Skip to comments.
New TV Outrage - A New Low For TV:
Parent Television Council ^
| Parent Television Council
Posted on 06/20/2003 6:04:02 PM PDT by webber
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520, 521-540, 541-560, 561-572 last
To: tpaine
Romans 1:16
For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Romans 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.
To: FreeLibertarian
No one here is referring to sex as a vice.
What has been objected to is the transmission on public airwaves (contrary to the FCC's own regulations) of acts that should remain private.
To: FreeLibertarian
Try thinking for yourself and reading something that doesn't have Jerry Falwell's Hugh Hefner's stamp of approval.
To: DAnconia55
Romans 1:16
For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Romans 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.
To: DAnconia55
You've convinced yourself that it's only old codgers, who have a sense of morality. You're wrong, as usual. LOL
There are people your age and younger, who aren't social liberals. What you have also failed to grasp, is that the pendulum has swung, throughout history, between libertine and what you would call " prudish " times. Each extreme is no good. We are now facing the nadir ( you would call it the zenith ) of lisencious times.
To: nopardons
There are people your age and younger, who aren't social liberals. What you have also failed to grasp, is that the pendulum has swung, throughout history, between libertine and what you would call " prudish " times. Each extreme is no good. We are now facing the nadir ( you would call it the zenith ) of lisencious times. I'm quite aware of this. But you're mistaken. It's not simply a swing of the pendulum.
The entire clock has moved to a new location. It won't swing back over the same path anymore.
To: DAnconia55
History may " repeat " itself; however, it's never exactly the same. And, you're dead wrong about the clock having been moved, etc. ! Technology changes, but people don't change. That's something you need to come to grips with. Neither you, nor I, or anyone else can say just when the pendulum will swing; however, rest assured that it shall.
No, I'm not for outright censorship of everything. I am in favor, though, for curtailments of some " popular " entertainment. It has only been about 40 years, that full bore lisence was opened up and that came slowly. It'll take a while for a reversal; which WILL come, whether you like it or not. Twas ever thus ... even in ancient times. :-)
To: happygrl
Try thinking for yourself and reading something that doesn't have Jerry Falwell's Hugh Hefner's stamp of approval. LOL! I'll take the writings of a libertine over a con artist any day.
568
posted on
06/26/2003 10:46:47 PM PDT
by
FreeLibertarian
(You live and learn. Or you don't live long.)
To: happygrl
Try thinking for yourself and reading something that doesn't have Jerry Falwell's Hugh Hefner's stamp of approval. LOL! I'll take the writings of a libertine over a con artist any day.
569
posted on
06/26/2003 10:47:15 PM PDT
by
FreeLibertarian
(You live and learn. Or you don't live long.)
To: FreeLibertarian
Uh, please reference the activities for which Jerry Falwell is a con artist. That is a specific accusation for which you should be able to provide an example.
To: happygrl
That's like asking for proof that politicians lie. Some truths are self evident.
571
posted on
06/26/2003 11:38:34 PM PDT
by
FreeLibertarian
(You live and learn. Or you don't live long.)
To: FreeLibertarian
No. If you make an accusation, you should be able to back it up. Potshots do not an argument make.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520, 521-540, 541-560, 561-572 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson