PhillyKev 0 #51 December 14, 2004 QuoteQuoteHow about not putting a TV in their bedroom if you're worried about it? Great idea. I didn't have one in my room. Sounds like your Mommy and Daddy are doing a good job Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #52 December 14, 2004 QuoteI knew plenty of poor kids that had cable in the house and are on welfare. Great... Nice to see my tax dollars being put to a good use. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #53 December 14, 2004 QuoteQuoteI knew plenty of poor kids that had cable in the house and are on welfare. Great... Nice to see my tax dollars being put to a good use. What do you expect? I see, you can only have freedom of expression if you pay for it. But if you're poor and paying for it, you're wasting money. Seems to me the purpose of the FCC should be to insure parity for all via the public airwaves, not promote class division. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #54 December 14, 2004 QuoteSounds like your Mommy and Daddy are doing a good job Uh, I'm 32 and live in a trailer on a DZ. I have spent enough on jumps to get a Masters degree, and still don't even have any degree. Maybe not"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #55 December 14, 2004 Dude, you're my hero. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #56 December 14, 2004 And I'm 32, flunked my senior year of high school, didn't go to college, love seeing titties on tv and think their should be more, and make the equivalent of 10,000 jumps a year. So what's the problem with titties again Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #57 December 14, 2004 QuoteWhat do you expect? I see, you can only have freedom of expression if you pay for it. But if you're poor and paying for it, you're wasting money. Seems to me the purpose of the FCC should be to insure parity for all via the public airwaves, not promote class division. There are always limits Kevin. There's not freedom of speech or expression to the point of anarchy. I mean, come on. You may not agree with the current standards but you've got to agree that there must be some standard, right? What's open and available to everyone who lives together must at least be decent. How do you determine that? I don't really know. It's necessary, though. I don't really want my 6 year old daughter watching guys walking around with their dicks hanging out. Even if the Greeks did it and it’s historic. You can't watch your kids all the time. Its "public" "broadcast" media for crying out loud. It's got nothing to do with "keeping the man down" that can't afford cable or satellite media. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #58 December 14, 2004 Do you have kids? Views can sometimes change when you have "and experience/spend time with" your own children. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #59 December 14, 2004 QuoteThere's not freedom of speech or expression to the point of anarchy. I mean, come on. You may not agree with the current standards but you've got to agree that there must be some standard, right? No, I honestly don't agree. No, you can't watch your kids all the time. But that's the point. They're probably over at the neighbors house watching cable unsupervised anyway. The solution is to discuss issues that children WILL BE exposed to with them so that they understand them and you can influence their perception. Not try and hide it from them. They're going to find out about it eventually. I feel it's better to remove tabboos and invite dialogue, rather than try to ignore the real world. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhillyKev 0 #60 December 14, 2004 QuoteDo you have kids? Views can sometimes change when you have "and experience/spend time with" your own children. Trust me, you don't want that, I don't want that....no body in their right mind would think that's a good idea Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #61 December 14, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteI knew plenty of poor kids that had cable in the house and are on welfare. Great... Nice to see my tax dollars being put to a good use. What do you expect? I see, you can only have freedom of expression if you pay for it. But if you're poor and paying for it, you're wasting money. Seems to me the purpose of the FCC should be to insure parity for all via the public airwaves, not promote class division. Cable is a luxury item - it is absolutely not a necessity. If someone can afford to pay for cable then they shouldn't be on welfare. There have been plenty of times in my life that I couldn't afford to have cable, yet I was paying taxes during those times and therefore supporting the welfare system... and it doesn't make me real happy to think I was paying for others to be able to afford a luxury that I could not afford for myself. Just another example of the abuse of the welfare system, which is not very fair to the few people who legitimately need welfare. (Sorry, not trying to hijack the thread to start a welfare rant.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #62 December 14, 2004 QuoteNo, I honestly don't agree. No, you can't watch your kids all the time. But that's the point. They're probably over at the neighbors house watching cable unsupervised anyway. So, there shouldn't be any rules based on the fact that someone somewhere will sneak away to the neighbors and watch HBO "Real Sex?" I think the "standard" should be set for what "should be" rather than what "might be." QuoteThe solution is to discuss issues that children WILL BE exposed to with them so that they understand them and you can influence their perception. Not try and hide it from them. They're going to find out about it eventually. I feel it's better to remove tabboos and invite dialogue, rather than try to ignore the real world. So, I should explain to my 6 year old girl all about gang rape b/c that was being discussed or shown in a movie on CBS or that she'll eventually be exposed to that kind of obscenity? I think there will be time for that once she reaches an age where she's intellectually and emotionally mature enough to handle it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #63 December 14, 2004 In a similar story: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=519&ncid=519&e=13&u=/ap/20041214/ap_on_re_us/governor_nudity_________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #64 December 14, 2004 Quotehttp://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/041213/photos_en/mdf793845&e=2&ncid=1756 Uh . . . they're wearing costumes. I don't personally have a problem with the little naked dudes, but I can see where some people would (the same people who don't want to see any nudity on public tv - they _do_ look completely naked after all). Of course I would prefer to see the majority of our country stop being so uptight about nudity, but I don't see that happening any time soon. I don't see this as the FCC being out of control - I think they are just catering to what the majority of the public wants. (And I am apparently not in that majority.) