Yeah. When I saw the disclaimer: here we have a written column (yeah, it's more of a transcript), being labeled as unsuitable for children.
It just struck me funny: as if kids are clamoring for their parents to read Chuck's latest offering.... And of course, any kid who does read it, is most likely mature enough for it in any case.
And I had this mental picture of Mr. Colson, standing in some family's kitchen, striking an important-looking pose and saying, oh-so-gravely and in hushed tones, "Mrs. X, your children may not want to hear what I'm about to tell you."
And then ... well, there's nothing in the subject matter itself that would even interest a kid, much less harm one. Why the disclaimer?
So ... pomposity: "having or exhibiting self-importance."
So it all boils down to attitude? Ths subject matter is certainly more worthy of notice. Back in the ‘60s, the flower children had nothing but scorn for bougeois morality. But what happems of you discard it? You get this: an exploitation of human beings that amounts to slavery,an exercise of raw economic power. It was fitting that John Lennon was struck down by a predator since he was the very symbol of this blithe disregard the the world as it is.
It's a warning to give parents time to change the radio station if they want, and it's faithfully transcribed.