The Thought Police strike again!

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by KB9YCO, Jun 9, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-3
ad: QSOToday-1
ad: Left-2
ad: Subscribe
ad: L-MFJ
ad: abrind-2
  1. KC2ESD

    KC2ESD Ham Member QRZ Page

    Freedon of speech means you can speak you mind without being sent to jail such as speaking againts taxes or being for the war on terrorism. You can deliver you message and ideas with out using the "F" word. If I can't say the "F" word on the 20 meter band why sould Howard Steirn be alowed on the FM bands?
     
  2. KG4CGC

    KG4CGC Ham Member QRZ Page

    Somehow I feel compelled to visit a crowded firestaion and yell "MOVIE!". [​IMG]
     
  3. KB9YCO

    KB9YCO Ham Member QRZ Page

    "YCO, you're attempting to muddy the water on this. As entitled to your opinion as you are...  There's a movement that has been in "full court press" for many years to subtly try to make any black and white issue, a gray area, "hard to discern," if you will. The fact is, is that there ARE black and white issues. There is no gray area with some of them as is the case with this topic." KD4LEI

    The only people I see 'muddying the waters' are the people that would attempt to write away the greatest document ever written to represent freedom.
    OK wait, you know what, you're right and it is a black and white issue. Let's analyze:
    "Congress shall MAKE NO LAW... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..."
    Wow, you were right, it doesn't get much more black and white than that. That means that NO LAW shall be made, what is hard to understand about that?

    "With free speech comes responsibility. We have too many people who think that their free speech rights are being infringed upon, just so they can say or do any lude thing they wish and not be held accountable for it... The FCC is trying to bring back accountability for people's actions." KD4LEI

    See, herein lies the problem. Who gets to decide what is 'lewd'? (Ludes are something completely different.) You? Extremist religious wackos in the Bush administration and the FCC? Me? That is the reason we need not set a gauge as the mainstream public sets it's own gauge through lack of commercial support. After all we are talking about commercial radio and television, if the majority didn't want Howard Stern he wouldn't have been around for 25 years.

    "Yet we still live in a society where some think, 'It's always someone else's fault for my problems.' " KD4LEI

    You're right, and they try to blame television, radio, and music on the fact that they were unable to watch their own children. Instead of looking at the root cause of why some things have changed in a negative direction it's much easier to blame it on Howard Stern or Janet Jackson. What a joke.

    "Freedon of speech means you can speak you mind without being sent to jail such as speaking againts taxes or being for the war on terrorism. You can deliver you message and ideas with out using the "F" word. If I can't say the "F" word on the 20 meter band why sould Howard Steirn be alowed on the FM bands?" KC2ESD

    So, now you're going to decide which topics fall under the meaning of freedom of speech? Freedom of speech applies to all topics whether we like them or not. That is the price of a free society.
    Also, Howard Stern has never used the 'F' word on the air, nor does his show contain lewd descriptions or graphic talk. Obviously you're not listeners and you're going by what you've heard, understandable but inaccurate. Compare what Howard's supposed offense is to what Oprah said. Her statements were much worse but the FCC refused to review the complaint because she is, and this is a real quote 'beloved by millions'. So now it's just a matter of if they like you or not?!?! Sick hypocritical BS.
    Have a nice day.
     
  4. K0WVM

    K0WVM Ham Member QRZ Page

    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KB9YCO @ June 10 2004,06:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Also, Howard Stern has never used the 'F' word on the air, nor does his show contain lewd descriptions or graphic talk. Obviously you're not listeners and you're going by what you've heard, understandable but inaccurate.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
    YCO

    Maybe you should ask if I have heard his show.  HS has not used the 'F' word on the air, but that's not the point. Frankly, I have heard &amp; seen HS' show when I rode with a partner on patrol (not many options to avoid doing so) back at my last assignment in NC.  I disagree with you that HS has never sounded lewd (not all the time but it pops in on numerous occasions) on the radio much less shown being lewd on TV.  He has a very uncanny way of doing it and anyone with a little bit of common sense can tell you what he's talking about.