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pajarito 0 #65 December 14, 2004 QuoteI don't personally have a problem with the little naked dudes, but I can see where some people would (the same people who don't want to see any nudity on public tv - they _do_ look completely naked after all). I don't think it's nearly as much about you and me or the people that want to see absolutely no nudity, as you say, as it is about young children and what they might see on "public" television. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #66 December 14, 2004 QuoteQuoteI don't personally have a problem with the little naked dudes, but I can see where some people would (the same people who don't want to see any nudity on public tv - they _do_ look completely naked after all). I don't think it's nearly as much about you and me or the people that want to see absolutely no nudity, as you say, as it is about young children and what they might see on "public" television. I agree. I was referring mostly to the parents who don't want nudity on public tv because they don't want their children seeing it. I don't have children, but if I did I don't think I would mind them seeing nudity - at least not this kind of nudity (guys dressed like statues) or Janet Jackson's boob. Now I wouldn't want them seeing porn, but I would make it my responsibility to censor what I don't want them to see. And I do think it makes it easier for parents to do the censoring as long as there is a clear-cut standard of what is being shown on tv. If you know there is a possiblity of nudity being shown then you can pay more attention; if nudity is not supposed to be shown but it is shown then that makes it hard for parents to have much control. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #67 December 14, 2004 Quote I agree. I was referring mostly to the parents who don't want nudity on public tv because they don't want their children seeing it. And when the parents visibly get upset in front of the kids about nudity they will develop a learned response to the human form....which can in turn give them issues later in life._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #68 December 14, 2004 QuoteQuote I agree. I was referring mostly to the parents who don't want nudity on public tv because they don't want their children seeing it. And when the parents visibly get upset in front of the kids about nudity they will develop a learned response to the human form....which can in turn give them issues later in life. Yep, I agree with that too... but it's not my place to tell other parents how I think they should raise their children. (Well unless they ask for my advice of course... but for some reason no one ever asks me advice on parenting... probably because I have no children and I am a bit psycho. ) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #69 December 14, 2004 QuoteIf you can't see how a walking/talking/naked costume of an ancient statue could be seen as a naked guy... Well I think you have issues. And if you think it is even close to porn....well I think you have issues. QuoteMy assistant thought it was a bunch of naked guys painted up. Then i suggest your assistant spend a bit more time looking at art, visiting museums and a little less watching tv. I guess culture does come at a price. And your parents letting you drink wine is a great example. Your parents could have been arrested for that, since they are not free to make that decisions. Providing alcohol to minors is a serious offence. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #70 December 14, 2004 QuoteAnd if you think it is even close to porn....well I think you have issues. Who said it was close to porn...? In fact if you look at this postQuote http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=1387385#1387385 Well lets see, there is a big difference between art and porn. Not saying this is either, but one could argue that Ron Jeremy is a fine actor. Or that "David" is porn. It IS inapropriate for *all* audiences, and the FCC's job is to establish some sort of base. QuoteThen i suggest your assistant spend a bit more time looking at art, visiting museums and a little less watching tv. I guess culture does come at a price. You clearly don't know my assistant. QuoteAnd your parents letting you drink wine is a great example. Your parents could have been arrested for that, since they are not free to make that decisions. Well they could have been, but see they made a choice on how to rasie me. They had that opportunity based on the laws that we had in place. Some people will abuse those laws, but my parents didn't. Like it or not that picture was bad enough that the FCC an organization that was created to decide what should or should not be allowed found it inapropriate...They did their job."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #71 December 14, 2004 QuoteWell they could have been, but see they made a choice on how to rasie me. They had that opportunity based on the laws that we had in place. Some people will abuse those laws, but my parents didn't. It wasn't their choice to make. Your government has already decided for them. Serving alcohol to minors is not allowed, even if it is your own minor. Your parents didn't have a choice, they broke the law. You have any idea how many countries watched the opening of the olympic games? How many countries do you think had citizens objecting to this costume? Are the citizens of all these other countries just too stupid to understand the immense vulgarity of that costume? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #72 December 14, 2004 QuoteYou have any idea how many countries watched the opening of the olympic games? How many countries do you think had citizens objecting to this costume? Are the citizens of all these other countries just too stupid to understand the immense vulgarity of that costume? What other countries do is not my concern unless it effects me. The FCC in the United States has said it was inapropriate. I don't care what Cnada or England thought about it. That is for THEM to decide."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #73 December 14, 2004 QuoteThe FCC in the United States has said it was inapropriate. well, that makes it official. Ron, do you personally think it was inappropriate? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #74 December 14, 2004 Quotewell, that makes it official. Ron, do you personally think it was inappropriate? For broadcast TV? Yes. If I had kids would I care? No. But I respect the fact that some parents would rather not let their kids see that. And while yes, it was a costume, it was the same if they had been nude really. Hell, if they had been nude *I* would not have cared. I also would not have cared if my kids had seen it. But I do know parents that would care. And the FCC cared. I understand the FCC and the other parents concerns....Do you?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #75 December 14, 2004 QuoteServing alcohol to minors is not allowed, even if it is your own minor. Your parents didn't have a choice, they broke the law. Actually... I don't know where Ron grew up, but in Texas it is perfectly legal for a minor to drink alcohol as long as they are under the direct supervision of their parent or guardian (or spouse in some cases). I know in North Carolina it is not legal (they had big signs up all over the winery to warn people), but I'm pretty sure it is legal in some other states too. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
