| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
07 Oct 2006 03:56:53 AM |
| Object: |
Another victory for decency |
....The Parents Television Council (PTC) is praising Mitsubishi Motors for
yanking its sponsorship of the FX Network drama Nip/Tuck. The TV series,
sexually and violently graphic from its inception, has recently aired
episodes that members of the PTC and other pro-family groups have criticized
as containing gratuitously explicit sexual situations and other indecent
content. The pro-family media watchdog group provided the automaker with
descriptions of the show, and Mitsubishi executives responded in a letter,
noting that they and their company "have no desire to offend consumers" and,
with this in mind, "have decided to discontinue advertising on Nip/Tuck."
PTC President Brent Bozell says his group applauds Mitsubishi Motors for its
"courageous" decision and notes that the creators of Nip/Tuck have, over the
past three years, "devised some of the most disgusting and disturbing
storylines imaginable." He cites episodes of the show containing themes of
incest, necrophilia, rape, pedophilia, and more. "And just four episodes
into season four," Bozell points out, "Nip/Tuck reached new depths of
depravity" with a storyline about bestiality, in which the guest star
portraying a woman with an inordinate affection for her dog was none other
than the former child actor of Little House on the Prairie fame, Melissa
Gilbert. And since FX is part of most cable subscribers expanded basic
package, the PTC spokesman notes, "this scene of stomach-turning depravity
was available to children in over 75 percent of U.S. households." Bozell
says his group is calling on the remaining sponsors of Nip/Tuck to closely
examine the value of supporting "the vilest content on television" with
their advertising dollars. [Jenni Parker]
--
----------
J Yöung
youngopinions@aol.com
.
|
|
| User: "Pangur Ban" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
07 Oct 2006 04:42:43 AM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in
news:taSdnWUZBtBTuLrYnZ2dnUVZ_rGdnZ2d@giganews.com:
Excuse the top post...
Do not PTC and Mitsubishi consider parents to be perfectly capable of
filtering what comes into their homes? Is this not yet another example
of egregious interference with parental rights?
I have not seen the show; it is not one I care to watch. However, the
fact that it is going into its fourth season indicates it does have an
audience....an audience which chooses to watch such things. They have
the right to do so.
Cable has parental controls, does it not? Let the parents use
them....let PTC work to persuade sponsors to support series, specials,
whatever, etc. instead of working to get them cancelled.
Pangur - nonchristian theist
...The Parents Television Council (PTC) is praising Mitsubishi Motors
for yanking its sponsorship of the FX Network drama Nip/Tuck. The TV
series, sexually and violently graphic from its inception, has
recently aired episodes that members of the PTC and other pro-family
groups have criticized as containing gratuitously explicit sexual
situations and other indecent content. The pro-family media watchdog
group provided the automaker with descriptions of the show, and
Mitsubishi executives responded in a letter, noting that they and
their company "have no desire to offend consumers" and, with this in
mind, "have decided to discontinue advertising on Nip/Tuck." PTC
President Brent Bozell says his group applauds Mitsubishi Motors for
its "courageous" decision and notes that the creators of Nip/Tuck
have, over the past three years, "devised some of the most disgusting
and disturbing storylines imaginable." He cites episodes of the show
containing themes of incest, necrophilia, rape, pedophilia, and more.
"And just four episodes into season four," Bozell points out,
"Nip/Tuck reached new depths of depravity" with a storyline about
bestiality, in which the guest star portraying a woman with an
inordinate affection for her dog was none other than the former child
actor of Little House on the Prairie fame, Melissa Gilbert. And since
FX is part of most cable subscribers expanded basic package, the PTC
spokesman notes, "this scene of stomach-turning depravity was
available to children in over 75 percent of U.S. households." Bozell
says his group is calling on the remaining sponsors of Nip/Tuck to
closely examine the value of supporting "the vilest content on
television" with their advertising dollars. [Jenni Parker]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Malcolm" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
07 Oct 2006 08:58:59 AM |
|
|
"Pangur Ban" <Pangur-Ban$@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in
Excuse the top post...
Do not PTC and Mitsubishi consider parents to be perfectly capable of
filtering what comes into their homes? Is this not yet another example
of egregious interference with parental rights?
It's the parents responsibility to bring up their children.
However if the culture outside is awash with trash, then it is extremely
difficult to insulate your children from it. Forty years ago there would be
one television screen in the house, colour if you were rich, and it was
relatively easy to have a parental "off" switch. Nowdays children
legitimately expect computers, and those computers come with DVD players,
and it is much harder to supervise. So we need to be a lot less tolerant of
unsuitable material. After all, if something isn't fit for a 12 year old boy
to see, then noramlly it is not fit for an adult to see either.
--
www.personal.leeds.ac.uk/~bgy1mm
freeware games to download.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Altarriba" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
10 Oct 2006 10:10:00 PM |
|
|
Malcolm wrote:
"Pangur Ban" <Pangur-Ban$@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in
Excuse the top post...
Do not PTC and Mitsubishi consider parents to be perfectly capable of
filtering what comes into their homes? Is this not yet another example
of egregious interference with parental rights?
It's the parents responsibility to bring up their children.
Agreed, though the culture at large also has some responsibility, as
those children are going to form part of the next generation's culture
and society.
However if the culture outside is awash with trash, then it is extremely
difficult to insulate your children from it.
We each have our own idea of what constitutes "trash." That's the
problem... you have items that *you* want to keep away from *your*
children, but they need not correspond to the choices I would make with
regards to what children are or are not exposed to.
Forty years ago there would be one television screen in the house, colour if you were rich,
and it was relatively easy to have a parental "off" switch. Nowdays children
legitimately expect computers, and those computers come with DVD players,
and it is much harder to supervise.
Nothing at all is stopping you from having no TV at all, or restricting
computer access. Your desire to restrict your children's access to
material you disapprove of is not sufficient reason for you to try to
restrict what I or my children are exposed to.
So we need to be a lot less tolerant of
unsuitable material. After all, if something isn't fit for a 12 year old boy
to see, then noramlly it is not fit for an adult to see either.
It is??? This is news to me.
I am not a 12 year old boy. My interests, experiences and tastes differ
markedly from that of a 12 year old boy, and I see no reason why I
should restrict my choice of entertainment to that which *you* consider
suitable for a child, and I certainly don't see any reason why you
should be able to dictate what I, an adult, do or do not view or
otherwise experience.
If I were someone who considered censorship acceptable, shows like "The
700 Club", or most of what is broadcast on Fox News would be gone...
but I *don't* approve of censorship... I consider it to be a "cure"
far, far worse than whatever "disease" is being censored.
IMO, censorship is for weak minds and weak spirits, who have no better
ideas to offer, who *know*, in their heart of hearts, that they don't
have what it takes to convince others by the strength of their
arguments or the compelling nature of their position, so they must
resort to the vulgar bullying of censorship.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
10 Oct 2006 08:54:58 PM |
|
|
Malcolm wrote:
"Pangur Ban" <Pangur-Ban$@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in
Excuse the top post...
Do not PTC and Mitsubishi consider parents to be perfectly capable of
filtering what comes into their homes? Is this not yet another example
of egregious interference with parental rights?
It's the parents responsibility to bring up their children.
However if the culture outside is awash with trash, then it is extremely
difficult to insulate your children from it. Forty years ago there would be
one television screen in the house, colour if you were rich, and it was
relatively easy to have a parental "off" switch. Nowdays children
legitimately expect computers, and those computers come with DVD players,
and it is much harder to supervise. So we need to be a lot less tolerant of
unsuitable material. After all, if something isn't fit for a 12 year old boy
to see, then noramlly it is not fit for an adult to see either.
--
www.personal.leeds.ac.uk/~bgy1mm
freeware games to download.
You are absolutely correct, Don't pay any mind to those two who
responded. They are both gay activitist, who would seduce and sexaully
assault 12 year olds if they could. They see nothing wrong with gay
boy scout leaders taking 12 year olds into the woods. Just keep on
campaigning for censoring on the tv and internet. We will win. Other
nations have censorship on both. I hear you can't get anything sexual
in some European countries. If we keep praying and working here, we
can overcome those like these gays on here and protect our children.
Amen
.
|
|
|
| User: "Doc Smartass" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
10 Oct 2006 09:32:21 PM |
|
|
wrote in
news:1160513698.407535.93140@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Malcolm wrote:
"Pangur Ban" <Pangur-Ban$@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in
Excuse the top post...
Do not PTC and Mitsubishi consider parents to be perfectly capable
of filtering what comes into their homes? Is this not yet another
example of egregious interference with parental rights?
It's the parents responsibility to bring up their children.
However if the culture outside is awash with trash, then it is
extremely difficult to insulate your children from it. Forty years
ago there would be one television screen in the house, colour if you
were rich, and it was relatively easy to have a parental "off"
switch. Nowdays children legitimately expect computers, and those
computers come with DVD players, and it is much harder to supervise.
So we need to be a lot less tolerant of unsuitable material. After
all, if something isn't fit for a 12 year old boy to see, then
noramlly it is not fit for an adult to see either. --
www.personal.leeds.ac.uk/~bgy1mm
freeware games to download.
You are absolutely correct, Don't pay any mind to those two who
responded. They are both gay activitist, who would seduce and
sexaully assault 12 year olds if they could. They see nothing wrong
"Gay activist" isn't the same as "catholic priest." You rightie-religious
weirdo perverts are the one pooning little boys. And goats. And sheep.
And donkeys.
with gay boy scout leaders taking 12 year olds into the woods. Just
Right-wing Boy Scout leaders are the problem, not gays. Keep the
conservatives off the kids.
keep on campaigning for censoring on the tv and internet. We will
win. Other nations have censorship on both. I hear you can't get
anything sexual in some European countries. If we keep praying and
working here, we can overcome those like these gays on here and
protect our children. Amen
If you want to live that way, move to a country like that, you psychotic
weirdo. You worship the wrong god, but they'd still recognize a Fellow
Traveler over in Saudi, or Afghanistan, or Iran. Go be with your own
kind.
--
Doc Smartass
The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of
words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the
people who must use the words. - Philip K. *****
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
11 Oct 2006 04:14:20 AM |
|
|
Doc Smartass wrote:
prophecyjohn@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1160513698.407535.93140@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Malcolm wrote:
"Pangur Ban" <Pangur-Ban$@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in
Excuse the top post...
Do not PTC and Mitsubishi consider parents to be perfectly capable
of filtering what comes into their homes? Is this not yet another
example of egregious interference with parental rights?
It's the parents responsibility to bring up their children.
However if the culture outside is awash with trash, then it is
extremely difficult to insulate your children from it. Forty years
ago there would be one television screen in the house, colour if you
were rich, and it was relatively easy to have a parental "off"
switch. Nowdays children legitimately expect computers, and those
computers come with DVD players, and it is much harder to supervise.
