"Protect The Children" Just a Euphemism for Censorship and Control

From today's headlines, a federal appeals court has ruled that fleeting curse words on network broadcasts do not automatically mark programs as "indecent" and trigger FCC fines. The article, from the Austin American-Statesman, goes on to quote FCC chairman Kevin Martin when he comes right to the point, "I completely disagree with the court's ruling and am disappointed for American families." FCC Commissioner Michael Copps also chimed in with "the FCC has a duty to find a way to breathe life into the laws that protect our kids. That may entail an appeal of this decision."

I think the FCC is taking this issue of "bad" language too far and blowing it out of proportion. Real life is sometimes rude, and whether we like it or not, our kids will be subject to the vulgar and sometimes graphic language of adults. Of course we need to protect them from those things that can do great damage to them. I would, however, argue that bad language isn't one of those greatly damaging things. Portrayed violence, in my opinion, is much more dangerous (though there is much disagreement about that) because it trivializes doing harm to our fellow humans. Personally, I wouldn't want my children (though I do not have any) becoming desensitized to violence. It is simply not something that we should ignore or even appear to condone due to our indifference.

But, as for the FCC's present concerns, do I want to listen to prime-time TV laced with expletives? No, but I have one potent weapon at my disposal, as does every family in America--I can change the channel. And frankly, given the dubious quality of much of our current network programming, I recommend it.