This writer can remember a time when it was entirely unacceptable to use colloquial and street language on television. It wasn’t a matter of denying that such language existed or that “good people” didn’t use it. It was a common sense attitude that recognized that children would be watching and listening. Folks knew that there was no need to defile them with such language or to purposely teach them how to perfect its use.
It was understood that there was no positive result that could come from steeping our children day in and day out in such an environment. This was also a tacit and educated recognition of the fact that television was a powerful instrument for teaching (with propaganda falling centrally into that category). They understood that TV was a two-edged sword that could teach and that it could endanger viewers.
Some would say (and have said) that the censors went too far in such an endeavor. They would point out that censorship wouldn't allow us to see such “realities” as a man and wife sleeping in the same bed. Evidently, they didn't get the point that there was no valid reason to bum-rush our children into maturity by providing them salacious and prurient ideas about which to fantasize.
It would also appear that critics thought that kids were just too stupid to realize that it was TV (i.e. as if they didn't know that their mother and father occupied the same bed in the bedroom). For the most part , it was a fantasy world that was there for solely for entertainment and not for dragging them into adulthood.
In those days of yore, there were times when, as a younger man (and far from Christ), I would be quite upset if some clown was completely out of line with his language around any of the women folks and I would call him on it. Fortunately, there were no showdowns or duels, but I was ready to duke it out with the offender if he had not bridled his lip. Actually, most of the guys apologized for the matter. It was just a time in this nation that protecting the women folks and children was important to most men. It worked quite well and the women appreciated being treated as special and not as "equals" to those who were Olympians at being foul-mouthed, filthy, and vulgar.
Then there were the TV cartoons. Every Saturday morning Mighty Mouse would whack and thump a batch of malevolent cats much to the glee of the younger crowd. It was great to see an evil cat get smacked into the next county.
Likewise, there was no shortage of other animated heroes who always got the upper hand in the end no matter how dire the situation. It was always a "good verses evil" environment and "good" always won. The best that anyone can tell, there were no reports of children imitating Mighty Mouse by bopping a neighborhood bully into the Twilight Zone with a baseball bat.
But some highly-educated brilliantly-shining chunk of coal determined that kids were learning to be violent by watching cartoons. Never mind that there was absolutely no empirical proof of that postulation whatsoever. I learned later that there didn’t have to be any such evidence and that "ideology" was deemed a trump card over common sense. It must have come from some “brainiac” who had all of the answers prior to having anyone having a question. Never mind also that the great thinker had no attachment to reality and life in general having never taken his nose out of a book long enough to learn to tie his own shoes, or to pour rain out of them if they were wet, or any such practical matters.
We had a wonderful slate of cute, imaginative, and amazingly intelligent cartoons like "Ruff and Ready", "Mighty Mouse", "Under Dog", "Quick Draw McGraw", "Tom and Jerry", "Huckleberry Hound", and a truly brilliant work like "Rocky and Bullwinkle". They were ousted like so much refuse and a plethora of demons and witches and a host of otherworldly creatures (tell me that "H. R. Puf N Stuff" isn't just plain weird or that "Skeletor" isn't demonic) was foisted upon us and our children. In the 90's we also had such bizarre shows like "Ren and Stimply" where you got to see a freaked out Ren, spooked by his alarm clock, insanely whack his bed to bits with an axe. How about Jester grinding off his own arm in a cheese grater? How is that acceptable for children?
“They’re all harmless” they (the educated but moronic) said and we (the stupid and uneducated public in general) nervously but quietly accepted their “intelligent” claptrap as “gospel”. What happened next was hardly different than opening Pandora’s box. Demons have ruled the airways since.
We got the entire dump truck load of garbage. Soap operas went from suggestive, to highly suggestive, to racy, to pornographic in short order. Now there's "Sex in the City" which is a high-dollar "soap" that has no shortage of prurient content and which couldn't be cleaned with a truckload of Tide.
One result of this morphing-from-pure-to-prurient dynamic is the example of a middle-aged lady that was a client while I was a representative for an insulation company (many many moons ago). She was a Christian but had been so seduced by the dirt on the TV that she had two console TV’s in front of her sofa so she could watch two slop operas (sic) at a time!
And, only God only knows the defilement our children endured by being parking in front of a television set and allowing it to babysit them for hours on end. They watch from 22hrs to 38hrs per week (depending upon age group - Link). Let that soak in for a second or two: children are being brainwashed the equivalent of nearly the length of a work week.
Movies rapidly deteriorated to the point to where pornography was no longer a novelty; it was gratuitous. I recall (again, many years ago) one flick that sported a cast of well-known stars none of which had an "R" rating attached to them (up to then). Right in the middle of the movie, completely out of context and completely unexpected, was a couple of bare-breasted women wending their way across the hot tub between the stars and the camera.
