The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > The Media and Morality

The Media and Morality

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. All
Gibo, Polycarp, I am not taking the Mickie out of you this post is how I truly feel.
Yes number 96 seemed to start something, we seldom heard of homosexuals before ,but we would have sooner or later.
Now I have been around for a while, remember my childhood was spent in a stern Christian home.
Mum came from a family of 13 kids, her dad had been wed before and had 13 kids in each of two family's.
Mum and dad had 16 kids 8 of whom still live.
Dad probably fathered that many outside the marriage.
While we feared God every bush town knew fathers day could be confusing.
We had our sex lives controlled by Church's, but those who told us it was dirty or wrong had active sex lives with many partners.
I wonder if we would be different if your Gods servants stayed out of our beds?
Humans are what we are, I am far more concerned about bigger issues than others sex lives.
What ever television bought us the family sizes I tell of show we needed no help in our sex lives.
Sure you can not get that video Gibo?
Posted by Belly, Monday, 8 December 2008 5:12:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Gibo,
Are you saying that if TV hadn't promoted 'gays' and or promiscuous sex the 'moral decline' of society wouldn't have happened or wouldn't be as rampant?

Notwithstanding this I am concerned that as COMMERCIAL imperatives (including the media) tend to become trail blazers for profit (sensation is Stupendous, scintillating etc and oh yes, attention grabbing) rather than reflections of society it is they that are desensitizing the public.

The proplem is ultimately the public allowing themselves to be manipulated and aconditioned by commercial interests.

Try this, get a transcript of a news broadcast sit down and Red pencil all that which is hype, highly quesionable,you don't NEED to know and the sensation ...try it you'll be surprised.
Posted by examinator, Monday, 8 December 2008 6:55:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Exactly Examinator.

Sadly there was a trend towards sexual freedom (along with drugs and general rebellion against adults) and many in the media, having come out of that 60's era, went for it as "their rights and their personal freedoms".

The media, with the help of the advertising industry, today is mostly responsible for spreading for the continuence of the sexual revolution (ratings and money and power, the goal) and with that media/advertising agency involvment comes the sexual diseases, the breakdown of moral society, the increase in adultery and the increase in divorce, the spread of sex crime.
Its not hard to grasp. We look at it everyday.

Go to the Daily Telegraph Sydneys website...its all bottoms and breasts and sleaze comment. Lust pours off the site.

The media is contaminating each new generation as it comes into the world.
Their corruption of global society is one reason we will see the Judgment of the Bibles Tribulation.

When civilisations get to the cut-off point brought about by idolatry, sexual immorlaity, sacrifice (abortion) and witchcraft...they vanish.
God Judges them and its over.
Posted by Gibo, Monday, 8 December 2008 7:15:58 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Polycarp, maybe television, the internet and the media in general are serving to drag us out of some of moral and social hang-ups.

Crikey, when it comes to nudity or sex, my view is that we are absurdly hung up. What would be wrong with nudity being portrayed on television all the time? What would be wrong with people walking nude on any beach or on their own property in full view of the street and neighbours? Why should we treat sex or pornography in such a secretive or condemnatory manner, especially when all manner of imagery is available at the fingertips of anyone, including children, on the internet?

Of course there still need to be boundaries of decency and morality. But I’d say currently the position of these boundaries is far too far towards the prudish and restrictive end of the spectrum.

Programs like Number 96, Queer as Folk, Californication, etc could be seen as progressive social liberalisers, which are slowly but surely bringing us out of the dark ages of our enormous cringe about exposed genitalia, sex and all that sort of stuff.
Posted by Ludwig, Monday, 8 December 2008 7:16:55 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Actually, I blame it on the waltz.

http://members.isp01.net/hfsears/lessons/waltz4.html

"the Waltz was widely condemned as immoral, given the "closed" dance position, the rapid tempo (60 measures per minute), and the constant twirling and turning."

Or maybe the tango.

http://tinyurl.com/6o7urp (n.b. this opens a .pdf file)

"The tango must be considered an immoral dance and is consequently prohibited to Catholics" (NY Times 21st November 1913)

Or was it rock 'n' roll?

http://tinyurl.com/56obsd

"rock 'n' roll... often plunges men's minds into degrading and immoral depths"

Or could it just be dancing per se?

http://www.ag.org/top/Beliefs/charctr_13_social_dancing.cfm

"In the face of this moral erosion the church calls all Christian adults and parents to abstain from social dancing for themselves and their children in light of God’s desire for His people to be a separate and holy people"

Let's face it, once the waltz caught on, we just zoomed on down the slippery slope to perdition.
Posted by Pericles, Monday, 8 December 2008 8:39:56 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ha ha,

I havent posted for ages but Pericles' last one was just too good. That last one from the Assemblies of God is just great - really is there any difference between the Taliban and fundie Christians?

The next logical step is to ban all contact between men and women in any social situation in case. In fact the article warns us :

"However, the New Testament is filled with cautions about the emotions and passions that are part of any physical contact between the sexes. We are specifically warned to flee temptation, especially lust and sexual temptation (1 Cor. 6:18, 1 Tim. 6:9-11, 2 Tim. 2:22)"

So there you have it. No physical contact between the sexes. Perhaps some sort of covering to avoid any sexual temptation? Sounds like Burqas are definitly the way to go.

Even Christian dance evenings are to banned :

"Some Christians in various parts of the country are establishing "Christian dance clubs" utilizing Christian contemporary music in an attempt to eliminate objections to dancing because it often takes place in unwholesome, even evil, settings. The very idea dancing is often connected with other vices should sound a caution to those who attempt to sanitize an activity which at best poses great moral risk."

Gibo, Polycarp et al. Surely we need to stop the evils of physical contact between the sexes before focusing on the media?

Happy Christmas in advance everyone!

gw
Posted by gw, Monday, 8 December 2008 9:55:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy