Fundies: The Fairness Doctrine's goal is to wipe Christians off the airwaves......

[marmar]

:eyes: :freak:


from the journal of persecuted Christian drama queens everywhere, the American Family Assn's OneNewsNow:



Christian radio - target of 'Fairness Doctrine'?
Chad Groening - OneNewsNow - 2/16/2009 7:45:00 AM


An official with the National Religious Broadcasters says if liberals are successful in bringing back the so-called "Fairness Doctrine," conservative commentators like Rush Limbaugh won't be the primary target of censorship.

Recently former President Bill Clinton joined the list of Democrats who are openly calling for the reinstatement of the so-called Fairness Doctrine or some kind of forced accountability. Senators Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) and Debbie Stabenow (D-Michigan) have both spoken favorably about the controversial policy in recent media reports.

While high-profile conservative commentators like Limbaugh and Sean Hannity have often been mentioned as "targets" of a reinstated "fairness" policy, Craig Parshall -- senior vice president and general counsel of the National Religious Broadcasters -- believes Christian radio is going to be the major target.

"I think when it gets down to the rubber meeting the road, it's not going to be Rush Limbaugh who's going to be the primary target. He's the poster boy for the issue," he contends. "It's going to be Christian broadcasters who are not afraid sexual orientation issues from a bibliocentric view, who aren't afraid to challenge the status quo on issues like abortion; or Christian broadcasters who aren't afraid to be able to compare the truth of the gospel with the false world religions around there. And all of this is very, very politically incorrect speech."

The bottom line, according to Parshall, is that Christian broadcasters are the ones who are going to have the target on their backs when all is said and done on the reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine.


http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=420300 (if Rick-rolled by onenewsnow, the story's at www.afa.net)

[rpannier]

1. Of course, because prior to 1988

There were NO Christian Broadcasting Networks, No shows with a 'Bibliocentric' view anywhere to be found. :sarcasm:

Idiots

[donco6]

2. I'd be happy with just ONE fewer channel.

Do they really - click - have to - click, click - be everywhere - click, click, click?

[ElboRuum]

3. So the Fairness Doctrine is about censorship?

I don't know whether I'm dealing with oxymorons or just plain old morons.

Hey, new word!!! Oxymorans! I like it.

[KharmaTrain]

18. The Answer Should Be Obvious...They're Trolling For $$$$

Their concept of a new "fairness doctrine" is to force stations to stay with formats...like hate radio despite low ratings or the station being sold to a different owner. They're afraid they'll lose their monopoly on the radio dial and an important conduit to their moneymaking and influence peddling.

People throw around the term "Fairness Doctrine" without understanding how this act worked...or should we say, didn't. No, it didn't require stations to offer equal time to shout back at a Rushbo...in fact it affected very little of what people heard.

In essence those who want to "restore" a fairness doctrine DO want censorship...no necessarily equal time.

[ElboRuum]

30. Well, the FD really applies mostly to news...

...the FD mandated that controversial issues of public importance be presented through the broadcast media, and opportunity be provided for the discussion of contrasting views. It entailed a few other things (such as candidate endorsement, for example).

I disagree that the restoration of the FD is due to a desire for censorship, just demanding an avenue of accountability when stations like Faux Noise throw spin at the news.

[boobooday]

4. Not just radio

Half the channels on the cable box too.

[liberal N proud]

5. Oh those poor persecuted bastards

:wtf:

[Wickerman]

6. Does Rush or Hannity or the like even profess to be Christian?

I don't pay them no mind but in the snips that show up here I've never heard them referred to as or offering anything that is focused on even the perversion of Christianity that many are familiar with.

[treestar]

13. They pretend to be, but they are really pure Libertarians

Christians would at least believe that the poor should be helped. They might think it should not be via the government, but the assertion that the US is a "Christian nation" would properly mean that the government inolvement question would never come up, as the Christians would naturally help the poor.

Limpballs and the like don't really believe in that. They are too full of judgmental attitude towards the poor, in contradiction to Christian doctrines. Charity doesn't work or it would have worked. So this is not a Christian nation after all. Limpballs is of the mean spirited type that believes the poor just deserve it for not working hard enough and taking advantage of opportunity enough.

[TheCowsCameHome]

7. It must be tough to be so paranoid.

Imagine, a commie waiting around every corner..............

[mmonk]

8. Good idea, especially since they used to try and buy up public radio

stations and switch them to "Christian" radio.

[BlooInBloo]

9. Don't tempt me.

[silverweb]

10. Paranoid much?

Last I heard, extreme paranoia such as this was considered mental illness.

Of course, these loons are ill, but I don't believe they believe their own bullshit.

