Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

This is interesting after, all the hoopla on Janet J

Feb 17, 2004 2:10AM PST

DAILY POLL

Do you use the V-Chip to block inappropriate TV programs from coming into your home?

Yes:
2%
No:
76%
I don't know what that is:
22%

Total Voters: 10766

Discuss Results
Archives | Related Topics


Looks like after all the controversy more people would be interested in using it!
Not sure, But I don't think my 20 year old RCA would even take a v-chip! If that is where they go! LOL I just know I don't have one!

Glenda

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
That's exactly the tactic used by Satan in Eden.
Feb 20, 2004 1:27PM PST

He started parsing what God had said, tried to introduce doubt, questioned if God really had meant what they thought he said, and so on. If Adam hadn't heard it direct from God himself, Satan probably would have tried that trick on him too, saying that it probably wasn't even from God.

- Collapse -
OK
Feb 22, 2004 10:37PM PST

But that doesn't invalidate the question. With any kind of luck god would not create our intellect and ask us to abandon all use of it.

Dan

- Collapse -
My two cents. I don't think He does.
Feb 22, 2004 11:45PM PST

I'm pretty sure it's Paul who says God works throught the 'renewal' of our minds. God wants healthy minds who are seeking and open to the truth.

- Collapse -
That kinda thing doesn't appeal to me as much as to some, apparently.
Feb 19, 2004 3:49AM PST

I was really hoping for a clear, concise definition of what's indecent. That's what we're talking about.

In any case, this is hardly a consistent message as these examples are thousands of years old. I don't think Lot turned out to be such a great role model, either.

Dan

- Collapse -
Oh come on! That sounds like sour grapes!
Feb 19, 2004 9:03AM PST

A message that started with less than 50 people took over and subdued the entire known world outside of Asia. That included overcoming the Roman Empire itself, and a spread into 'barbarian' europe. A message so important that we base our calendar on the birth of Christ. A message that has reached, and persuaded, millions of people including a vibrant church in virtually every part of the world. A message which is still be proclaimed 2,000 years after the death and resurrection of Christ. A message that has shaped our entire civilization.

A second year marketing student? That's about the most assinine statement I've ever read. You must be speaking tongue in cheek, and I'm not getting it.

- Collapse -
Yet
Feb 19, 2004 10:25PM PST

We still can't come to any consensus whatsoever about what the definition of indecent is for purposes of the current discussion. In fact, no one has even made the attempt.

Dan

- Collapse -
I tried to answer it a little bit
Feb 20, 2004 2:12AM PST
here.

Although, it's certainly not a 'definition', it talks about a 'process' whereby we might reach agreement. In that sense, IMO it's a start toward what you're asking.
- Collapse -
We'll put a committee together
Feb 20, 2004 2:30AM PST

with one representative from each of the world's thousands of religions and each school of secular thought. They ought to come up with a consensus view sometime before the sun burns out, maybe.

Dan

- Collapse -
Not a chance in the world. See my post above. (NT)
Feb 20, 2004 5:06AM PST

.

- Collapse -
Re:I tried to answer it a little bit
Feb 20, 2004 5:19AM PST

How would you proceed to the practical solution to the question at hand? Having all of this warm feeling coming from god is not very helpful if the goal is putting instruction on paper so that broadcasters can follow it.

Dan

- Collapse -
If you're looking for steps 1 thru 20, I don't have your answer.
Feb 21, 2004 10:08AM PST

I think I said it's probably a process, and the process includes several principles. I think the primary element of this process is to attempt to glorify God. That implies many things such as:

The truth about sin should be exposed. It should not be held up as rewarding or 'good'.

Human beings should not be demeaned, but treated as what they are; creatures who reflect the image of God.

Programs should strive to show those things which are 'excellent' and dwell on them.

They should emphasize the need to seek peace with one another, and to seek the other's good before our own.

They should illustrate the need to fight evil.

They should celebrate life and health.

Those are a few. What do you want to contribute?

- Collapse -
I don't know that there is an answer.
Feb 22, 2004 10:48PM PST

Your suggestions are certainly a fine starting point for those who share your specific religious dogma, but would fail as a yardstick to guide the multifaceted, heterogenous, near anarchic system we're discussing.

I think it's been offered before that there should be limited central control of what programming is offered. This would allow the individual to choose from a variety and for market forces to select the most requested.

Dan

- Collapse -
and here we return to an imperfect system attempting to deal with the question
Feb 22, 2004 11:55PM PST

of a garbage dump. Do you have the right to build a garbage dump next to my house? Telling me to close the doors and windows is tyranny. It denies me the right to enjoy the fresh air. The garbage dump will pollute all the air around me and leave me without any choices. Thus, I must lobby government to force you to put your garbage dump where all of the other garbage dumps are. That's the only way my ability to choose to open or close my windows can be retained. Other than moving away, and why should I have to do that, that's the only rational choice open to me.

- Collapse -
A most flawed anology
Feb 23, 2004 2:42AM PST

You can't turn the channel on your neighbor. It's all too simple to do it on a TV.

Dan

- Collapse -
Turn the channel to what? If it's all polluted, there's nothing to turn
Feb 23, 2004 5:41AM PST

the channel selector to. It's just like the garbage dump polluting my air. You can't stop it from spreading.

- Collapse -
Open For Debate And Interpretation...
Feb 18, 2004 4:53AM PST
He didn't spell out in that document every detail of life and technology. - Kiddpeat

God did a pretty good job spelling everything out in the document he did write, The Ten Commandments. The documents written by man that have been retranslated over and over a multitude number of times into different but unequal and constantly evolving languages and were used in the current compilation of the Christian Bible, are the ones open for debate and interpretation...
- Collapse -
Are you saying we don't have the original Hebrew and Greek text? If so, show
Feb 18, 2004 10:09AM PST

me THAT link. I'll be most interested. Last I heard, scholars are pretty sure there are no substantial differences between what we have and the original documents. The New Testament says something like 'holy men spoke as they were moved by God', and 'all scripture is given by inspiration of God'. That means that He wrote it all, although men were used as intermediaries. Is your God too small? If He took the trouble to write it, do you think He would allow it to be lost in transitions from culture to culture.

