heard a comedian comment once on the sorry state of U.S. "ethics",
specifically wrt movies:

If a man fondles a woman's breast, the movie is rated "R",
but if he hacks it with a sword, it's only rated "PG-13".

What does that say about our "culture"??
:-(

-Ben

> Speaking of which, did anyone else hear about Walmart covering the covers of
> "women's" magazines like Redbook and Cosmo, so as not to offend the eyes of
> wee ones? Totally ridiculous. If my kid asked why I might need to "satisfy
> my husband in the bedroom" I'd tell him.
> 
> -d
> Isaac wrote:
> > In any event, to get back on the subject imho censorship really just
> enables neglect on the part of parents by attempting to shelter children
> from being exposed to things which would result in them asking questions
> which the parents would be uncomfortable answering. And it's awfully
> selective. Some of the images of graphic violence on TV can be really
> intense, but there's little mention of that because parents aren't as
> uncomfortable answering questions about death and violence as they are
> answering questions about sex. And after having seen some of the more
> intense images, not hearing certain words on TV that many parents are using
> in front of their children with reasonable frequency seems rather silly.
> >
> 

> 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5

Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more 
resources for the community. 
http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm

                                Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
                                

Reply via email to