Should the Public Airwaves be More or Less Censored?

Um, thats what being relative means. It's awesome that a 3 year old can forget goldfish, and that is most likely due to the fact that goldfish would not have an impact on their undeveloped brain. Watching someones head be blown off would. I can remember things all the way back when I was 1.5 years old, and they were significant things, and I definately remember the first time I saw someone die on TV. The topic of this thread is, should the public airwaves be more or less censored, not, should the FCC have control over the airwaves. whine?
Just stating the facts.If I was whining about it, I would have left EVC a long time ago.

I am not the only one who has said it, you should be harrassing the FCC as well. That is not what I said at all. It's not the topic Dan, read the topic. I have not said that either.If your going to attack me, at least be truthful Oh. So your reason is that speech should only be free if nobody can hear it. If you are indeed handling them, then that is fine. I guess we can get rid of child services now too.

FCC? You're a bunch of pricks.Damn, it's been days now. By the logic you've used in this thread, I should have been issued a stiff fine by the FCC, been locked up by the secret service, and have a restraining order on me that prevents me from responding to your posts.Of course, I don't, because you have no fucking clue what you're talking about. All three of these points are quoted in previous posts. I'm happy to let 'em sit there, and bring them up again if you try to repeat your arguments that depend on them. Hey, now you're midnlessly repeating my statements, instead of yours! That's a twist.Either way... no, not at all. But you have to leave someone the choice to not hear it if they don't want to. In the case of the bullhorn, he's not leaving anyone that choice. The TV networks, on the other hand, do. An ad for Desperate Houswives is comparable to child abuse! There go those leaps again.You should get over this disdain for being called a hypocrite, if you're going to be so intensely hypocritcal.

---

"I know some of you are going to say 'I did look it up, and that's not true.' That's 'cause you looked it up in a book. Next time, look it up in your gut."
-Stephen Colbert

One of the advantages of fiction is that you can learn about life from the comfort and safety of your own living room. I'd rather have my children learn about heads being blown off that way. I'd rather have them filling their minds where I can be with them and explain things to them if necessary and comfort them if necessary.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

as to being relative, you were inferring that i should agree with you that offensive is relative by age. it isn't. offensive is relative to being raised to be offended by things. like goldfish was referring to the fact that children, like goldfish, forget things very easily. the fcc is the body that censors the airwaves. therefore a discussion of whether the airwaves should be more or less censored involves a discussion of why the fcc claims the right to censor in the first place. logic, nutjob. no. harrassment is uninvited. you continue to post, therefore you invite comment. if you don't like it. sucks.Edited by brennakimi, : No reason given.

Keep thinking that way Dan, and btw, stop making everything I say into a black and white issue, because it is not.Oh, and yes, I do have a fucking clue what I am talking about.Take a look at this sticky post in another forum.
Do not make threats against the President of the US - RC GroupsYou may be able to freely offend people, but there is a line alwys that can be drawn. Like I said, it dosn't give you the right to do it.
If we were so free to offend people whenever and however we want, then all these other rules that stem from offending people, wouldn't be in place.I would also say that 80-100% of all pIn the case of the bullhorn, he's not leaving anyone that choice.[/qs]Bullshit, you can always go buy yourself some noise cancelling headphones. IT's my right to freedom of speech, and it doesn't matter what means I use to get my speech out there, and it doesn't matter what time.Why have all these stipulations all of sudden? What makes your stipulations any better or worse than mine?I think we have a new hypocrite in town. No leap there, and I did not say that, just you missing the point again, what a fucking joke, what are you selectively smart?Go read it again, until you figure out exactly what I meant.Edited by riVeRraT, : No reason given.

Yes Ringo, I have agreed to that line of thought already in this thread. And I must thank you for your rational behaivor in this thread.But what about the time your not with your kids, and they happen to catch something?
What about when they are in school?
What about the children that aren't being supervised?That is what I meant about child services. We obviously have those to protect our children, because htere are parents out there who are not doing their job, and then someday we have to pay for it, when we have a run-in with one of these people.Yes, I know it's your right to be an idiot(not you), but is it fair to a child if theyt aren't getting the supervision they need?TV is a part of life. Turning it off, or being able to turn it off is not the answer.

