Jersy shore should be banned.

"Censorship is like telling a man he can't have his steak because a baby can't chew it."This is much of my argument and I'm glad you agree. We should not ban steak because children can't handle it and in like kind children that are provided steak by their parents could be considered idiots depending on the presentation and oversight (or lack thereof).I stand by the idea that guardians are to look after their children in such cases. We do not live in an ideologically homogeneous society and fooling ourselves into believing that everyone has or should have a similar parenting style is both harmful and naive. Informing your children that others, especially other children, may have differing and/or harmful views will teach your child multitudes more than sheltering them into isolation for fear that one day they might hear a Snooki quote. If isolation is your style, private schooling or even home schooling is available, but publicly banning things does more harm than good. It'd be book banning: 21st Century.While I think comparing Jersey Shore to either steak or a loaded gun is kind of silly, these analogies don't mesh with reality. Children exposed to Jersey Shore aren't choking to death on steak nor are they getting shot. Media exposure isn't lethal and it's nothing they won't be exposed to at a later date, still I do think parents have the right to monitor their children's private exposure to it as they see fit. Parenting is more similar to nutrition in that feeding your kids junk food isn't considered great for them, but few think it should be illegal. Banning Twinkies is not the solution.Whether or not some governing body can ban something is not the issue. Any government could ban anything. Whether or not they should is the issue. I have gone over why I think it should not ban the show.Additionally, I do not believe the FCC, as it stands currently, can ban the show. Per Miller v. California, in order for an outright ban, the FCC would have to agree that the publication satisfies the Three-Prong-Test outlined by the Supreme Court.[1][2] It would have to show that Jersey Shore 1) as a whole, appeals to the interests of sex 2) describes or depicts sexual acts in a patently offensive way 3) as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value. All three must all be true in order for a ban to be put in place. I do not believe, as a whole, Jersey Shore appeals primarily to sex although I'll concede it alludes to it as most television does today. Patently offensive is vague, but I do not believe so as its depictions are comparable to similar modern television. The show has a modest FCC regulated TPG rating of TV-14, so I doubt it's on the FCC's naughty list to begin with. Lastly, notable schools and professors have proposed creating classes and hosting conferences dedicated to critical analysis of Jersey Shore.[4][5] Although you or I may not agree, apparently a lot of people see the show, and shows like it, worthy of public broadcast. There are FCC time-slot restrictions for indecent shows which again could be argued, but we're discussing a ban. I believe I have satisfactorily refuted my opponents position. I think him and readers for the opportunity to debate this. I ask that readers consider the evidence an please vote CON: Jersey Shore should not be banned.Sources:[1] http://www.fcc.gov...[2] http://courses.cs.vt.edu...[3] http://www.tvguide.com...[4] http://www.huffingtonpost.com...[5] http://www.foxnews.com...