A wordwide war is raging between the Dictatorship of Theocracy and freedom of reasonable men to choose their own way and the organizers of the most visable worldwide dshowcase of American culture out choose a sordid display of man's baser instincts. Garter belts and red biki panties on men, bondage outfits for sadomasochistic sex, a titillating flash of nudity. Hell even the profane Kid Rock singing about how glad he is to be an American was just the wrong, wrong image. Who could have thought this was even possibly appropriate? And now Houston will forever be associated with "the flash" and thank you, the streaker. I say we stone em all.
already on http://www.drudgereport.com/ OUTRAGE AT CBS AFTER JANET BARES BREAST DURING DINNER HOUR; SUPER BOWL SHOW PUSHES LIMITS jeez.. "during dinner hour" like anyone is having "dinner hour" on the superbowl..
It was really pathetic if you ask me. Titilitation over entertainment. No wonder the Muslims think we are the great Satan.
yeah it was pathetic, and this is coming from someone who is a big fan of sex. when you make it mainstream and overdo it, it just becomes stupid and a waste of time. its like that south park episode when the word "sh*t" becomes mainstream and it gets so overused that it becomes stupid. Sex in pop culture is very closely getting into that stage.
No. That is the problem with liberal thinking, that morality can be skewered for every different situation and person. There has to be an overall standard and defining that standard is a major sticky wicket. Why do we need to see Janet Jackson's tit on a Superbowl halftime show when my kids are watching? Can't we just do something musical and interesting versus titilating (along the lines of the Brittney/Madonna/Aguilera smooch)? I'm not for going back to the Puritan days when Catholics such as myself were viewed in league with the devil, but I think that the social pendulum has swung too far toward the path of perversion.
Easy killer.. it's not a "liberal" way of thinking.. moral relativism is a spiritual line of thought, not political.. it applies to people of all creeds, colors, and yes, political parties.
I expected this response. Let me ask you something: Do you see that disagreeing with your version of morality, and having an accurate grasp of 'real' morailty are not necessarily mutually exclusive? Besides the ignorance of assuming that they are correct about the virtues of absolute moralities, has anyone ever noticed that the same people who export absolute morality as a philosophy always assume that they have a monopoly on what that 'true' moraility is?
Point taken. Moral relativism is very ugly thing. As for the NFL, what were they thinking getting MTV to do the halftime show? I don't let my kids watch that filth-filled channel of degenerates.
Sean Combs segment with the remix "Oh diddy you're so fine you're so fine -----" may have been the dumbest thing i've ever heard. That boob thing with janet and justin was creepy.
The music was awful. To hell with the morality spin. The whole thing was a disjointed, pathetic mess. Good game, though.
But if we remove any higher power from the equation (as the foundation of the Judeo-Christian ethics that our laws are founded upon), what are we left with? The race of man acting on their own base instincts without any form of restraint or control. We are unable to determine our own moral code. Without a code of morality, we are savage animals driven by our lust.
Ok...so I'll play along. So where the laws of the United States differ from those of Judeo-Christian ethics, you would side with the latter? Please think carefully before answering.
It's an ugly thing when it gets out of control. Moral absolutism is just as ugly when it gets out of control, too. MTV is a blackhole of culture. It's become a game of one-ups..
Our laws are based on English common law, with the exception of the Constitution. The comon law is based on Judeo-Christian principles. Now I'm not saying the govt. should be involved with the morality question (we as free men are granted our agency to love or ignore God, sin or not to sin), but I'd like to see more people at the grassroots level fight against MTV when they turn a halftime show into soft-core p*rnography. Morality is not an individual question, because right and wrong is already concrete (thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not covet, etc.). But playing by the rules, as a function of agency, is.
Ok, fine. Are you going to answer the question? I'll rephrase: If "We are unable to determine our own moral code.", and therefore the moral code is established by Judeo-Christian ethics, I am assuming that where our laws and actions as a nation differ from Judeo-Christian ethics, you would oppose them. Is that or is that not correct?
Please leave the typical liberal/conservative blather out of this one. We might need to form new alliances if we are going to promote mankinds higher instints over it's more basic ones. The persuit eduation, empathy, freedom, science, love, and cooperation is being trampled by greed, consumerism, sexual immaturity and violence. The point of life might just be being a cog in the wheel of social evolution; helping mankind advance from animals into something else.