So we need to be a lot less tolerant of unsuitable material. After
all, if something isn't fit for a 12 year old boy to see, then
noramlly it is not fit for an adult to see either. --
www.personal.leeds.ac.uk/~bgy1mm
freeware games to download.
You are absolutely correct, Don't pay any mind to those two who
responded. They are both gay activitist, who would seduce and
sexaully assault 12 year olds if they could. They see nothing wrong
"Gay activist" isn't the same as "catholic priest." You rightie-religious
weirdo perverts are the one pooning little boys. And goats. And sheep.
And donkeys.
with gay boy scout leaders taking 12 year olds into the woods. Just
Right-wing Boy Scout leaders are the problem, not gays. Keep the
conservatives off the kids.
keep on campaigning for censoring on the tv and internet. We will
win. Other nations have censorship on both. I hear you can't get
anything sexual in some European countries. If we keep praying and
working here, we can overcome those like these gays on here and
protect our children. Amen
If you want to live that way, move to a country like that, you psychotic
weirdo. You worship the wrong god, but they'd still recognize a Fellow
Traveler over in Saudi, or Afghanistan, or Iran. Go be with your own
kind.
--
Doc Smartass
The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of
words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the
people who must use the words. - Philip K. *****
So you favor the molesting of cub scouts by gay pedophiles regardless
of their party affiliation. Perhaps you are a scout leader yourself?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Doc Smartass" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
11 Oct 2006 05:58:27 AM |
|
|
wrote in
news:1160540060.162411.98480@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Doc Smartass wrote:
wrote in
news:1160513698.407535.93140@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Malcolm wrote:
"Pangur Ban" <Pangur-Ban$@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in
Excuse the top post...
Do not PTC and Mitsubishi consider parents to be perfectly
capable of filtering what comes into their homes? Is this not
yet another example of egregious interference with parental
rights?
It's the parents responsibility to bring up their children.
However if the culture outside is awash with trash, then it is
extremely difficult to insulate your children from it. Forty years
ago there would be one television screen in the house, colour if
you were rich, and it was relatively easy to have a parental "off"
switch. Nowdays children legitimately expect computers, and those
computers come with DVD players, and it is much harder to
supervise. So we need to be a lot less tolerant of unsuitable
material. After all, if something isn't fit for a 12 year old boy
to see, then noramlly it is not fit for an adult to see either. --
www.personal.leeds.ac.uk/~bgy1mm
freeware games to download.
You are absolutely correct, Don't pay any mind to those two who
responded. They are both gay activitist, who would seduce and
sexaully assault 12 year olds if they could. They see nothing
wrong
"Gay activist" isn't the same as "catholic priest." You
rightie-religious weirdo perverts are the one pooning little boys.
And goats. And sheep. And donkeys.
with gay boy scout leaders taking 12 year olds into the woods.
Just
Right-wing Boy Scout leaders are the problem, not gays. Keep the
conservatives off the kids.
keep on campaigning for censoring on the tv and internet. We will
win. Other nations have censorship on both. I hear you can't get
anything sexual in some European countries. If we keep praying and
working here, we can overcome those like these gays on here and
protect our children. Amen
If you want to live that way, move to a country like that, you
psychotic weirdo. You worship the wrong god, but they'd still
recognize a Fellow Traveler over in Saudi, or Afghanistan, or Iran.
Go be with your own kind.
So you favor the molesting of cub scouts by gay pedophiles regardless
of their party affiliation. Perhaps you are a scout leader yourself?
Go back to your sheep, little girl. You're not qualified to flame me.
--
Doc Smartass
The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of
words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the
people who must use the words. - Philip K. *****
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Strife767" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
13 Oct 2006 03:25:48 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:14:20 -0400, <prophecyjohn@yahoo.com> wrote:
Doc Smartass wrote:
prophecyjohn@yahoo.com wrote in
news:1160513698.407535.93140@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Malcolm wrote:
"Pangur Ban" <Pangur-Ban$@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in
Excuse the top post...
Do not PTC and Mitsubishi consider parents to be perfectly capable
of filtering what comes into their homes? Is this not yet another
example of egregious interference with parental rights?
It's the parents responsibility to bring up their children.
However if the culture outside is awash with trash, then it is
extremely difficult to insulate your children from it. Forty years
ago there would be one television screen in the house, colour if you
were rich, and it was relatively easy to have a parental "off"
switch. Nowdays children legitimately expect computers, and those
computers come with DVD players, and it is much harder to supervise.
So we need to be a lot less tolerant of unsuitable material. After
all, if something isn't fit for a 12 year old boy to see, then
noramlly it is not fit for an adult to see either. --
www.personal.leeds.ac.uk/~bgy1mm
freeware games to download.
You are absolutely correct, Don't pay any mind to those two who
responded. They are both gay activitist, who would seduce and
sexaully assault 12 year olds if they could. They see nothing wrong
"Gay activist" isn't the same as "catholic priest." You
rightie-religious
weirdo perverts are the one pooning little boys. And goats. And sheep.
And donkeys.
with gay boy scout leaders taking 12 year olds into the woods. Just
Right-wing Boy Scout leaders are the problem, not gays. Keep the
conservatives off the kids.
keep on campaigning for censoring on the tv and internet. We will
win. Other nations have censorship on both. I hear you can't get
anything sexual in some European countries. If we keep praying and
working here, we can overcome those like these gays on here and
protect our children. Amen
If you want to live that way, move to a country like that, you psychotic
weirdo. You worship the wrong god, but they'd still recognize a Fellow
Traveler over in Saudi, or Afghanistan, or Iran. Go be with your own
kind.
