Newsgroups: rec.video.cable-tv,misc.consumers,alt.cable-tv.re-regulate
Subject: Re: Cable TV Consumer Protection Act of 1992
From: jack@myamiga.mixcom.com (Jack Decker)
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 16:01:06 GMT
Organization: Northern Bytes BBS - Sault Ste. Marie, MI U.S.A.

In article <BCR.92Sep25095416@hpl3sn03.cern.ch> dated Fri, 25 Sep 1992 08:54:16
GMT, bcr@cernapo.cern.ch (Bill Riemers) wrote:

 > So lets take one step back to something not so extreme and more directly
 > related. Such as nudity on TV(gee I seem to remember hearing this befor).
 > I contend this can only be a moral issue.  Furthermore, I for one would
 > much prefer not to let the "moral majority" dictate what I can watch.  (Why
 > is it called the "moral majority"?  Because, anyone disagreeing is immoral.
 > Therefor "moral majority" always referes to 100% of all moral people.  100%
 > sounds like a majority to me. As far as the 98% of the population that is
 > immoral, we don't matter since we are all going to hell anyways.)

First, if you knew anything about Hell, you wouldn't be so flippant about it.
Going to Hell is NOT something you'd look forward to.  Of course, you don't
HAVE to go there, but if I told you how to avoid it I'd get flamed royally for
an off-topic message (hint: see the book of John in the Bible).

However, I don't know why you are railing on about the "Moral Majority" since
that organization has been disbanded for years now.  That particular
organization was formed by TV evangelist Jerry Falwell, and never included
anything even remotely approching a majority, even of so-called "moral" people.
I would just point out, however, that mis-naming organizations is not a
practice confined to conservative organizations.  For example, a couple of
years ago, a pro-abortion coalition was formed to oppose a ballot initiative
that banned the use of taxpayer money to fund abortions (via the medicaid
program).  And what name did this pro-abortion group take for themselves?  "The
Committee to save Michigan lives."  And why did they take such a misleading
name?  Because they then circulated petitions to get an opposing measure on the
ballot, which many pro-life people signed thinking that they were the
anti-abortion group.  So liberal groups aren't above putting a patently
misleading name on their organizations.

I think the original rationalle for the name "Moral Majority" was that the
majority of Americans are supposedly "moral".  But that is even at odds with
the Bible, which says that ALL have sinned... so no one is truly "moral" 100%
of the time. Falwell made a mistake in picking that name, but I think he paid
for it in that the organization didn't last too long.

So, when you attack the "Moral Majority" in 1992, you are attacking a ghost or
a straw man... it just doesn't exist anymore!

I do apologize to all that this post is getting pretty far off topic, but some
of the arguments that have been presented in this thread are really
thinly-veiled attacks on those who believe that there should be some standard
of public morality, and the above (quoted) message is an example of "guilt by
association" (you sound a lot like that bunch; you must be one of THEM!).  I
don't know about anyone else here, but I can assure you that I am not now, nor
have I ever been, a member of the "Moral Majority", although I did agree with
**some** of their goals.

Jack

Jack Decker                               | No, I don't own an Amiga; I just
Internet address: jack@myamiga.mixcom.com | get Internet mail via a gateway
Fidonet address:  1:154/8                 | system that runs on an Amiga.
Xref: sparky rec.video.cable-tv:1706 alt.cable-tv.re-regulate:470