Sure, it's open for debate and interpretation. That's why you've got to expend some effort to understand what is being said. There is a real meaning which is what God meant to say. It's our job to try to understand what that is.

- Collapse -
Really? I thought facism, communism, and other 'isms' have made religious
Feb 18, 2004 3:49AM PST

disputes kind of puny by comparison. How many did Hitler and Stalin kill? How many did pol pot kill? By contrast, one of the worst of the inquisitors killed perhaps 2,000 people. Of course, anyone killed in the name of religion is one too many, but what does that have to do with my post?

I believe you originally asked how my claims versus your claims should be evaluted. I answered that neither of us can do that because we don't have the perspective or the objectivity to do so. Only God has that, and only He can do that. Our job is to try to discern what He wants and do that. I guess your approach is simply to push for what you want. I fail to see any superiority in your approach, and, in fact, see deficiencies which I've alluded to above.

- Collapse -
Re:Really? I thought facism, communism, and other 'isms' have made religious
Feb 18, 2004 3:55AM PST

But "what God wants" isn't objective. Every religion has its own ideas about what God wants. Sure there's a lot of overlap but there are also big differences. You can (and should) live according to the way you believe God wants you to live, but if someone else believes otherwise, that doesn't make them wrong or morally deficient, and it doesn't give anyone the authority to declare their interpretation of "what God wants" to be truer than anyone else's.

- Collapse -
Josh, that's a classic error, and a little thought should show you that.
Feb 18, 2004 10:27AM PST

'What God wants' is absolutely objective. He is real, and He knows what He wants. It doesn't make a lick of difference what every religion's ideas are, or what someone believes. It doesn't change what He wants. Further, God has every right to declare particular beliefes as wrong or abhorrent. As you said, there are big differences between religions. They can't all be right. They may all be wrong, but they can't all be right. That's where faith comes in. You have to explore a religion and decide whether you're going to buy into it. Once you make that committment of faith, you are making a statement about truth. You're saying that you have found the truth. You may be wrong, but you can't say there are two or more truths. There is only one truth. That's God's truth. It's real, and its objective. If someone contradicts God, they are indeed wrong and morally deficient. How could it be otherwise? What you can't do, is force your view of the truth on someone else. You can, however, work to convince your society of what God's truth is, and it can make laws which reflect that truth. That's the reason that God gave government its power.

- Collapse -
Oh, and....
Feb 18, 2004 4:08AM PST
By contrast, one of the worst of the inquisitors killed perhaps 2,000 people.

That number has been topped, and recently. 3,000 people were killed "in God's name" in one day right here in the USA. It happened on September 11, 2001.
- Collapse -
I said inquisitor, as in the Inquisition. I'm sure you know what that was.
Feb 18, 2004 10:30AM PST

It's one of the things commonly cited as religion run amuck along with the Crusades.

- Collapse -
To bend the subject a bit. The Passion.
Feb 18, 2004 11:28AM PST

There was that interview by Diane Sawyer recently with Mel Gibson about his gospel inspired movie of Christ Passion. Of course they hit on Jewish concerns about the message it sent, worried it was "anti-semitic". I was sitting there and wondering why Jews of today wouldn't accept that the Sanhedrin of that day and time was possibly only a little less corrupt than the Catholic Inquisition, or maybe just as corrupt. When Christians, even those that are not Catholic, condemn the Inquisition it's not taken as a blanket condemnation of all Catholics today, in other words it's not considered as anti-catholic simply because it condemns a particular point in Catholic history. So why would outright condemnation of the Jewish leaders during Christ day be considered anti-Semitic toward Jews of today?

- Collapse -
Exactly. Don't you think bin Laden is acting as a self-appointed Inquisitor?
Feb 19, 2004 12:43AM PST

Remember, he calls all Americans "infidels."

Main Entry: in

- Collapse -
and your point is? I referred to a distinct historical event, but
Feb 19, 2004 9:16AM PST

even Bin Laden has a way to go before he surpasses Hitler, Stalin, or Pol Pot.

- Collapse -
Long way to go...
Feb 19, 2004 3:48PM PST

Considering that the population of New York City is 8 million, one smuggled "WMD" could result in a lot of rapid "catch up". BTW, it was Inquisitions (plural). One Bernard Gui, the Dominican Inquisitor who did his thing in northern Italy, seems to have gotten the most "press" in modern times, especially in the movies.

- Collapse -
Another angle on this
Feb 19, 2004 5:45AM PST

If you were talking about making people pay for a channel that provides "adult" programming, e.g. the Playboy channel, that would be one thing (and the Playboy channel is already a premium channel). But you're talking about making people pay for channels that provide both adult and "family-friendly" content, because you object to some of the programming. What that really calls for is a device that would let you block individual programs, not an entire station, and that is something that the person wanting to do the blocking should have to pay for IMO.

- Collapse -
Because we control the vertical...
Feb 17, 2004 10:20AM PST

...we control the horizontal...do not adjust your set.

- Collapse -
Re:Because we control the vertical...
Feb 18, 2004 2:55AM PST

Cute. Not true unless the US becomes a theocracy, but cute.

- Collapse -
We are with you KP:)
Feb 17, 2004 4:51AM PST

We have control of what we watch! If we don't like it, or the Grandkids are here we are real selective in what we watch! I am like Mary Kay, That is what the off button is forHappy

Glenda