--
Doc Smartass
The basic tool for the manipulation of reality is the manipulation of
words. If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the
people who must use the words. - Philip K. *****
So you favor the molesting of cub scouts by gay pedophiles
"The vast majority of offenders are heterosexual men. Male offenders who
abuse young boys maintain adult heterosexual relationships. The habitual
molester of boys is rarely attracted to adult males." --Roland Summit,
M.D. Head Physician, Community Consultation Service, Harbor UCLA Medical
Center
--
____________ _____________ __________________
__ ___/_ /__________(_)__ __/____/__ /_ ___/__ /
_____ \_ __/_ ___/_ /__ /_ _ _ \_ /_ __ \__ /
____/ // /_ _ / _ / _ __/ / __/ / / /_/ /_ /
/____/ \__/ /_/ /_/ /_/ \___//_/ \____/ /_/
Skeptic, atheist...and somehow an optimist. Go figure.
I want to change the world.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "ScottyFLL" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
10 Oct 2006 11:36:38 PM |
|
|
wrote:
Don't pay any mind to those two who
responded. They are both gay activitist, who would seduce and sexaully
assault 12 year olds if they could.
LOL.
But you might be interested in this little tidbit about homophobes:
http://content.apa.org/journals/abn/105/3/440
People so out of touch with themselves, they won't even admit who they
are. Pity. They end up making everyone miserable.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Strife767" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
13 Oct 2006 03:22:54 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 10 Oct 2006 16:54:58 -0400, <prophecyjohn@yahoo.com> wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
"Pangur Ban" <Pangur-Ban$@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in
Excuse the top post...
Do not PTC and Mitsubishi consider parents to be perfectly capable of
filtering what comes into their homes? Is this not yet another
example
of egregious interference with parental rights?
It's the parents responsibility to bring up their children.
However if the culture outside is awash with trash, then it is extremely
difficult to insulate your children from it. Forty years ago there
would be
one television screen in the house, colour if you were rich, and it was
relatively easy to have a parental "off" switch. Nowdays children
legitimately expect computers, and those computers come with DVD
players,
and it is much harder to supervise. So we need to be a lot less
tolerant of
unsuitable material. After all, if something isn't fit for a 12 year
old boy
to see, then noramlly it is not fit for an adult to see either.
--
www.personal.leeds.ac.uk/~bgy1mm
freeware games to download.
You are absolutely correct, Don't pay any mind to those two who
responded. They are both gay activitist,
Activitivistist?
who would seduce and sexaully
assault 12 year olds if they could.
You fantasize about some strange things.
They see nothing wrong with gay
boy scout leaders taking 12 year olds into the woods.
Because they're:
a) Not as perverted as you
b) Aware that homosexuality has zero correlation with higher incidence of
child molestation
Just keep on
campaigning for censoring on the tv and internet. We will win.
No, you won't.
Other
nations have censorship on both. I hear you can't get anything sexual
in some European countries. If we keep praying
not a damned thing will happen, so--pray all you like.
and working here, we
can overcome those like these gays on here and protect our children.
Amen
Ahh, so all of the "work" you've done has accomplished what to this end?
There are more homosexuals in the media now than there ever have been.
Sounds like you failed miserably.
--
____________ _____________ __________________
__ ___/_ /__________(_)__ __/____/__ /_ ___/__ /
_____ \_ __/_ ___/_ /__ /_ _ _ \_ /_ __ \__ /
____/ // /_ _ / _ / _ __/ / __/ / / /_/ /_ /
/____/ \__/ /_/ /_/ /_/ \___//_/ \____/ /_/
Skeptic, atheist...and somehow an optimist. Go figure.
I want to change the world.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "ScottyFLL" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
07 Oct 2006 02:09:08 PM |
|
|
Malcolm wrote:
It's the parents responsibility to bring up their children.
Correct.
However if the culture outside is awash with trash, then it is extremely
difficult to insulate your children from it.
Why would you want to insulate someone from reality? How are you going
to raise a child to be a rational adult if you keep from him the
reality of the world? Isn't the time to see this kind of stuff WHEN
the child is still the charge of the parents, when some dialogue can be
engaged in??
Nowdays children
legitimately expect computers, and those computers come with DVD players,
and it is much harder to supervise.
There are tools that restrict sites that children can access. You can
turn off the DVD player function. If you have children that you are
not able to supervise, how does that become MY problem? Call Child
Protective Services if you can't control your kids -- give 'em up for
adoption -- leave my TV set alone.
So we need to be a lot less tolerant of
unsuitable material.
Who decides what's unsuitable? You? We're gonna have to watch Muppets
and "Reverends" when we turn on the tube? I don't think so.
After all, if something isn't fit for a 12 year old boy
to see, then noramlly it is not fit for an adult to see either.
You're advocating censorship. Which we don't allow in this country.
I'm not going to sit around watching "Lassie" and "Leave it to Beaver".
YOU will not be dictating what *I* watch on TV.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
10 Oct 2006 08:56:54 PM |
|
|
ScottyFLL wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
It's the parents responsibility to bring up their children.
Correct.
However if the culture outside is awash with trash, then it is extremely
difficult to insulate your children from it.
Why would you want to insulate someone from reality? How are you going
to raise a child to be a rational adult if you keep from him the
reality of the world? Isn't the time to see this kind of stuff WHEN
the child is still the charge of the parents, when some dialogue can be
engaged in??
Nowdays children
legitimately expect computers, and those computers come with DVD players,
and it is much harder to supervise.
