NBC Sports goes PC

Who is authorized to make changes to national instutions? Is every Tom, Dick or Harry or TV network authorized to make changes willy-nilly as they see fit?

Why bother to do the thing if you’re not going to do it as written? . Originally Posted by I B Hankering

It is their show. They can edit it as they damn well please, just as Fox News does.

WTF?

How damn hard is that to understand?

Buy the God Damn network if you don't like how they edit or watch Fox News, you seem to love how they edit. Just don't come on here and tell me how 'wrong' it is. Check that tell me all you want but do not expect me to agree with you or to not make fun of your selective outrage over editing.

But I imagine you’ve grown used to NBC, et al, similarly editing the news for you and succoring you with their saccharin pabulum of half-truths and omissions. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

It is the pledge for Gods sake , done by a bunch of little kids. Who gives a fuc how it was edited, I would have edited out the whole segment. I wanted to watch golf, not some runts repeating a bunch of words that they haven't the slightest clue as to wtf it means.

Mediocrity begets mediocrity. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Yea and getting offended at every little thing begets a new pair of panties. Not that some of you couldn't use a new pair as much as you bunch up the one's you're wearing!

Who is authorized to make changes to national instutions? Is every Tom, Dick or Harry or TV network authorized to make changes willy-nilly as they see fit? Originally Posted by Bull149

Nobody changed the Pledge of Allegiance.

Damn, where do you get this BS from? Wait, probaby from groups like the Washington-based Family Research Council who says its mission is to advance "faith, family and freedom in public policy and public opinion."

Great a group for freedom (Family Research Council) demanding that another group (NBC) bow to their pressure and edit as the Family Research Council deems proper. What a bunch of hogwash .... and some of you support this nonsense?

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/0...omment-page-1/


"Please join me in contacting NBC and demanding that the network air a daily public service announcement with the entire Pledge of Allegiance."
The Washington-based Family Research Council says its mission is to advance "faith, family and freedom in public policy and public opinion." The group is best known for its strong objections to same-sex marriage and abortion. It's a powerful political force among conservative evangelicals.

Dayum WTF! Lovely batch of histrionics you’ve whipped up here! Perhaps you should be more worried about corporate NBC’s willful misrepresentation of an accepted tradition, than the few words one, solitary person posts on a SHB. At least then it would justify the number of words you used in your petty, little tirade.

It is their show. They can edit it as they damn well please, just as Fox News does.

WTF?

How damn hard is that to understand?

Buy the God Damn network if you don't like how they edit or watch Fox News, you seem to love how they edit. Just don't come on here and tell me how 'wrong' it is. Check that tell me all you want but do not expect me to agree with you or to not make fun of your selective outrage over editing.


It is the pledge for Gods sake , done by a bunch of little kids. Who gives a fuc how it was edited, I would have edited out the whole segment. I wanted to watch golf, not some runts repeating a bunch of words that they haven't the slightest clue as to wtf it means. Originally Posted by WTF

So, why did they do it? You claim a large, corporate entity wasted your time when it willfully misrepresented the accepted text of a public convention. Subsequently however, you’ve invested substantially more time defending that large, corporate fraud. And yet, you call me a “wacko”?

Yea and getting offended at every little thing begets a new pair of panties. Not that some of you couldn't use a new pair as much as you bunch up the one's you're wearing! Originally Posted by WTF

Speaking of which, I want cash for this pair. That check you wrote for the last pair, it came back NSF.

Dayum WTF! Lovely batch of histrionics you’ve whipped up here! Perhaps you should be more worried about corporate NBC’s willful misrepresentation of an accepted tradition, than the few words one, solitary person posts on a SHB. At least then it would justify the number of words you used in your petty, little tirade.

accepted tradition?

I haven't said the Pledge since I was ten years old. Who but pre schoolers and people that are making money from stirring this pot give a shit about this? I sure don't. I'm not writing letters to NBC demanding shit. I am making fun of you knuckleheads that are. It is what makes my day!

So, why did they do it? You claim a large, corporate entity wasted your time when it willfully misrepresented the accepted text of a public convention. Subsequently however, you’ve invested substantially more time defending that large, corporate fraud. And yet, you call me a “wacko”?

If you think it is a 'fraud'. That is wacko thinking.

Now I think having the kids recite anything was a waste of time but then I think commercials are a waste of time while I want to watch a golf championship. I ain't worried about the freaking Pledge now or then. It is much ado about nothing. If you think it is some big to do, then I think you are a wacko.


Speaking of which, I want cash for this pair. That check you wrote for the last pair, it came back NSF.

LOL, if you would quit whining about stupid shit , I would have to keep buying you panties! Originally Posted by I B Hankering

WTF, the Pledge matters. Just like the Flag and the National Anthem matter. They aren’t dogma; they are national traditions and symbols. If you want to have no respect for national symbols so be it, but trust me, not everyone feels that way.

Regardless.... Cory Mcllroy Rocked !! * Pretty damned impressive!! Originally Posted by MrGiz

We all make mistakes. In fact it was Rory McIlroy and not Cory McIlroy, MrGiz, who captured the U.S. Open at Congressional Country Club but in my book – no harm – no foul! We all knew exactly who you were talking about and the full thrust of your statement congratulating him was in no way diminished. So Hear! Hear!

