FCC Fines too Harsh?

[seinfeldrules]

Yeah, and our friends at the Republican party are trying to make FCC regulations apply to private communications such as Cable or Satellite meaning everything will be censored. If this succeeds there will be nothing that can stop them from censoring CDs and then movies and then video games, etc...

blame the rise in "moral values" for this

Just as some examples. People seem to think that this new legislation only affects Democrats/liberals. Furthermore, you seem to think Bush is solely the one to blame for passing this law. I was attempting to point out the flaws in those arguments.

 

[kmack]

Just as some examples. People seem to think that this new legislation only affects Democrats. Furthermore, you seem to think Bush is solely the one to blame for passing this law.

No you are completely wrong and the quotes do not support that opinion. Those people stated the simple fact that this is a Republican initiative.

No one said anything about who it AFFECTS!

 

[seinfeldrules]

Fine, then I was merely pointing out who it affects. That point is entirely relevant.

 

[kmack]

Fine, then I was merely pointing out who it affects. That point is entirely relevant.

i win.

"Hell, they hit the conservative talk shows pretty hard as well."

that was your first post. You said that they hit conservative talk shows pretty hard as well. As well as what? No one said anything about who the fines hit, no one said only liberals were affected. The only thing stated was the fact that the Bush administration and republicans started and backed the bill. you went trolling, your post came out of the blue with no justification whatsoever. The post is about the financial imbalance of federal fines.

How about this, we start over, pretend NO ONE said a thing, it's just you and my first post, read it, and respond to it taking nothing into consideration except my original post, is that cool?


* (and since the only indecency fines have been against CBS, Clear Channel, and Howard Stern, i don't think it is relavent EVEN if someone had suggested conservatives were safe)

 

[seinfeldrules]

No one said anything about who the fines hit, no one said only liberals were affected.

I misinterpreted their posts, sue me.

The post is about the financial imbalance of federal fines.

But, you forget to mention that you single out:

The only thing stated was the fact that the Bush administration and republicans started and backed the bill.

From there on out it was a minor bash fest, as is the case in every thread you begin.

 

[kmack]

I misinterpreted their posts, sue me.




But, you forget to mention that you single out:

The only thing stated was the fact that the Bush administration and republicans started and backed the bill.

Because IT IS TRUE. How can i start a thread about this new FCC fine bill and not say who started it??????????????????? FFS man, even if i said "a bill passed will allow FCC to fine $500,000 for indecent acts" its obvious that the president did it. What was I suppposed to say? The simple fact is it is the Presidents bill.

 

[seinfeldrules]

Because IT IS TRUE. How can i start a thread about this new FCC fine bill and not say who started it??????????????????? FFS man, even if i said "a bill passed will allow FCC to fine $500,000 for indecent acts" its obvious that the president did it.

Bush doesnt play any legal role in this until the bill is laid on his desk to sign. I dont see you calling Congress into question. Furthermore, I highly doubt it could have passed without some Democrats passing over party lines.

 

[kmack]

Bush doesnt play any legal role in this until the bill is laid on his desk to sign. I dont see you calling Congress into question. Furthermore, I highly doubt it could have passed without some Democrats passing over party lines.

Holy sh*t. How can i make this more clear to you, it is President Bush's bill, it passed through a republican congress (sure some dems voted for it ) but that doesn't matter. Just read my firs post and respond to it, its not about anything but the fine itself and its disproportionately high fines.

 

[seinfeldrules]

How can i make this more clear to you, it is President Bush's bill, it passed through a republican congress (sure some dems voted for it ) but that doesn't matter.

How does it only matter when the Republicans do it?

 

[Calanen]

Whoa creationsim - Im a right winger as you people know. Not a loony right winger, i like to believe, but opinions may differ.

But, creationsim per se has no place being taught in public schools. Because, its just bunkum. Im sorry but it is. What can happen - is that students could opt to take a religious course, which had summaries of all sorts of religions and their beliefs, and so they could have a look at what they believe. But teaching creationism, as an alternative to evolution is just silly stuff.

That said, I think the ACLU goes overboard with its anti-Christmas stuff. Its part of America's heritage, and people should be able to stick a manger up at Christmas without the ACLU running off to court and freaking out. The ACLU tends to also, only bash christians for their religious expression, not muslims and not jews.

 

[Bodacious]

Whoa creationsim - Im a right winger as you people know. Not a loony right winger, i like to believe, but opinions may differ.

But, creationsim per se has no place being taught in public schools. Because, its just bunkum. Im sorry but it is. What can happen - is that students could opt to take a religious course, which had summaries of all sorts of religions and their beliefs, and so they could have a look at what they believe. But teaching creationism, as an alternative to evolution is just silly stuff.

That said, I think the ACLU goes overboard with its anti-Christmas stuff. Its part of America's heritage, and people should be able to stick a manger up at Christmas without the ACLU running off to court and freaking out. The ACLU tends to also, only bash christians for their religious expression, not muslims and not jews.

My point is, people are all too fast to call sensorship of obscene stuff on the tv and airwaves facist but when a christian attempts to speak his mind somehow it is infringment on someone's rights and that christian has to be silenced.

Hypocrisy at it's finest.

 

[CptStern]

yes when it's hate propaganda I think they should be silenced

 

[Absinthe]

My point is, people are all too fast to call sensorship of obscene stuff on the tv and airwaves facist but when a christian attempts to speak his mind somehow it is infringment on someone's rights and that christian has to be silenced.

Hypocrisy at it's finest.

I don't recall too many events where Christians were "silenced" for speaking their minds. I'm not denying that there are people that will try to do that, but I'm not sure who exactly you're referring to. Your post makes it out as if it's Christianity vs. the world, which it certainly is not.

