, posted 04-11-2007 8:08 PM riVeRraT has not yet responded

  
One_Charred_Wing
Member (Idle past 4318 days)
Posts: 690
From: USA West Coast
Joined: 11-21-2003


Message 170 of 310 (394613)
04-12-2007 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 164 by Dan Carroll
04-12-2007 10:30 AM


Quote mining liability
Watch, someday somebody's gonna see that detailed account you just gave me, and copy-paste it along with "SEE!! ATHEISTS SACRIFICE BABIES AND EAT SOULS!!"
This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by Dan Carroll, posted 04-12-2007 10:30 AM Dan Carroll has not yet responded

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 2091 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 171 of 310 (394614)
04-12-2007 2:33 PM
Reply to: Message 165 by Dan Carroll
04-12-2007 10:37 AM


Re: Apology

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by Dan Carroll, posted 04-12-2007 10:37 AM Dan Carroll has not yet responded

tsig
Member (Idle past 1072 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 172 of 310 (394617)
04-12-2007 2:40 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by riVeRraT
04-03-2007 11:36 PM


Re: No to Censorship
[q]Well then we should get rid of helmet laws, speed limits, local and state building codes, legalize all drugs, drinking age, smoking age, and make all stop signs with white trim around the edges optional.[/q]

I agree. Let god sort it out.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by riVeRraT, posted 04-03-2007 11:36 PM riVeRraT has not yet responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 333 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 173 of 310 (394618)
04-12-2007 2:41 PM
Reply to: Message 165 by Dan Carroll
04-12-2007 10:37 AM


We LOVE these!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by Dan Carroll, posted 04-12-2007 10:37 AM Dan Carroll has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by ramoss, posted 04-12-2007 3:50 PM nator has not yet responded
 Message 175 by ringo, posted 04-12-2007 4:02 PM nator has not yet responded

  
ramoss
Member
Posts: 3110
Joined: 08-11-2004
Member Rating: 7.7


Message 174 of 310 (394642)
04-12-2007 3:50 PM
Reply to: Message 173 by nator
04-12-2007 2:41 PM


Re: We LOVE these!
That is udderly ridiculous you know.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by nator, posted 04-12-2007 2:41 PM nator has not yet responded

ringo
Member
Posts: 16621
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 175 of 310 (394645)
04-12-2007 4:02 PM
Reply to: Message 173 by nator
04-12-2007 2:41 PM


Re: We LOVE these!
I think cow-pornography should be banned from the Internet.


Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by nator, posted 04-12-2007 2:41 PM nator has not yet responded

tsig
Member (Idle past 1072 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 176 of 310 (394694)
04-12-2007 7:25 PM
Reply to: Message 158 by macaroniandcheese
04-11-2007 10:05 PM


Revolting
you and me, baby. we'll change the world.

First we take the forum, then we'll take Berlin.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by macaroniandcheese, posted 04-11-2007 10:05 PM macaroniandcheese has not yet responded

  
riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 82 days)
Posts: 5746
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 177 of 310 (394806)
04-13-2007 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 166 by ringo
04-12-2007 11:03 AM


Re: No to Censorship
A five-year-old driving a car is a poor analogy. He presents a danger to society at large - a five-year-old watching pornography does not.

Are you 100% sure about that statement?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by ringo, posted 04-12-2007 11:03 AM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 179 by ringo, posted 04-13-2007 12:07 PM riVeRraT has responded

riVeRraT
Member (Idle past 82 days)
Posts: 5746
From: NY USA
Joined: 05-09-2004


Message 178 of 310 (394808)
04-13-2007 10:25 AM
Reply to: Message 167 by nator
04-12-2007 1:48 PM


Re: No to Censorship
BUT, if it is broadcast during prime time, then you tak your chances that prime-time-rated stuff will be shown.

I guess you haven't been reading, but I stated that it happened on a Sunday afternoon. If it was prime time, then I guess I wouldn't have a problem, but I still think the rating of the commercial should match the rating of the program, and yes, commercials do have ratings.

Your reaction was to censor what is broadcast to match Riverrat's sensibilities.

No, just be fair. TV has changed much over the years, and it keeps inching in a direction that IMO is not favorable to children. I would love to know the justification, besides freedom of speech.

It is obvious that offending people is not a good thing, just look at what Don Imus is going through right now.(and he deserves it)

You want to criminalize bad manners now?

It is really not that far fetched of an idea, as most private institutions will punish you for offending people.
Bad mannors and offending people on purpose are two different things, I don't know why you would describe it that way.

You know this. Therefore, for you to pretend that that beer ads broadcast during sports programming depict women in bathingsuits similar to how they are depicted on children's shows is dishonest.

When did I ever say I support the beer commercials?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by nator, posted 04-12-2007 1:48 PM nator has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 180 by nator, posted 04-13-2007 9:32 PM riVeRraT has responded

ringo
Member
Posts: 16621
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 179 of 310 (394831)
04-13-2007 12:07 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by riVeRraT
04-13-2007 10:17 AM


Re: No to Censorship
riVeRraT writes:

A five-year-old driving a car is a poor analogy. He presents a danger to society at large - a five-year-old watching pornography does not.

Are you 100% sure about that statement?

Never mind how sure I am. If you have a point to make against that statement, make it.


Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC
This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by riVeRraT, posted 04-13-2007 10:17 AM riVeRraT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 182 by riVeRraT, posted 04-18-2007 5:45 PM ringo has not yet responded

nator
Member (Idle past 333 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 180 of 310 (394889)
04-13-2007 9:32 PM
Reply to: Message 178 by riVeRraT
04-13-2007 10:25 AM


Re: No to Censorship
quote:
TV has changed much over the years, and it keeps inching in a direction that IMO is not favorable to children. I would love to know the justification, besides freedom of speech.

I know why, rat.

M O N E Y

I mean, how much Masterpiece Theater do you and your kids watch? Probably about as much as the rest of the population.

If Masterpiece Theater was as popular as Desperate Housewives, that's what we would see much more of.

quote:
It is really not that far fetched of an idea, as most private institutions will punish you for offending people.

Jesus, rat, are you really incapable of seeing the difference between what your job requirements are for being polite and innoffensive to others and criminal behavior?

quote:
Bad mannors and offending people on purpose are two different things, I don't know why you would describe it that way.

No, they really aren't different things WRT the First Ammendment.

quote:
When did I ever say I support the beer commercials?

Well, you didn't mention them as being offensive, even though they are probably just as raunchy as a Desperate Housewives commercial.

And, again, what about the cheerleaders?

And, just to reiterate:

TV is only a part of your life if you choose it to be.

You can also choose to not have it be part of your life.

Nobody has a gun to your head to force you to pay for or watch TV.

Edited by nator, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by riVeRraT, posted 04-13-2007 10:25 AM riVeRraT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by riVeRraT, posted 04-18-2007 5:41 PM nator has responded

  
RewPrev1
...
1011
12
1314
...
21Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019