There are tools that restrict sites that children can access. You can
turn off the DVD player function. If you have children that you are
not able to supervise, how does that become MY problem? Call Child
Protective Services if you can't control your kids -- give 'em up for
adoption -- leave my TV set alone.
So we need to be a lot less tolerant of
unsuitable material.
Who decides what's unsuitable? You? We're gonna have to watch Muppets
and "Reverends" when we turn on the tube? I don't think so.
After all, if something isn't fit for a 12 year old boy
to see, then noramlly it is not fit for an adult to see either.
You're advocating censorship. Which we don't allow in this country.
I'm not going to sit around watching "Lassie" and "Leave it to Beaver".
YOU will not be dictating what *I* watch on TV.
He is not controlling what you watch. You can get your porn films out
anytime.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Strife767" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
07 Oct 2006 05:33:41 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 04:58:59 -0400, Malcolm <regniztar@btinternet.com>
wrote:
"Pangur Ban" <Pangur-Ban$@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in
Excuse the top post...
Do not PTC and Mitsubishi consider parents to be perfectly capable of
filtering what comes into their homes? Is this not yet another example
of egregious interference with parental rights?
It's the parents responsibility to bring up their children.
However if the culture outside is awash with trash, then it is extremely
difficult to insulate your children from it. Forty years ago there would
be
one television screen in the house, colour if you were rich, and it was
relatively easy to have a parental "off" switch.
Now there are V-chips in every TV sold. Parents have no excuse for their
kids watching shows they don't want them to see.
Nowdays children
legitimately expect computers, and those computers come with DVD players,
Not necessarily. Also, there is v-chip-like software that exists for the
computer to monitor child use and prevent access to certain things. A
CD/DVD drive could easily be disabled when the kid is on the computer,
among other things.
With all of the methods that exist, parents have no excuse. If a child
works around this stuff by doing it at a friend's house or something, then
_his/her_ parents are to blame. Parents should not be taken off the hook
for not keeping watch over their own children. This is no one's problem
but theirs, and no one has the responsibility to 'fix it' but them.
--
____________ _____________ __________________
__ ___/_ /__________(_)__ __/____/__ /_ ___/__ /
_____ \_ __/_ ___/_ /__ /_ _ _ \_ /_ __ \__ /
____/ // /_ _ / _ / _ __/ / __/ / / /_/ /_ /
/____/ \__/ /_/ /_/ /_/ \___//_/ \____/ /_/
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "J Young" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
07 Oct 2006 04:02:28 AM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:taSdnWUZBtBTuLrYnZ2dnUVZ_rGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
...The Parents Television Council (PTC) is praising Mitsubishi Motors for
yanking its sponsorship of the FX Network drama Nip/Tuck. The TV series,
sexually and violently graphic from its inception, has recently aired
episodes that members of the PTC and other pro-family groups have
criticized
as containing gratuitously explicit sexual situations and other indecent
content. The pro-family media watchdog group provided the automaker with
descriptions of the show, and Mitsubishi executives responded in a letter,
noting that they and their company "have no desire to offend consumers"
and,
with this in mind, "have decided to discontinue advertising on Nip/Tuck."
PTC President Brent Bozell says his group applauds Mitsubishi Motors for
its
"courageous" decision and notes that the creators of Nip/Tuck have, over
the
past three years, "devised some of the most disgusting and disturbing
storylines imaginable." He cites episodes of the show containing themes of
incest, necrophilia, rape, pedophilia, and more. "And just four episodes
into season four," Bozell points out, "Nip/Tuck reached new depths of
depravity" with a storyline about bestiality, in which the guest star
portraying a woman with an inordinate affection for her dog was none other
than the former child actor of Little House on the Prairie fame, Melissa
Gilbert. And since FX is part of most cable subscribers expanded basic
package, the PTC spokesman notes, "this scene of stomach-turning depravity
was available to children in over 75 percent of U.S. households." Bozell
says his group is calling on the remaining sponsors of Nip/Tuck to closely
examine the value of supporting "the vilest content on television" with
their advertising dollars. [Jenni Parker]
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/10/62006h.asp
[ sorry. forgot to include the all, important verifiable source ]
.
|
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
07 Oct 2006 04:31:41 AM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:V-KdnRqtYMaAurrYnZ2dnUVZ_vidnZ2d@giganews.com...
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:taSdnWUZBtBTuLrYnZ2dnUVZ_rGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
...The Parents Television Council (PTC) is praising Mitsubishi Motors for
yanking its sponsorship of the FX Network drama Nip/Tuck. The TV series,
sexually and violently graphic from its inception, has recently aired
episodes that members of the PTC and other pro-family groups have
criticized
as containing gratuitously explicit sexual situations and other indecent
content. The pro-family media watchdog group provided the automaker with
descriptions of the show, and Mitsubishi executives responded in a
letter,
noting that they and their company "have no desire to offend consumers"
and,
with this in mind, "have decided to discontinue advertising on Nip/Tuck."
PTC President Brent Bozell says his group applauds Mitsubishi Motors for
its
"courageous" decision and notes that the creators of Nip/Tuck have, over
the
past three years, "devised some of the most disgusting and disturbing
storylines imaginable." He cites episodes of the show containing themes
of
incest, necrophilia, rape, pedophilia, and more. "And just four episodes
into season four," Bozell points out, "Nip/Tuck reached new depths of
depravity" with a storyline about bestiality, in which the guest star
portraying a woman with an inordinate affection for her dog was none
other
than the former child actor of Little House on the Prairie fame, Melissa
Gilbert. And since FX is part of most cable subscribers expanded basic
package, the PTC spokesman notes, "this scene of stomach-turning
depravity
was available to children in over 75 percent of U.S. households." Bozell
says his group is calling on the remaining sponsors of Nip/Tuck to
closely
examine the value of supporting "the vilest content on television" with
their advertising dollars. [Jenni Parker]
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/10/62006h.asp
[ sorry. forgot to include the all, important verifiable source ]
And caving in to the demands of Parent's Television Council must be a new
definition of courageous that I'm not familiar with.
