Good, bad, or ugly?

[fredjacksonsan]

Thu May 18, 3:34 AM ET WASHINGTON (Hollywood Reporter) - Republican leaders in the U.S. Senate are preparing another attempt to win quick approval of legislation greatly increasing the fines broadcasters would pay for violating the nation's indecency laws.
.
.
.

Brownback's Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act would increase fines for indecent broadcasts from $32,500 per incident to $325,000 per violation.
Frist and Brownback expected to know whether lawmakers would allow the bill to go through with the expedited procedure late Wednesday. A vote on the bill would then be forthcoming.
.
.
.

Pressure from the religious right has been building on senators to move an indecency bill.
.
.
.

Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, chairman of the House Commerce Committee, has been hesitant about moving indecency legislation through his committee preferring to wait and see how a new $330 million pledge by the entertainment industry to publicize and teach parents how they can control content coming into their homes -- whether it's with the V-chip or with cable's channel-blocking technology -- works out.

(excerpt taken from Reuter's article at: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060518/.../media_smut_dc )



Potentially rich topic of discussion. By multiplying the fine by ten, is this just another angle to make money for the government? With the religious right having a say, is it a blurring of the lines between church and state? Or have we moved beyond the Puritanical ethics that prompted the law originally?

Comments please.

[Muscletang]

Wait, let me get this straight.

Before...

HOLY FUCK LOOK IT'S TITTIES!!!! ( . )( . )

$32,500

Now after this bill though it'll be $325,000? Why do I see people like Howard Stern, Trey Parker, and people with money pulling crap just to get fined and then not pay it and raise hell?

[YogsVR4]

The religious right fighting for what they want out of their politicians is the same as any other group. The establishment clause has nothing in it to prevent a religious group from petitioning the government. Heck, the ACLU is a anti-religious group. Should they be prevented from weighing in?

With that said, its a damn waste of time and effort. I think the broadcasters need to be very specific about the content they intend to show and leave it to the parents to monitor/restrict what their kids have access to.