Posted on 06/06/2002 9:00:55 AM PDT by Peacerose
Strangeness is nothing new at ABC, but since when is the name of Jesus a dirty word? Bare butts are okay, foul language of all types is tolerated, but let a talk show host say, "Thank you, Jesus," and its time for the censors to step in!
On May 23, this exchange occurred on The View, a daytime talk show:
Nothing too shocking there, but it was too much for the censor: The word "Jesus" was bleeped out for the West Coast feed.
The next week, during the May 28 show, as the co-hosts discussed the bleeping, Behar said, "Well, geez, so what? I'm a Catholic!" . . . "Jesus and I are pals, okay? Get with the program!"
That's right, ABC! Get with the program! What kind of disturbed reasoning process is behind decisions like this? If a Muslim woman thanked Allah on a talk show, would that be bleeped, too? I suspect that it would not -- in the interests of diversity, you understand. And plenty of tolerance is afforded to the "realism" of taking the Lord's name in vain. How is it possible to decide that thanking Jesus is ugly and profane?
Whatever warped policy is at work here must be reviewed. ABC owes the public an explanation and an apology. Join me in demanding answers from these people. The contact information is below.
ABC
Phone 212-456-7777
E-mail ABC's Audience Relations Department
Read more here:
Meredith Vieira: "So yesterday, yesterday if you say this show, you know it was the last day of the weigh-in, the scale is gone."
Joy Behar: "Yes, and thank you, thank you, Jesus, is all I have to say! Goodbye to that damn scale and this whole diet. I'm sick of it!"
77 West 66th Street
New York, New York 10023
FAX 212-456-4292
Because swear words never commanded us not to use them in vain? lol
Are you serious? You actually live by these rules?
Even the Bible tells us that we cannot hold the world accountable to the same standards expected of the Church and other believers.
That if we were to cut of all who were Godless in our lives we would have to literally leave this world.
People have gotten very jaded.
I have to tell you --we don't get cable; we never have. That's not a matter of principle. We used to be too broke to afford it, and now NOT springing for it is a habit. Actually, we do get some cable stations (CNN, NY1) on our TV in our new place, if I connect the cable antenna hook-up, but I have to drag the TV onto the floor to reach the wire, so I rarely do. The BOSS is more interested in me picking up a VCR, so we can get cartoon movies for our two-year-old son, and she's pretty hostile towards the TV -- except for Jerry Springer -- anyway. And I get on her case whenever she turns that on, because no two-year-old has any business seeing or hearing that. So, we've got something of a stalemate re the TV. The things I miss are not being able to watch The Sopranos, and re-runs of late, great network series like The Twilight Zone, thirty-something, and China Beach.
Regards, Search4Truth.
Actually, you are only half-correct.
The episode in question was the last one for Anthony Edwards, not the last for ER. Furthermore, if you had meant the season finale, that too is incorrect, as that aired one week later.
That said, under ordinary circumstances I would have been upset with NBC. But as another pointed out, once you placed it in context, coming from a man who was a mere hours away from death, losing his motor functions to the point balance is impossible, what did you expect him to say?
"Well, gosh, I guess I's can't stand up no more"?
Never in the real world.
And just for that one moment, it was the real world.
Cool signature picture.
I agree that trying to help Godless people see the light is a very positive thing.
However I don't believe that arm-twisting tactics like boycotting advertisers and cutting off people who won't go along is the way to go about it.
Look at what Paul says in this passage;
"I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people,
not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world.
But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler.
With such a man do not even eat. 1 Corinthians 5:9-11
Paul is saying that we cannot hold the world to the same moral standards we hold a Christian brother to...and indeed if we were to attempt to cut off all dealings with them we would just have to leave the world.
This is exactly the point I was trying to get across.
When it comes to showing people the light...attempting to make them walk a straight line before they even know Christ is getting the cart before the horse.
It doesn't work.
Surely you jest?!?!? Are you saying that a society has no right to set certain behavioral standards for its members? The media are nothing more than corporate members of society, and as such could and should be held accountable. Presumably you wouldn't want the Propagnada Ministry fomenting sedition, or committing acts of treason......would you?????????? Or maybe you like your porn on all channels? Or maybe cocaine ads for the kiddies??????
The tricky part is how to apply a standard to the "free press". Just as the RKBA and freedom of religion, to name a couple, have been trampled by the "free press", "freedom of the press" could use a little fine tuning. In their own inimitable and subtle ways they ARE fomenting sedition. I don't like it; maybe you do.
I would like to go on, but it's getting late......
FGS, Texan-American
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.