Why is sex and language censored?

It's not a matter of opinion.

 

Last time I checked, Britney Spears movies were legal.

 

How? You can always just tell your kids not to watch. Turn off the TV. Get rid of the TV.

That's what I've had to do to keep the kids from seeing things that I don't want them to see ... like non-stop violence, constant commercialism and sexual morality I don't think they should be exposed to (usually in the form of prostitution). I TURNED OFF THE TV. Worked great. Didn't require me to censor things for you, did it?

 

Then why did you ask mine?

I noticed you didn't even bother to address my argument. Can't?

 

Really? So you want to hop on the subway and be greeted by video ads of people in various forms of intercourse? That'll be nice as you ride the train sitting between an old lady on one side and a young kid going to school on the other...


And when that kid gets to school...why shouldn't the teachers there be allowed to show up and teach in the nude? Why shouldn't they show porno movies in bio class and scream obsenities at students when they get a wrong answer?

Then when that child gets home from school, public television is airing a 24-hour BJ marathon for the public's viewing pleasure.

My, what a nice society.

Face it, you haven't thought it through and when you do you must admit you WANT a degree of censorship.

 

In that particular instance I was telling you about a point of law.

 

Don't ride that train.

Don't go to that school.

Don't watch that show.

I want people to censor themselves -- I don't want the government to do it for them.

 

Yes, families should be forced to hide from all media because some self-indulgent hedonists want to pander to the lowest common denominator.

Gonna be hard to keep those kids from being exposed to media if you dare to let them venture outside for any reason...

All because some self-centered fools are too insecure to accept that there are in fact limits to behavior despite what a certain element of society has hammered into their brains since birth.

 

Public train, maye the only way to get to school/work.

Public school - mandatory.

 

Would I want to see any of those things? No. But I also wouldn't ask for the government to censor them for me.

If the subway had obscene ads, I would stop riding it. If enough others agreed and stopped riding it, the subway would lose money and change advertisers.

If obscene things were happening at my kids school, I would pull them from it and send them to a school with different rules that fit my values. If enough parents did that, the school would lose money and they would change their rules.

If a channel showed material that I deemed inappropriate, I would block it. If every channel showed such material, I would cancel my service and watch DVD's. If enough people did the same, the channels would change their content or a competing channel would come into existence to take up with marketshare that its competitors are losing.

See? I actually believe in personal responsibility and the free market. You believe in having the government be your nanny and dictate to businesses what they can and can't do.

 

Yes you do, you are just too afraid of the word to admit that there are limits.

 

Why don't you trust the free market? You don't think that channels/services would come into existence to take up the marketshare lost by programming that people consider offensive?

 

Public school is not mandatory. There's always private school and homeschooling.

As for "the only way to get to school/work", your choice of school/work is exactly that: your choice. You can choose to get a different job/school.

 

Wait, let me guess.

But you're fine with turning over your healthcare decisions to that same Big Brother, aren't ya?

Comes down to this... *******s to too stupid to police themselves. If allowed, they'd all run around nekkid. I think of this same theory everytime I sit thru a red light, waiting for my turn. If libs ruled the earth, nobody would have stop lights... we'd only have yield signs and traffic would be chaos.

Liberals can't be allowed to make all the rules. That's why we've always upheld censorship of certain morally-unacceptable behavior.

They'd soon run amuck if left unchecked.

Ever been to Canada?

 

Nope. But I am fine with having a government run insurance provider at the State level for people who can't afford/are blocked from having private insurance.

Really? Every Liberal wants to be naked? You have anything to back that up? Personally, I like clothes, they are a good way of expressing myself. Not to mention, there's a lot sun here in Texas. My white ass would burn like nobody's business.

Stop lights are censorship? Funny I thought roads were a public good. Who knows? I've only taken a number of economics classes.

Yet you guys want the free market to run with no government intervention and you believe things will correct themselves?

 

Does that apply to violence as well? I find violence a lot more offensive than sex -- should I use the government to stop self-centered fools that are too insecure to accept that there, in fact, limits to behavior, despite what a certain element of society has hammered into their brains since birth, from putting violence on television?

No, I shouldn't.

Nor should you.

 

So your arguments against Big Brother have been dishonest up until now?

I knew it.

 

Just have a look on the weekly "Top Reputation List" -- don't want to be a part of them either.

Besides, chill... I corrected myself further on in the thread: America has become a crappy place vis-à-vis other countries who kept on following the path of modernity.

 

Regular TV.

 

odd that big cities are liberal, while "conservative" America rarely has more than ONE STOPLIGHT in the entire town.

yeah, cause liberals can't follow traffic law.

 

I think that the people in favor of censorship are being dishonest.

The problem isn't that you might see something that you find offensive. The problem is that you want to control what other people see, so that they don't see something that you find offensive.

To me, this is a pretty basic freedom -- the freedom of thought, of the expression of ideas, regardless of whether or not some people are offended by those ideas. Censorship is a slippery slope, and if we allow the government to control our thoughts and the expression of those thoughts in one arena, that gives them the right to control our thoughts in other arenas, too.

Rush Limbaugh is pretty offensive. FOX News is pretty offensive. The whole Bush administration was terribly offensive. But to censor those things would have been wrong. I don't have a right to censor your ideas and you don't have a right to censor mine.

Period.

 

I have no problem with limits. But I'll decide what my limits are, thank you -- I don't need you to do it for me.

 

And, incidentally -- NO. I WOULD NOT be fine with turning healthcare decisions over to the government, I never have been, I never will be, and your characterization of me (and liberals in general) as such just goes to show that you haven't listened to a word on these forums that didn't originate in your preconceptions.

See? You can censor yourself all day long without any help from me ... I bet you haven't actually read a single word I've typed. Bet you can do the same with any errant boobs that show up on television.

 

so having two consenting adults on tv (*)(*)(*)(*)ing is alright, because it allows us to be freer, and meets with your standards....
homosexual (*)(*)(*)(*)ing makes us freer, meets with your standards....
rape scenes from rated R movies not ok, torture from SAW movies not ok, because they don't meet your standards, they don't make us freer?

hypocracy 101?
you make the standards my 8 and 10 year olds should see on tv....

tv isn't a public good, poster correct, it is in the public domain, airwaves are the public domain, television is therefore regulated, just like radio, because airwaves are ours.....
last time i checked, i believe cable legally falls outside FCC regulations....
i'll have to double-check....

decency and morality standards reflect societal norms.....
there is standards even on this site, the regulation of profanity here doesn't absolutely nothing to diminish the free flow of ideas and speech, to state otherwise, or to create your own personal standards and IMPOSE those, proclaiming decency as prudent, only politicizes what should be reason as it has been established by statute, and law.....

 

So long as they aren't real rape/torture/murder/incest/etc. then most of us don't have a problem with them being in movies. If we don't want to see them, then we won't watch.

However, real illegal acts and their recordings should be illegal. No hypocrisy involved.