In 1972, I recall vividly being hired by a local walk-in movie theater (as a uniformed police officer) to check ID's at an "R-Rated" movie. If you couldn't prove you were at least 17 years old, you were sent on your way. Fast forward about twenty years when my wife and I attended a long-forgotten movie in Albany, OR. What was remembered was that the movie in the adjacent room was "R-Rated" and that young boys 11 or 12 years old were freely in attendance. I immediately tracked down the manager about the matter and asked what the policy was concerning children and such a rated movie. His answer was almost stunning. He advised that the children's mothers drop them off without so much as a thought as to the rating of the movie. And, if the mother's don't care, the movie theater doesn't either because they don't want to make waves. Doing so would cost them revenue.
On every hand there is heavy marketing of feminine pulchritude and the championing of and even forcing of sexual perversion upon, not only adults, but our Kindergartners and elementary school children. There is a myriad of sexually alluring advertisements. At one time, there was even a tooth paste that touted that it gave your mouth "sex appeal".
Today, we have little girls dressed up to be just as sexy as the "big girls" and who are wearing tight jeans and such because it a fad among the kids. Such fad could only have been initiated by adults and usually the clothing industry at that. Is it not correct to think that the "love of money is the root of all evil"?
The public is bombarded daily with sex, more sex, and even more sex until our souls and consciences have been seared to the effects of this deluge of sex-based brainwashing. Sex crimes have become almost a ho-hum statistic. Muslims who rape and who sexually abuse our women state that "it's the woman's fault" because she has so few clothes on and is sexually alluring. No one seems to "get the memo" about why these things are so.
Cosmopolitan Magazine proudly and loudly touts sexual training on how to "please him" in every way and lists the number of ways to do so. And, it's in our faces at the checkout counter of every supermarket in the land. That's merely one of the monthly dirty rags that filth mongers purvey. The list is endless.
Pornography on the Internet is a massive fetid black ocean of soul seduction that temps even those in the ministry to lust. 60% of pastors admit to viewing porn. Who can but weep when the shepherds of our soul are without chastity and are without discipline? Who hasn't heard of stories and whose lives have not been touched by the soul-snaring smut industry? How many stories are there of marriages destroyed and lives shattered because of those who act out their fantasies on others?
Rape statistics are horrifying and yet never abate or even wane but climb higher and higher. No one "connects the dots" and even those who do are vilified as those who are against "freedom of speech". This is utter insanity.
In the 1960's, only about 5% of high school'ers had sexual intercourse by the time they graduated. That number has rocketed to almost 50% (Link). Almost 6% have had sex by the time they are 13 years old (ibid)! And, even those who have not had intercourse are quite comfortable engaging in other forms of sexual gratification.
Sex education, meant to illuminate young people about sex and STD's, did just that. They now have sex at earlier ages and now have more STD's than ever. Not so astounding (to those with common sense) is the conclusion reached by researchers: "In fact, a review of the literature by D'Augelli and Herschberger (1995) concluded that in response to HIV, many teens have not modified risky sexual behavior, despite their knowledge about how HIV is transmitted".
In a stomach-turning ploy that can only be described as part of the efforts of the loony left to debauch our children (literally an agenda), the New York Times used these same research stats to downplay the entire matter and make promiscuity look mundane and irrelevant ("The Myth of Rampant Teenage Promiscuity"). Again, the "thinkers" refused to allow historical and empirical evidence to interfere with their "research" and promulgations, and agendas.
The results of this insanity have filtered down to our young children. It will likely not take long until pedophilia is recognized as normative (e.g. NAMBLA). While it may seem almost insane, there are those in the psychological profession that are ready to accept that notion and are willing to promote it. To them, it is an "orientation" rather than an "illness" (Link)
Only a couple of years ago or so, our 6 year old grandson was in the process of being enrolled in an elementary school in Washington State. While signing him up, his mother asked about the meaning of the colored bracelets the little girls were wearing. The lady in the office advised that girls wear different colored bracelets that indicate "how far they will go" regarding sex! His mother went ballistic and immediately pulled her application and enrolled him in a private Christian school (and you can bet your last box of Captain Crunch that we helped with that).
The Internet abounds with instructions and stories about young girls who won't "go all the way" but who will gladly substitute oral or manual (hand-job) sex instead. There's even a "Bad Girls Bible" on the Internet explaining in detail just exactly how to do just that. To those of us from a previous generation, this is nothing less than insanity gone to seed.
This article isn't meant to be an exhaustive study or expose' on this topic. It is meant to be an advisory that depicts the pit of depravity and callous disregard for that which is both sensible and sacred into which this country has sunk (and into which it is yet further sinking).
It is also aimed at Christians who have a scriptural responsibility to pray for our nation with all alacrity, all diligence, all perseverance, and with all faith believing for God's involvement that we may change. We, the believers, have the ability to bring the will of the very God of peace into the earth to resolve His creation to peace (i.e. "Thy will be done"). It needs to be done as evil is upon our land and it is a fearful matter.
The Bible is clear that praying for our leaders is not a suggestion. Paul the Apostle gave this exhortation: "I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth" (1 Timothy 2:1-4). Should be not be obedient to the word of the Lord? Ought we not to pray for one another that none of the children of God be found loving the world and the things that are in it? The Bible says: "Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much: (James 5:16). Will the Lord not hear our fervent prayers?
The hour is late; the day is dark. Let us not sleep as others do but let us awake to righteousness. Let us call upon the Lord while He is near.