 

[No Limit]

Bush doesnt play any legal role in this until the bill is laid on his desk to sign. I dont see you calling Congress into question. Furthermore, I highly doubt it could have passed without some Democrats passing over party lines.

Again, Bush is the one that sets the policy for congress. This censorship thing has been on his list since boobiegate and he has said countless of times that he supports more censorship.

I'm not sure what the overall position on private communications censorship is with Bush and Republicans but the people pushing for this (however many there are) are clearly all republicans.

 

[No Limit]

My point is, people are all too fast to call sensorship of obscene stuff on the tv and airwaves facist but when a christian attempts to speak his mind somehow it is infringment on someone's rights and that christian has to be silenced.

Hypocrisy at it's finest.

Example? Every morning I flip through channels I run in to about 10 that are 100% christian. I never heard a single complaint that they should be silanced (1 of the channels is on the local airwaves). So try again.

 

[kmack]

My point is, people are all too fast to call sensorship of obscene stuff on the tv and airwaves facist but when a christian attempts to speak his mind somehow it is infringment on someone's rights and that christian has to be silenced.

Hypocrisy at it's finest.

You show me where the words "seperation of church and state" exist in the constitution and I will agree with you.

The framers of the U.S. Constitution were concerned that European history might repeat itself in the new world. They wanted to avoid the continual wars motivated by religious hatred that had decimated many countries within Europe. They decided that a church/state separation was their best assurance that the U.S. would remain relatively free of inter-religious strife. Many commentators feel that over two centuries of relative religious peace in the U.S. have shown that they were right.

In 1789, the first of ten amendments were written to the Federal Constitution; they have since been known as the Bill of Rights. The First Amendment reads:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

This was ratified by the States in 1791.

horizontal rule
The establishment clause of the First Amendment:

The first phrase in the First Amendment states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." is called the establishment clause.

The courts have the responsibility to interpret the U.S. Constitution in specific instances. In 1947, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled:

"The 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever from they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between Church and State."

The Supreme court is there to interpret the Constitution for us, they did, and that is what they concluded, their word is the ultimate law of the land.

I thought we were gonna agree!

Creationism is not being censored, it has been deemed unconstitutional to bring the religious idea of creationism into PUBLIC school. It is just as the constitution says. Please keep this to censorship issues.

 

[Zeus]

Anyone see the new v-chip commercial?


please god forbid kids see some of life's facts.....

 

[Dalamari]

Stern makes like half a million a paycheck, those fines are nothing to him, why does it matter anyways, radio is full of fakers anyways.

 

[Raziaar]

I'm against censorship as much as the next guy... except in the cases of broadcasting on public channels, where children might be exposed... hardcore sex, or real death scenes, such as beheading videos, or people getting torn to shreds by military guns, etc. These sorts of extremely explicit things should be up to the individual to find via other alternatives, such as the internet, or other, privatate channels like cable, etc.

 

[kmack]

My point is, people are all too fast to call sensorship of obscene stuff on the tv and airwaves facist but when a christian attempts to speak his mind somehow it is infringment on someone's rights and that christian has to be silenced.

Hypocrisy at it's finest.

Sorry buddy, but again Seperation of Church and state applies to schools and public places.

So guess what! Christians can (AND DO) speak their minds on television and radio. What are you even doing here, your points are not even true and worse, they aren't even on topic.

THESE FCC FINES ARE ONLY AGAINST INDECENT BEHAVIOUR!!!!

IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LIBERALS CONSERVATIVES OR RELIGION. STOP PRETENDING IT DOES.



*The only mention of something along those lines is the fact that this is a Bush Administration bill. I am equally outraged by a $500,000 fine given to a conservative a liberal or a religious speaker. but the fines are for indecency get that through your heads before you post here again. ALL OF YOU

 

[Maxi]

I only want to say one thing.

Lol @ the us. Seriously, you have some serioulsy wrongly brought up people in charge of your country. The whole censorship thing isn't even an issue in europe. We shown porn at night, and soft porn after 11 or something. People don't get stripped of everything they have for swearing on public tv or "accidentaly" showing a breast on some public event. Your government is just wierd.

 

[Calanen]

Lol @ the us. Seriously, you have some serioulsy wrongly brought up people in charge of your country. The whole censorship thing isn't even an issue in europe. We shown porn at night, and soft porn after 11 or something. People don't get stripped of everything they have for swearing on public tv or "accidentaly" showing a breast on some public event. Your government is just wierd

While a strong supporter of the USA - its not the gov who is weird on this issue, its the people. Their values are, that breasts are bad. Im not sure why, and probably neither are they. But when I was at the beach in San Diego, no topless girls, whereas in Australia topless girls are everywhere, on the beach that is. Occassionally you can see a topless girl in a city park as well....but its not often.

I read somewhere (no, No Limit, I don't have a link I can pull out of the proverbial.....) that a woman was arrested on the beach for indecent exposure for baking topless - now it was either in Californa or Florida....if I had to guess I'd go with Cali. Thats pretty weird.

 

[Calanen]

Your post makes it out as if it's Christianity vs. the world, which it certainly is not.

Not Christianity versus the world. The ACLU versus public displays of Christianity................

 

[Razor]

There was an incident on wwe wrestling where one of the advertised matches was a man vs woman match for a particular event, the local council in America that the arena just happened to be in sent a letter to the WWE stating that that particular match is illegal and if they go through with it, they will be fined $1,500. WWE sent a letter back saying, no plans will be made to change the match and we've got your cheque ready for you now.

 

[Calanen]

1,500 dollars? thats probably less than the cost of getting the council permit?