they may not be "indecent" because they do try to be subtle, but Jeez, why should any parent have to explain to a 7 or 8-year old what "erectile dysfunction" is?

I thought it bad enough when I had to explain to my 9-year-old sons what tampons were for! This is a whole 'nother ball game!

Nothing is private any more.  We even have to put up with those idiots dancing and grabbing their behinds on the word "diarrhea" in the Pepto Bismol ads!

They might say "Wow, that sucks!"  But at least they'll say "Wow!"  -Duff Goldman, the Ace of Cakes

Chris, if your Thrill lasts for more then four hours, call Helen Thomas (see wilts rose buds).

Respectfully, I disagree that this is "prudish."  My wife and I cannot stand these commericials -- they are inane, and don't belong on air during prime time when children are watching.  We all know about Viagra -- I don't need to hear classic Elvis songs corrupted by their medication-marketing jingle.  I actually agree with Moran (D) on this one (and I think this is about the only thing I agree with him on).

"Let's wrap him up, alright?" -- Keith Olbermann

the party that promotes sex without consequences dare to deny the Constitutional right of a woody to our elder men?  It's age-ism I tell you!

<Snork at the 4 hour comment> 

If the omitted party was an 'R' I wonder what the outcry would be?  

I think I'll get around to registering as an independent because I don't think Republicans are that much better anyway than Democrats, but this is a reason why I decided to leave the Democrat party. They want to censor the airwaves even more than the Republicans want to, whether it's with a Fairness Doctrine or  Jay Rockefeller (D) wanting to censor television because, oh boo-hoo-hoo, a child might hear someone saying the word "penis" or Janet Jackson might want to wear a piece of nipple jewelry!

As far as I'm concerend, anything should go in free speech, no matter how disgusting, vile or insulting it could possibly be. Fining broadcast networks is tantamount to punishing any other business by levying a tax on it.

To me, the last group of people who should be stating that they are "just doing it for the children' should be anyone connected to the democrats.

Hey dem representatives, don't go getting all sanctimonious on us about 'the children'. It kinda sounds a little hollow.  When you vote session in and session out to kill millions of them before they are born. 

As long as we're going to restrict the access to "family hour" prime time TV ads for vanity products like Viagra, can't we also limit the airing of commercial products like Proactive? I. for one, don't want our young children to be exposed to the possibility that they, too, may have to suffer with acne someday. I also don't want them to know that acne is considered unsightly when they're in their teens and adulthood. Besides, who wants to see a bunch of teenagers with Zits! EWWWW! That's NOT appropriate for family hour!

Oh, and we should stop advertising such products as the Thigh Master (anyone remember that one? lol), diet pills, underwear ads, makeup, hair dyes, and any other vanity product that just may expose our young children to the realities of adulthood. I mean, really, that's just plain wrong!

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court

Anyone remember this?  Back in the sixties they had Playtex commercials on TV.  They had to show the bras over the womans sweater, I figure it was 1966 or 67 I was ten or eleven years old, and I was sitting pn the living room floor when one of these commercials came on, my Aunt was standing right behind me, she reached down and covered my eyes with her hands!  She diidn't want me to have anything to do with seeing a commercial like that.

Of course from that point on I did want to see a commerical like that, just because she did that.  But I reckon that's human nature.

to have commercial free television viewing.   None of which require legislation.

Hold on ‘cause the world will turn if you're ready or not ~ KT Tunstall

I guess when the dildo commercials become commonplace we'll ho-hum that as well.

Seriously, what is there left to shock us?

I believe that if one looks at how the airwaves have increasingly been filled with what was once considered improper over the decades, it coincides squarely with the rise of Leftist values (such as they are)-you know, the typical Communist disdain for the family and the attacks on what they consider to be Victorian-Edwardian social norms concerning what children and even adults should be exposed to (and, of course, how they should be treated...look no further than Dr. Spock on that one).

We have been taught to laugh at and despise the decorum and proprieties of the 1950s, because this is when the little brats grew up and later felt guilty that the average Vietnamese kid didn't have what they had...and then said the hell with it and snorted coke and danced at Studio 54 'til the wee hours of the morning...and then retired and realized they may not live to see the Socialist Utopia come about (more guilt).

All along the way though, they've been extolling the virtues of Communism in all that they do...while making sure they get theirs first and foremost of course.  Conservatives rarely become pop music stars, actors, journalists, playwrights, screenwriters, etc. especially since the '60s.

Do such things come about because of the increasing cynicism of our society, or does the cynicism come about because of the acceptance of such things?  They probably feed off of each other.

One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 61% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory (yep...approval for Congress now at 39%...do you believe that!?).