A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z 

Fearing free speech: The American way

Years ago, I used to listen to a radio “Shock Jock,” as they were called, named Bubba the Love Sponge.  His show was probably the most entertaining way to spend the morning drive anywhere in Central Florida, and even in other states where his show was syndicated.  It was borderline crude and blessed with gratuitous amounts of controversial topics, often skirting the line best displayed by cable TV and HBO.  It was refreshing in its own way.  All the things that may or may not have been important were discussed, but they were talked about in a way that made sense and at least made you think a little about a topic, sometimes making a listener more interested in something thought to be obscenely boring at first.

Then some pitchfork wielding soccer mom brigade accidentally flipped on the radio and listened to the show for a minute, and to their horror, their teenage children enjoyed the show.  And of course, no good parent would ever dream of letting their child think for themselves or find interest in anything that was not written on the 30-year plan set forth at birth by the parents for him to go to med school, marry a nice Catholic girl and live in the house next door with a white picket fence.  

God forbid the kid show interest in anything that delved into the moral gray area between normal people and the zealots that follow faith with blinders.

And so Bubba the Love Sponge, like Howard Stern and later Don Imus, all felt the wrath of people with their panties in a bunch.  

Opinions, last I checked, weren’t considered slander or libel.  It seems that in the process of preaching free thought, free will and free speech, that disclaimers have been attached to each with where they may not go.  It seems ironic that Don Imus can get fired for calling a black female basketball player a “nappy headed ho” and stoke the flames of controversy into a blazing firestorm, yet a church can stand on the street holding signs that say “Thank God for IED’s” and they get away with a finger shaking by the media.

Soccer moms far and wide will get into an uproar about Bubba the Love Sponge or Buckethead, all while they go and buy their teenage kids beers for the party after the big game.  The same soccer mom that will deprive a child of any of life’s experiences in the name of protection, firmly sticking to a warped set of ethics that don’t approve of morally questionable thoughts yet they couldn’t care less about those who love the fact our soldiers are fighting a war across the world, and in some cases, even condone the protests that shame our troops.

America as a whole has become fat and content with a way of life filled with selfish ideals and corruption.  Anyone with an opinion that falls outside their strict line of thought is looked at with daggers and if they even so much as plant the seed of doubt into a child about the so called values these slave driver parents have beaten into their minds, all hell breaks loose.

Sorry soccer moms of the world. The world is not as you wish it would be, and denying a child the right to experience things for himself or herself is only going to ensure that they won’t be prepared to make any decisions, or the right ones, when the time comes.

Shielding is not parenting.  Guiding is.

1 comment so far

I both agree and disagree with what’s said here, and I guess that means I just haven’t made my mind up on this subject quite yet.

What I agree with is that for this newest generation, it’s important to engage kids and let them know what’s going on, even if it may not be exactly “appropriate” for little eyes and little eyes. Truly, this is where our society is going, and if those kids are ever going to be prepared for it, they’re going to need to experience it, right? Right.

Then another part of me disagrees, thinking that some children are far too young to see and hear certain things, such as the Bubba the Love Sponge, an example used in the article. I don’t know what age I would start letting a child of mine listen to something like that, but the point is, where do we draw that line/boundary? Because I definitely think there should be one.

Children who are too young will not be able to rationalize and understand certain content, and certainly won’t be able to apply it “appropriately” in their lives.

I don’t know. Overall, I worry about our society on this topic.

Leave a comment

(required)

(required but not displayed)


  • Mission Statement

    The staff of Streaming Magazine is dedicated to creating a comprehensive collection of useful articles about health and to the philanthropic concept of an interactive and inclusive dialogue about medical issues and general well-being.

    The articles that appear on Streaming Magazine come from Doctors, Institutions, and Health Organizations from around the world. The information helps readers to help themselves or others, and helps to foster a nurturing environment where support from friends and family is essential.

    Editorial Guidelines Doctors Requirements

  • Archives