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
http://www.ashenempires.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
12 Oct 2006 03:35:07 AM |
|
|
Denis Loubet wrote:
And caving in to the demands of Parent's Television Council must be a new
definition of courageous that I'm not familiar with.
Look - if the Earth has just blown up, being on a Vogon spaceship *is*,
at least relatively speaking, comparatively safe.
And, after all, they're from Japan. How would *they* know what the
Parents' Television Council is, and whether or not it is representative
of typical American standards?
John Savard
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
12 Oct 2006 05:12:32 AM |
|
|
On 11 Oct 2006 20:35:07 -0700, wrote:
Denis Loubet wrote:
And caving in to the demands of Parent's Television Council must be a new
definition of courageous that I'm not familiar with.
Look - if the Earth has just blown up, being on a Vogon spaceship *is*,
at least relatively speaking, comparatively safe.
Too bad everyone's attention was so focused on the "relative safety"
of that Vogon spaceship that nobody thought of the possibility that
preventing the Earth from being blown up in the first place might be a
viable option.
And, after all, they're from Japan. How would *they* know what the
Parents' Television Council is, and whether or not it is representative
of typical American standards?
John Savard
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Maureen" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
07 Oct 2006 03:50:29 PM |
|
|
J Young wrote:
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:taSdnWUZBtBTuLrYnZ2dnUVZ_rGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
...The Parents Television Council (PTC) is praising Mitsubishi Motors for
yanking its sponsorship of the FX Network drama Nip/Tuck.
No problem here with that.
Gross premise to a show,
They ought to withhold sponsorship on that basis alone.
--
Maureen, living "La Vie Boheme"
I can't control
My destiny
I trust my soul
My only goal is just
To be
There's only now
There's only here
Give in to love
Or live in fear
No other path
No other way
No day but today...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yj1Y4o5R80A
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
07 Oct 2006 01:41:30 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 00:02:28 -0400, J Young wrote:
[ sorry. forgot to include the all, important verifiable source ]
Still did.
--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
"As hip as it is for outsiders to blame New Orleans
for everything bad that happened during and after
Hurricane Katrina, the truth is that the people
who lived here were much more prepared for a big
storm than the federal government that promised
us flood protection." [Jarvis DeBerry]
http://makeashorterlink.com/?V180525DC
"Everything New Orleans"
http://www.nola.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "ScottyFLL" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
07 Oct 2006 03:29:49 PM |
|
|
Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 00:02:28 -0400, J Young wrote:
[ sorry. forgot to include the all, important verifiable source ]
Still did.
LOL!
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
07 Oct 2006 05:26:51 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 00:02:28 -0400,
CENSORSHIP-HAPPY Retard, "J Young"/"IBen Getiner" wrote:
...yanking its sponsorship...
<GARBAGE-flush>
Moronic and delusional JERK.
Clue, control-freakish LOSER: If you don't want to watch
something on TV. that's what dials and remotes are for.
NO one in possession of a working brain would EVER
seek to deprive OTHERS of any shows that they'd like to see.
Once again, you've proven to everyone that you're a
complete idiot.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
.
|
|
|
| User: "John D. Wentzky" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
07 Oct 2006 05:30:46 AM |
|
|
"Craig Chilton" <xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:rbeei2hfojq2653grqj6k9480bmk7inhop@4ax.com...
On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 00:02:28 -0400,
CENSORSHIP-HAPPY Retard, "J Young"/"IBen Getiner" wrote:
...yanking its sponsorship...
<GARBAGE-flush>
Moronic and delusional JERK.
LOL!
Is this a genius I see responding or NOOOOOOOOOO?????
LOL!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
07 Oct 2006 05:43:29 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 00:02:28 -0400,
CENSORSHIP-HAPPY Retard, "J Young"/"IBen Getiner" wrote:
...yanking its sponsorship...
<GARBAGE-flush>
Moronic and delusional JERK.
Clue, control-freakish LOSER: If you don't want to watch
something on TV. that's what dials and remotes are for.
NO one in possession of a working brain would EVER
seek to deprive OTHERS of any shows that they'd like to see.
Once again, you've proven to everyone that you're a
complete idiot.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sylvia R. Dickinson" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
07 Oct 2006 12:22:19 PM |
|
|
Craig Chilton wrote:
On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 00:02:28 -0400,
CENSORSHIP-HAPPY Retard, "J Young"/"IBen Getiner" wrote:
...yanking its sponsorship...
<GARBAGE-flush>
Moronic and delusional JERK.
Clue, control-freakish LOSER: If you don't want to watch
something on TV. that's what dials and remotes are for.
I thought they did away with dials on televisions, long ago? ;-)
NO one in possession of a working brain would EVER
seek to deprive OTHERS of any shows that they'd like to see.
Indeed.
Once again, you've proven to everyone that you're a
complete idiot.
No. He's a successful troll that has managed to acquire and retain the
attention of almost everybody in several newsgroups. Just ignore this
pig and his disgusting postings, and he may disappear.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
07 Oct 2006 03:23:53 PM |
|
|
On 7 Oct 2006 05:22:19 -0700,
"Sylvia R. Dickinson" <sylviadickinson@bluebottle.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton wrote:
CENSORSHIP-HAPPY Retard, "J Young"/"IBen Getiner" wrote:
...yanking its sponsorship...