    I know what I have heard &amp; seen and we can go the way of the argument that says, &quot;well it's based on how you interpret it vs how I do the same.&quot;  But I disagree and that's just my $.02.
     
  5. K0WVM

    K0WVM Ham Member QRZ Page

    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KB9YCO @ June 10 2004,06:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">See, herein lies the problem. Who gets to decide what is 'lewd'? (Ludes are something completely different.) You? Extremist religious wackos in the Bush administration and the FCC? Me? That is the reason we need not set a gauge as the mainstream public sets it's own gauge through lack of commercial support. After all we are talking about commercial radio and television, if the majority didn't want Howard Stern he wouldn't have been around for 25 years.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
    Forgetting to add something else, another reply...

    So where do we draw the line YCO? Just let things go and ignore the fact that we have a society going down the tubes, or is there a need to have certain standards?

    I know you will think this is a joke in what I am saying, but a good example of &quot;not drawing that line&quot; is how we have let the public school systems become more of a loose cannon society than what it used to be over 50 years ago and I am not talking about segregation. Although this is a little extreme in comparisons, look at the string of school shootings a few years ago as an example.

    If you let things go and decide to not have a standard, what you will have is chaos later.
     
  6. KB9YCO

    KB9YCO Ham Member QRZ Page

    Let me say first off, thanks for all the reasonable and thought out responses; QRZ has got to be the best site for discussion without immediately attacking the person instead of their opinion. At least it's about 75/25 most of the time, there are some people that can't resist and the internet is full of them.
    Chad, you are correct, this all hinges on what you consider indecent versus what I consider indecent. Thus the reason for free speech without government hindrance, no one person or group's opinion should be the rule of law; if you don't like what you're hearing then you're free to not listen to it or support it. That doesn’t give the government the right to intervene on behalf of either side.
    I don't think we have a society going down the tubes (another subjective comment), I think we have a society that is over-populating, under-educating, and growing more polarized out of philosophical and financial differences. Those are some of the elements causing problems, not radio or entertainment. Blaming the media is an easy solution to a complex problem and has little to do with the real issues. Your comparison to school shooting, etc. is not apt in my opinion because you are comparing two things that are dissimilar in action and severity. Most of the chaos is coming from making The Bill Of Rights a fluid document open for change when all along it is clearly defined; congress shall make no law... the government shall not infringe, etc. Sacrificing our fundamental way of life to satisfy some moral dilemma is not the solution, nor does it solve the root problems.
     
  7. w5zzq

    w5zzq Ham Member QRZ Page

    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KG4CGC @ June 10 2004,02:59)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Somehow I feel compelled to visit a crowded firestaion and yell &quot;MOVIE!&quot;. [​IMG][/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
    Now that's funny....... [​IMG]
     
  8. N0OV

    N0OV Guest

    CYO

    Your last post was a very good observation.

    One thing you missed though is the actual power of the media.  

    Over the last twenty years these same people used citcoms, talk shows, etc to blast our government, influence elections and challenge some of the beliefs that helped build this country and make it strong.  All of this has been done in the name of Freedom of Speach.  As an American, I am concerned with the amount of influence they are having on the culture as a whole -- and find attempts to influence elections particularly disturbing.

    It is very obvious to me the folks in control of the media are interested only in power, money, and ratings.  And like the rail road tycoons of the past, they will do what ever it takes protect their rights to more. They have not been elected, and they are not accountable to anyone -- unless they violate the law of the land. A very, scary situation.

    -------------------------------

    Some of the other freedoms are the right to life, liberty and the persuit of happyness. The right to bare arms and protection against illegal search.  

    There has to be a balance.  Every freedom we are provided does come with a level of responsiblity.

    Each society has rules establish to provide guidance who wish to have a normal life.  These rules also act as trigger wires to alert others when the norms of society have been violated, placing others rights at risk.

    Back to the topic at hand.

