LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY eiredrake)

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/16/business/media/16fine.html

Censorship is a pet peeve of mine. Especially when:

The orders are in response to more than 300,000 consumer complaints about programming that viewers found indecent, profane or obscene. Many complaints are lodged in large numbers by organized groups and not by independent viewers.

Basically, it's yet another political maneuver by our right wing Masters.

Sign on San Diego TV Ratings Guide says that Without a Trace gets a viewership of 20.1 million people. 20.1 MILLION. Yet 300,000 people, an apparently small but vocal minority can decide what the remaining 19,800,000 are permitted to watch? Yes, 300,000 is a lot of people and yes there needs to be some sort of standard for regular broadcast Tv. But this whole batch of nonsense is to protect kids and protect uppity sensibilities in adults. It would be more effective if these people claiming to be protecting their kids would actually be PARENTS and keep track of what Junior is watching instead of forcibly limiting other people's choices.

Personally I find shows like Fear Factor to be utterly repugnant and vile ( especially when they start eating roaches ). But just because I don't like it doesn't mean someone else shouldn't be able to watch it.

I hate to use the phrase 'vast Right wing conpiracy' ( since the vast left wing conspiracy is a favorite Republican/Conservative buzzword ) but this censorship nonsense is one facet of that very thing. Not necessarilly dark Christians ( though I'm willing to bet it's primarilly them ) but definately the type of right-wingers that want to live everyones lives for them. Changing how people express themselves isn't easy. But if you limit what they get to see and hear... and limit their avenues of expression you can affect their minds, behavior and so forth. 1984, anyone?

I wonder if we could possibly cost guys like Pat Robertson money if we all started writing into the FCC about how his comments and hypocrisy are morally indecent and should be stricken from the air. Naturally it'll never happen, since he's a core dominionist type but it'd be interesting to see what might happen. Anyone up for a letter writing campaign?


Not directly relevant to my proposal and argument but this ticked me off anyways...
"We absolutely are elated by the rulings handed down by the F.C.C.," Mr. Winter said. "Where they could fine a broadcaster for breaking the law, they did so. We think this sends a very powerful signal that those who violate the law will be punished."

Yeah... unless of course you're President.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY mirandaflynn)

Wouldn't want to spare the rod, now, would we?

link

Fun stuff all around. I like the advice to use plumbing supplies to beat the child. I don't have kids and am iffy on spanking, but if I ever *was* going to do it, there wouldn't be more than the back of the hand to the backside, and then only in major situations.

"Sean's 9-year-old brother was beaten so badly he limped, a prosecutor said. Bruises marred Sean's backside, too, doctors found."

"Sean died after being wrapped so tightly in blankets he suffocated. That, too, was a form of punishment, Johnston County Sheriff Steve Bizzell said."

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY sunfell)

In an article posted today on Talk To Action, writer Frederick Clarkson talks about candidate Jamie Raskin standing up to an overtly Dominionist legislator in the Maryland Senate:

Jeremy Learming, writing at the blog, Wall of Separation, tells the story of the Raskin's testimony (which was covered by The Baltimore Sun) at a hearing in the Maryland legislature on proposed state constitutional amendment to ban same sex marriage. Raskin, a professor of Constitutional Law at American University had been asked to testify by Equality Maryland, a marriage equality organization. More dramatic than his tesitimony was his exchange with Republican State Senator Nancy Jacobs who said, "As I read biblical principles, marriage is intended, ordained and started by God - that is my belief, ... For me, this is an issue solely based on religious principles."

Raskin replied:

"People place their hand on the Bible and swear to uphold the Constitution," Raskin said. "They don't put their hand on the Constitution and swear to uphold the Bible."

That quote is now on our front page, in the Wiki, and should be spread far and wide, because it is the quote which will take the Dominionist view of the law out of the picture, properly used.

Clarkson goes on to define Dominionism:

In a recent issue of The Public Eye, I noted that dominionism is a term used by outside observers to understand a complex yet vitally important trend. For people trying to figure out if a conservative politician, organization, or religious leader is a "dominionist," I noted three characteristics to listen for:

... Dominionists celebrate Christian nationalism, in that they believe that the United States once was, and should once again be, a Christian nation. In this way, they deny the Enlightenment roots of American democracy.

Dominionists promote religious supremacy, insofar as they generally do not respect the equality of other religions, or even other versions of Christianity.

Dominionists endorse theocratic visions, insofar as they believe that the Ten Commandments, or "biblical law," should be the foundation of American law, and that the U.S. Constitution should be seen as a vehicle for implementing Biblical principles.

To that last, it should be noted that dominionists believe that the Bible as an absolute, infallible source of God's word, and elevate it above even Christ and God. They worship the Bible. This is a critical difference, and when examining religious groups, their mission statements (or creeds) should always be checked to see where the Bible falls in their regard. If the Bible is first, then you are dealing with dominionists. Every change in the law they wish to force upon our government is driven by Scripture.

Go read the article. And its links. It's quite interesting.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY britzkrieg)

From NARAL:

Thank you for helping protect Georgia's women access to emergency contraception (EC or the 'morning-after' pill)! Because an overwhelming number of activists responded to Friday's urgent alert, the Georgia House did NOT pass HB1445!

House Bill 1445 would have allowed pharmacists to refuse to fill prescriptions for emergency contraception, but thanks to our advocates, we finally have a victory to celebrate!

NARAL Pro-Choice Georgia extends our deep gratitude to the following Representatives: Debbie Buckner, Karla Drenner, and Jeannette Jamieson, who spoke out against the bill from the House floor and were integral in stopping it.

The Senate version of this bill, SB123, has passed the Senate and is pending in the House - so please keep up the fight!

If you look at the Georgia General Assembly site, though, the situation looks more complex. To me, it looks like the House passed the bill, then voted to reconsider it, then voted to table it. WTF? I hate politicians...

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY exotic_princess)

...because they'll be wanting to come out against this, at least I would think so!

Because, of course, God wouldn't have been wise enough to possibly have CREATED the Big Bang... or that of course, Satan is blinding these scientists with false data...


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A NASA space probe has peered back in time to a bare instant — less than a trillionth of a trillionth of a second — after the Big Bang, astronomers reported on Thursday.

"We have new evidence that the universe suddenly grew from sub-microscopic to astronomical size in less than the blink of an eye," Bennett said at a telephone news conference. "This tremendous inflation of the universe happened in much less than a trillionth of a second."

There is a website linked at the end of the article with results of the probe, descriptions of the Big Bang Theory, etc.

LJ-SEC: (ORIGINALLY POSTED BY wyldraven)

Missouri House OKs birth control funding ban

The Missouri House voted Wednesday to ban state funding of contraceptives for low-income women and to prohibit state-funded programs from referring those women to other programs.

( Read more... )

I heard it a few days ago. What they are striving for is "forced pregnancy". It's nothing but a case of "power over" gone horribly out of control. One more way to achieve dominion?