<GARBAGE-flush>
Moronic and delusional JERK.
Clue, control-freakish LOSER: If you don't want to watch
something on TV. that's what dials and remotes are for.
I thought they did away with dials on televisions, long ago? ;-)
LOL!!! I was thinking about John Hagee and the way he often
admonishes viewers, during his sermons, as he's launching into
something controversial, "Don't touch that dial !!"
Hagee is interesting (and well-versed) when he deals with
prophecy, but he also is an abominable bigot in other areas.
I figure the backward and doltish RRR Cult lemmings that he
appeals to with his *bigoted* sermons probably still have lots
of TVs with rabbit ears and dials...
NO one in possession of a working brain would EVER
seek to deprive OTHERS of any shows that they'd like to see.
Indeed.
Once again, you've proven to everyone that you're a
complete idiot.
No. He's a successful troll that has managed to acquire and
retain the attention of almost everybody in several newsgroups.
Just ignore this pig and his disgusting postings, and he may
disappear.
Well... we COULD do that. But if he disappears, we egalitarians
will have lost a valuable tool in our fight to help America to become
a Bigotry-Free Zone. Just as the relevant FACTS support us in this,
so also doe the highly-visible *presence* of such public dolts as
"Jon"/"IBen," so that people have a constant reminder of the faulty
and diminished mentality that accompanies being a bigot. They
EXEMPLIFY that which we are fighting, and remind everyone that they
comprise America's REAL enemies. The people who TRULY hate our
liberties.
Thus, I respond to them -- to KEEP them in the mode of showing
everyone what utter fools they are.
It's the *counterbalance* to the constant stream of lying hate-
propaganda that is spewed by the leaders of the RRR Cult.
As long as they and their loathsome agendas continue to be active,
we NEED them to keep reminding us, openly, of their hatefulness.
(And you know something? I have no qualms about pointing that
out in here -- because they are ***'WAY*** too dumb to figure
that out!)
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "ScottyFLL" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
07 Oct 2006 01:55:20 PM |
|
|
Sylvia R. Dickinson wrote:
I thought they did away with dials on televisions, long ago? ;-)
"J Young"/"IBen Getiner" and that Wentzky character are
traditionalists. They still have black and white TVs with dials. Yet
due to their advanced age, they seem to have trouble getting up to
change the channel or adjust the rabbit ears.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "bob young" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for decency |
08 Oct 2006 05:29:01 AM |
|
|
Craig Chilton wrote:
On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 00:02:28 -0400,
CENSORSHIP-HAPPY Retard, "J Young"/"IBen Getiner" wrote:
...yanking its sponsorship...
<GARBAGE-flush>
Moronic and delusional JERK.
Clue, control-freakish LOSER: If you don't want to watch
something on TV. that's what dials and remotes are for.
NO one in possession of a working brain would EVER
seek to deprive OTHERS of any shows that they'd like to see.
Once again, you've proven to everyone that you're a
complete idiot.
No he's not actually.
He spends a great deal of time searching for and posting items
related to 'goodness' and 'godliness' in the misguided belief that
if he posts enough of them it will magically reveal that his
imaginary god really exists.
All rather banal IMO.
"Religion is a desease that we catch from our parents".
Bob Young'
[from the sane side of the family]
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Parsifal" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for facsim in America |
07 Oct 2006 09:01:08 AM |
|
|
J Young schrieb:
...The Parents Television Council (PTC) is praising Mitsubishi Motors for
yanking its sponsorship of the FX Network drama Nip/Tuck. The TV series,
sexually and violently graphic from its inception, has recently aired
episodes that members of the PTC and other pro-family groups have critici=
zed
as containing gratuitously explicit sexual situations and other indecent
content.
Why do you applaud to that? If you don't like something on tv, has it
ever occured to you that you didn't HAVE TO watch it?
Why are you ALWAYS in favor of censorship?
Of course, because you're a nazi turd.
The pro-family media watchdog group provided the automaker with
descriptions of the show, and Mitsubishi executives responded in a letter,
noting that they and their company "have no desire to offend consumers" a=
nd,
with this in mind, "have decided to discontinue advertising on Nip/Tuck."
PTC President Brent Bozell says his group applauds Mitsubishi Motors for =
its
"courageous" decision and notes that the creators of Nip/Tuck have, over =
the
past three years, "devised some of the most disgusting and disturbing
storylines imaginable." He cites episodes of the show containing themes of
incest, necrophilia, rape, pedophilia, and more. "And just four episodes
into season four," Bozell points out, "Nip/Tuck reached new depths of
depravity" with a storyline about bestiality, in which the guest star
portraying a woman with an inordinate affection for her dog was none other
than the former child actor of Little House on the Prairie fame, Melissa
Gilbert.
Here's a hint: she's an actress. She wasn't Laura Ingall but she was
PLAYING her. So what does this have to do with anything?
And since FX is part of most cable subscribers expanded basic
package, the PTC spokesman notes, "this scene of stomach-turning depravity
was available to children in over 75 percent of U.S. households." Bozell
says his group is calling on the remaining sponsors of Nip/Tuck to closely
examine the value of supporting "the vilest content on television" with
their advertising dollars. [Jenni Parker]
What is it going to take to have you go since your postings have "the
vilest content on this discussion group"?