This is all just manufactured drama-queen hysteria/false outrage to drum up donations from the ignorant and terminally stupid.

[liberal1973]

11. LoL

I don't know about the Fairness Doctrine ,but I certainly want to crush crazy radio.:P :toast: :party:

[Deja Q]

12. So they want to get rid of the Doctrine and get rid of everyone that disagrees with them, we see

The fairness doctrine is for everyone - INCLUDING them.

[treestar]

14. It's to let the nonChristians onto the airways

To these people persecution means: unable to dominate due to equality allowed to others.

[daleo]

15. This is pretty revealing of their mentality

"Christian broadcasters who aren't afraid to be able to compare the truth of the gospel with the false world religions around there"

It would be amusing if churches had to give equal time to alternative religious viewpoints. Perhaps an FSM advocate could come on after a televangelist to present another viewpoint. I would watch that.

[GinaMaria]

16. Actually wouldn't it get them on more stations? n/t

[Generic Brad]

17. There's very little programming for the devil worshippers out there

If we must be bombarded with Christian broadcasting it would only be fair to allow the other side to be represented - sort of like 'fair and balanced' for the spiritual.

[PufPuf23]

19. What about "Christian" TV?

My home is in the mountains and the only multi-channel TV is DirectTV or Dish. I subscribe to DirectTV. There are at least 10 Christian stations. Ironically that is the same range of station numbers where LinkTV with Democracy Now resides. In large part the Christian stations are extremists mixing politics and faux history/prophecy/natural science with fundamentalist theology. There is rare programming from other religions nor liberal Christian perspectives. I do not know if this is universal for DirectTV and in general I am happy with DirectTV exccept some sports programming and wish more "real" news than corporate war party spew.

[DavidMS]

20. Not a fan of fairness doctorine

Would love an accuracy doctrine. Make FCC fines for being unable to get basic facts right, making material misstatements when the correct information is readily available. Permit 3rd parties to enforce it. For the fundie right it would be like being a fly in a room full of 13-year old boys armed with flyswatters.

There aren't always two sides to every story. There are somewhere between 1 and N, depending on the story. For instance global warming stories are one sided. Stories about tax policy may have 3 or 4 sides.

Christian Broadcasters probably will die off as the population demographics change. By 2030 the SBC supposedly will loose half their churches. Not a bad thing.

[silverweb]

25. Enforceable accuracy doctrine... yes!

I absolutely agree.

[Tartiflette]

27. Agreed

It's really the flooding of the public airwaves with unfactual or misleading information that is the problem, so if one can ensure that utterances using a mass media tool are required to reach at least some form of accuracy, that would be a huge step forward. Might make people like the "Swiftboaters for destroying a presidential candidate", think twice, too.

[Kip Humphrey]

21. If only it were that easy!

[DCKit]

22. I'd (almost) be satisfied if they began talking about punishing adulterers...

as much as they do "Teh Gays". Half the religiously insane would be looking for another, more accepting church on Monday.

As fascists are so fond of saying, "You can't pick and choose which laws you're going to obey."

Listen to any of them for more than a few moments and you'd think the Bible lessons - Old *and* New Testament - on hypocrisy were written in invisible ink.

[Rosco T.]

23. If that were true.. then I would have to say .....

GOOD!

[jmowreader]

24. "Christian Radio" isn't exactly religious...

but I think everyone here knows that.

Look at the first thing Parshall mentioned: sexual orientation. When Pigboy talks about sexual orientation issues, he calls GLBT people evil and perverted. (This is as opposed to being a junkie pedophile who likes to vacation in the Cabana Boy Capitol of the World, of course; that's perfectly fine.) If Pat Robertson or James Dobson talk about it, they hold up a Bible and say "it says in Leviticus 18:22 in this good book that GLBT people are evil and perverted, and who can argue with that?"

(I was wondering too: Craig and Janet Parshall are married.)

The religious broadcasters are right to fear a renewed Fairness Doctrine, because their bullshit is easy to pick apart. Five minutes of rebuttal by any decent liberal commentator would be enough.

[mitchum]

26. It's ALWAYS about those Nazarene Death Cult motherfuckers...

according to their blather

[AB_Positive]

28. No offense to the Christians here but...

Wouldn't that be a good thing?

All other religious folk and non-believing heathen (like me) would feel better, and nice, well meaning Christians could have the scumbags that take their flag to use for "The Cause" wouldn't look so bad compared to their abusive brethren.

Everyone wins, right?

[JHB]

29. Ahhh, another day of self-proclaimed "Christians"...

...bearing false witness against their neighbors, while fundraising.

A reminder of their TRUE idol.