Ok yes, I completely agree with that, but age is a factor, as you see more things, then more things become less offensive to you. Or even the opposite could happen. Oh, ok, I missed that one. But my point is stilla good reply, because as I pointed out in my own life, it was those traumatic events that I remember more than any other thing. WEll I don't see it as that way. I think that is a totally different topic. That is why I feel I do not have to justify what is already in place, and allowed by the people of the USA.If you were that concerned about it, you and Dan could start a revolution or something.

What on Earth does making threats against the President's life have to do with offending someone?I included the preceding line about you having a fucking clue, because it makes the one about the sticky post funnier. Laws against threatening the President don't stem from offending people. They relate to conspiracy to commmit treason against the United States. Requiring you to spend money, and block out possibly necessary noises (like oncoming cars) is infringing on you. Where's this "all of a sudden" coming from? I made clear that it doesn't extend to infringing on someone else from my second post in the thread, when I made clear that I had nothing against regulating technical matters. A basic understanding of the law. Like... seriously, a fifth grade civics class level of understanding. You really are just repeating what I say, aren't you? I understand why... the things I say do sound much more convincing than the things you say.Edited by Dan Carroll, : No reason given.

---

"I know some of you are going to say 'I did look it up, and that's not true.' That's 'cause you looked it up in a book. Next time, look it up in your gut."
-Stephen Colbert

Any revolution started by me and Brenna would be far too awesome for this country to handle.

---

"I know some of you are going to say 'I did look it up, and that's not true.' That's 'cause you looked it up in a book. Next time, look it up in your gut."
-Stephen Colbert

I'm glad if they "happen to catch something" when I'm not around. I can't think of everything to tell them so I'm glad they have other sources to get them thinking. I'm less concerned about "supervising" them than about being available to talk to them.I don't think my children should be deprived of a source of information just because somebody else isn't making proper use of it.Let them watch what they want. Chances are they'll be bored by the "bad" stuff anyway.
(By the way, I don't approve of children watching basketball. They should be playing it, not watching it.)

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Don't dig. You'd be to China by now. You're a good guy, and write some excellent posts in the Faith and Belief forum from time to time, but you're making a fool of yourself here.Look, I doubt you'll listen to me here, but I've skimmed this thread and you're not giving any evidence to your points, and thus are just embarrassing yourself.1.Explain WHAT GIVES THE FCC (or anybody) THE RIGHT TO CENSOR PUBLIC AIRWAVES FOR CONTENT?2.Please don't claim that an ad for a show glorifying adultery is as damaging to a child as physically abusing said child, unless you have some professional evidence to support this claim.3.People have the right to say what they want on a public forum. It's not harrassment if you keep replying to them, and even if you don't, nobody's forcing you to come on here and debate.4.Big Brother is not as strict as some people think. The Patriot Act's bad, but fortunately the government doesn't have THAT much power right now.Proof: Bush is a tool.

No, the post doesn't say threats against his life, it only says threats, and pointless offending the president could be consider threatening.I know, I have seen it first hand, so yes I have a fucking clue. That is only one example.Look, I am done with you.If you can't get what I am saying, and have been saying all along, and that is, I find it wrong to have a R rated commercial during a G rated basketball game, then there is nothing more to say.It is beyond me how you could possibly find that unreasonable.They should have a law against being irrational.

quote:

---

TV is a part of life.

---

If you so choose, yes.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.I do watch a few TV shows, but I get them in DVD form, without any ads.We got rid of TV because we tended to waste a lot of time flipping around the channels becasue there was nothing good on.The point is, nobody is forcing you to have a TV. Nobody is forcing you to turn it on. Nobody is forcing you to watch prime-time programming with your children.You choose to do all of those things.

quote:

---

Turning it off, or being able to turn it off is not the answer.

---

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

You don't see a difference in "information" and things that could possibly hurt your childrens minds?