=20
=20
=20
=20
=20
--=20
----------
=20
J Y=F6ung
youngopinions@aol.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for facsim in America |
07 Oct 2006 02:48:34 PM |
|
|
On 7 Oct 2006 02:01:08 -0700,
"Parsifal" <jeanpascalvachon@gmail.com> wrote:
Censorious Bigot, "Jon Young"/"IBen Getiner" schrieb:
...The Parents Television Council (PTC) is praising Mitsubishi
Motors for yanking its sponsorship of the FX Network drama
Nip/Tuck.
So much, then, for my ever giving any consideration to owning
one of those cars. I never buy the products or services of ANY
company that supports RRR Cult agendas in any way. Mitsubishi
just made that list.
The TV series, sexually and violently graphic from its inception,
has recently aired episodes that members of the PTC and other
[anti-personal liberties] groups have criticized as containing
gratuitously explicit sexual situations and other indecent content.
Why do you applaud to that? If you don't like something on tv,
has it ever occured to you that you didn't HAVE TO watch it?
Why are you ALWAYS in favor of censorship?
Of course, because you're a nazi turd.
WELL said!! I wish I'd thought to say that; I was 'WAY
too gentle with him. "Nazi turd" sums him up perfectly!
And -- LOL!!! as I think about it!! -- I wonder what he'd be
saying if he lived in FAR more sensible and open-minded Europe?
Last time I was in Moscow, I was flipping through the broadcast
channels on TV in a hotel room around 7 p.m. and happened onto
one of those fashion shows where the models walk back and forth
down a runway. And was pleasantly surprised to see that half of
them were wearing TOPLESS fashions! American TV hasn't been
the same for me since!!
It's as a woman from England who was in the audience on a
"Donahue" show several years ago told Phil, in a discussion about
sex -- "America is a VERY repressive country." And she was (and still
is) right... when it comes to the way things are DONE over here.
Ironically, most PEOPLE, case-by-case, are very open-minded.
It's our SYSTEM that sucks. When Janet Jackson had that "wardrobe
malfunction" at the Super Bowl, MOST people got a good kick out of it.
But how does Congress and the FCC respond? THEY gave an ear to
the relative HANDFUL (out of 300 million people) of control-freakish,
RRR-Cultish sewer rat turds who WHINED about it. Sheeeesh!!!!
America needs to GROW UP!!
Visiting Europe is always a HUGE breath of fresh air. If my
business didn't depend upon my living here, I'd happily move to
Denmark! Where, according to a recent poll, are found the
happiest people on the planet.
The pro-family media watchdog group...
HONEST TRANSLATION: The anti-personal liberties bund group...
...Bozell says his group is calling on the remaining sponsors of
Nip/Tuck to closely examine the value of supporting "the vilest
content on television" with their advertising dollars. [Jenni Parker]
What is it going to take to have you go since your postings
have "the vilest content on this discussion group"?
Hopefully that'll be as soon as they decide to cut off Internet
access from the rubber room in that cackle factory from which that
schizophrenic... er... nazi turd... likely is posting.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222@mchsi.com>
.
|
|
|
| User: "•R L Measures" |
|
| Title: Re: Another victory for facsim in America |
08 Oct 2006 02:11:08 PM |
|
|
In article <m3efi2l1i0339ros300l5e46av26eq39su@4ax.com>, Craig Chilton
<xanadu222_@mchsi.com> wrote:
On 7 Oct 2006 02:01:08 -0700,
"Parsifal" <jeanpascalvachon@gmail.com> wrote:
Censorious Bigot, "Jon Young"/"IBen Getiner" schrieb:
...The Parents Television Council (PTC) is praising Mitsubishi
Motors for yanking its sponsorship of the FX Network drama
Nip/Tuck.
So much, then, for my ever giving any consideration to owning
one of those cars. I never buy the products or services of ANY
company that supports RRR Cult agendas in any way. Mitsubishi
just made that list.
The TV series, sexually and violently graphic from its inception,
has recently aired episodes that members of the PTC and other
[anti-personal liberties] groups have criticized as containing
gratuitously explicit sexual situations and other indecent content.
Why do you applaud to that? If you don't like something on tv,
has it ever occured to you that you didn't HAVE TO watch it?
Why are you ALWAYS in favor of censorship?
Of course, because you're a nazi turd.
WELL said!! I wish I'd thought to say that; I was 'WAY
too gentle with him. "Nazi turd" sums him up perfectly!
And -- LOL!!! as I think about it!! -- I wonder what he'd be
saying if he lived in FAR more sensible and open-minded Europe?
Last time I was in Moscow, I was flipping through the broadcast
channels on TV in a hotel room around 7 p.m. and happened onto
one of those fashion shows where the models walk back and forth
down a runway. And was pleasantly surprised to see that half of
them were wearing TOPLESS fashions! American TV hasn't been
the same for me since!!
It's as a woman from England who was in the audience on a
"Donahue" show several years ago told Phil, in a discussion about
sex -- "America is a VERY repressive country." And she was (and still
is) right... when it comes to the way things are DONE over here.
Ironically, most PEOPLE, case-by-case, are very open-minded.
It's our SYSTEM that sucks. When Janet Jackson had that "wardrobe
malfunction" at the Super Bowl, MOST people got a good kick out of it.
But how does Congress and the FCC respond? THEY gave an ear to
the relative HANDFUL (out of 300 million people) of control-freakish,
RRR-Cultish sewer rat turds who WHINED about it. Sheeeesh!!!!
America needs to GROW UP!!
• It seems a bit odd that those who stentorianly venerate God are reviled
by the sight of one of His creations.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
