Jake Tapper Draws Tipper Gore Reality Check on Prince's Passing

NewsBusters ^ | April 24, 2016 | P.J. Gladnick

[Faith Presses On]

Since it was her 11-year-old daughter listening to these lyrics, she might very well have been interested in morality.

[Faith Presses On]

>>>People liked making fun of Tipper’s cause, but in many ways she was right. At very least, you need labels to judge the potential filth content. But for a few exceptions, yesterday’s scandalous music is pretty mild compared to the fluent profanity and overt sexualization that grade schoolers are exposed to online day in, day out.

People also laughed at Nancy Reagan’s “Just Say No” campaign against drug abuse. She was shining a light on a big problem and offering the simplest solution available to each one of us.<<<

Indeed. The presumption among secular humanists, though, is that something isn’t harmful to people if it is no longer “shocking” to them because they’ve grown desensitized to it, when actually just the reverse is true.

[Faith Presses On]

“...She did more than anybody else to increase the proliferation of raunchy and obscene lyrics in popular music...It’s true. Many recording artists would gratuitously insert obscene lyrics into their recordings to earn the coveted PMRC sticker. For it would often double or triple their record sales.”

There’s every reason to doubt that, just on the face of things.

Madonna and many of the shock artists of explicit lyrics and visual content came along before the warning label. The label was a response to them.

This sort of music, which persists to this day, is just part of the overall rejection of Christianity going on during modern times in the wealthier, “highly-advanced” nations of the world.

It would be completely surprising if such labels could somehow have stopped this sort of music.

It was to be a tool for parents, though, and a light in darkness, and no doubt it gave light to some.