    The FCC established these rules -- the same rules we have agreed to that prevent us from saying F$#@ over 20 meters.

    The media agreed to these rules.  In return, the FCC granted them a license to broadcast (and make money)

    The rules have been voilated and now the violators have been fined to correct this mistake.

    No freedom of speach issue here -- just the process bring some of the out of control elements you mentioned back into check.

    I respect your opinion but don't confuse the issue.  No one is saying Stern cannot shoot off his mouth, they are just reinforcing the original -- contractual agreement of where it can and cannot be done.

    Note:  If the right to Freedom of Speach was truly at risk, do you think the media would be getting away with the push to make Gay culture the norm, or attacks on the President?
     
  9. KD5KUF

    KD5KUF Guest

    [​IMG]0--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KB9YCO @ June 09 2004,22[​IMG]0)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Come on, wake up. Comparing someone shooting a gun to talk is way, way out of line and an extreme example with no bearing on what is in question here. No normal person will suddenly be injured by talk or even a jewel covered breast for a half a second that no one saw until the partisan nitwits at Fox News and CNN replayed it a thousand or more times. Do people really still believe that children will be turned into raving maniacs because of a word, or a song, or a brief and only partial breast flash? Are you people really that obtuse? Do you have that little of faith in your children to make the right choice? I'm not saying this to be personally insulting to anyone, but come on, time to take a step into the real world and the new millenium.
    Any of these lame comparisons, fire in a crowded theater, yelling bomb at the airport, etc. don't count and have nothing to do with the issue at all, not even close. Apples and oranges, wait more like apples and moon rocks, they don't even belong in the same category. There is no serious injury, no damage to property, nothing resulting in death, just talk that certain people may find offensive. Maybe you can dig up Joe McCarthy and have some more hearings about these awful threats to our sanity, safety, and morality. What a load...[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
    Responsibility and accountability for your actions sometimes must be enforced by others. Especially since it is no longer politically correct for us to assume such responsibility for ourselves.

    Shooting a gun may kill someone. But you can destroy the soul of someone who cares about you and that you matter to, with words out of your mouth. A spouse who really loves you, or a child who worships the ground you walk on (you're the role model here) can be more cruelly devastated by your words and actions that merely killing them would. They use to say the pen is mightier than the sword. Bullets may kill but words can destroy.... a heart, a soul, morale, moral fiber, self esteem, sense of right or wrong, a family, a town, a nation. Pity the people who have such as Howard Stern as a role model. Especially children who have not been taught better.

    Simple death ends things now, but the destruction caused by words lingers for years and even centuries. Freedom does not exist without individual responsibility to the people around them. Without such personal obligation it is childish, self centered anarchy, not FREEDOM. [​IMG]
     
  10. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Many have commented upon the 'responsibility and accountability' provision that must apply when you have the 'freedom' to do something.

    The Founding Fathers (and others) UNDERSTOOD that there are three legs to the stool upon which FREEDOM sits.

    LIBERTY... ACCOUNTABILITY.. RESPONSIBILITY.

    YCO and others WANT, and DEMAND, the FREEDOM upon which LIBERTY is an integral part.. yet seem highly offended, and put out, when others attempt to note that the other TWO terms MUST be joined with that LIBERTY he so highly prizes.  Without those two, the results are an increasingly general disregard for MUCH of the 'unwritten' rules of the road that society has long had itself immersed in.

    All three 'legs' **MUST** be present or you have what we have today..

    -- Disregard of the 'well-tested unwritten rules' that society must have to prosper and be successful.

    --  Dumbing down of the children, young adults who then grow up to become the leaders, lawmakers, policy makers and those in charge.

    --  Dilution of those foundational things that make America what it was (and still is, for the most part)  until all that remains is faint history and a poor reflection of what once was.

    YCO also has problems with religion as it relates to any contact with official Government policy, law, or regulation. This DOES fly in the face of long-standing recorded history that shows religion (in the specific case - Christianity) was a MAJOR player in, and component of, MUCH of the United State's history and culture.

    k3FT
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page