That said, I am not one to read a sinister motive into NBC's editing and even if I were, I doubt the editing 'order' would have come from as high up the food chain as do some of the 'orders' at NBC or even at Fox.

I almost had an orgasm Stevie Wonder and a history nut for a second lol. Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

Yeah, me, too, on the return post. I go crazy when I see sexy eyes, intelligence, someone who can have fun, a winning smile, nice tits and a pretty face – not necessarily in that order.

Yes, I am aware of that. My whole point is that even so I'm non-Christian, PC changes is tinkering with something that is tradition now. 1954 was almost 60 years ago. Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

I tend to agree with most of that although some traditions need to be changed every once in awhile to reflect changes in the overall values of society.

Funny, I thought the US welcomed people of all faiths or of no faith. Silly me! Originally Posted by TexTushHog

As usual, you tend to distill these matters in a most expert way, TTH. See the body of what is written and linked farther below.

Guys on a hooker board complaining about the removal of a reference to God on TV. Originally Posted by Doove

I think this is an arrow to the geographical bullseye of most of this thread’s significance – the religious resurgence that threatens our constitution and our little corner of the world, the hobby.

Wow....a guy on a hooker board, peruses threads in the "Sandbox", and bitches about what he finds. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Aside from the abject stupidity of our raising these sorts of questions here instead of in another forum, the tie-in lies in the fact that we fear the repercussions of the legalities surrounding our own specific tastes for adventure.


That said, I find the leaps some here take to defend many religious trappings as a strange avoidance. The reality of giving in to any defense of the attempt to further enhance and spread those same trappings seems to open the door wider to the Christian Right’s interference with our own desire to pursue certain indoor sports.


Further thought about editing the Pledge


Perhaps, NBC has a closet atheist that saw an opportunity. IDK but certainly I doubt 100% that the head of their network and/or their head honcho of sports programming set out to birth a debate over atheism or amending the pledge.

I mean the Fox Obama Muslim accusations make me want to ask if the majority of people even pay attention.



Fox even had to retract their "Medrassah” story prior to the election along with their later hue and cry about the Obamas' "terrorist fist jab". The fact that people even give lip service to a theory like that amazes me. The 'fist bump' or 'knuckle jab' has been used by non-terrorists after hitting home runs and scoring touchdowns for years in team sports. However Fox, played that video for days and wondered out loud if it were a "terrorist fist jab".


We all know that Fox is attempting to counterbalance what they feel is a left leaning news cycle. In so doing, even Fox’s own Chris Wallace admitted in the Jon Stewart interview that Fox presented mostly that “other side” and thus admitted that the “fair and balanced” slogan needed the other networks for their own balance. He basically admitted that you could not watch only Fox and get both sides of an issue and Stewart called him on that very admission.

Forget Fox News. I often wonder if those who support the GOP/Tea Party rush toward the right and its merger with the radical religious right shouldn't somehow give pause to consider the eventual effect on the very hobby this board is about.

Those who support that cause are inextricably married to the movement which we all know would be far worse at judging our participation in this "sport" than would be any who were elected from the more socially-liberal left.

Yet, by their attacks on those social liberals, they actually add fuel to the current evangelical fire and its undeniable race to even more fully capture the GOP and to dictate the nation's morality.

While we hear screams about Sharia Law, we, as hobbyists, should also fear being ruled by the religious radicals. They want to invoke the Ten Commandments and unless we can lobby for expunging the one that deals with adultery we're in a pickle when it comes to some of the enhanced enforcement we are beginning to see (note New Mexico).

Quickly before the single or divorced in this community protest, do you really know for sure if the provider is not secretly married even if you attempt to go that far in the selection process?

We are marching closer and closer to having a state religion when we defend and try to tie “Christian” principles to our Constitution. There were many influences upon our constitution that attempted to distance it from any marriage to Christianity.


John Adams, as President, declared that the United States was not founded in any sense on the Christian Religion when he signed the Treaty of Tripoli and Congress approved it.

http://avalonddotlawdotyaledotedu/18...y/bar1796t.asp


(To avoid hot-linking this board with certain outside sites that may check where incoming traffic originates, I have substituted DOT’S for some of the periods in the address. Simply leave the incorrect address in your browser’s address bar and substitute periods for the “DOT’S” and hit enter once more to visit the Yale Law link from your own computer.)


ARTICLE 11. (Italics note my additions for clarification) of the Treaty of Tripoli -


As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen (Muslims),-and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.


The treaty was sent to the floor of the Senate, June 7, 1797, where it was read aloud in its entirety and unanimously approved. John Adams, having seen the treaty, signed it and proudly proclaimed it to the nation.

http://ethicsdailydotcom/newsDOTphp?viewStory=13913
(To avoid hot-linking this board with certain outside sites that may check where incoming traffic originates, I have substituted DOT’S for some of the periods in the address. Simply leave the incorrect address in your browser’s address bar and substitute periods for the “DOT’S” and hit enter once more to visit the Ethics Daily link from your own computer.)

Article 11 was included in the treaty text as ratified by the Senate on June 7, 1797, and as signed by John Adams on June 10, 1797. The Treaty of Tripoli was subsequently published to inform the American public.


If the founders and their political contemporaries saw themselves as a “Christian nation” in a legal-institutional sense, it is politically and religiously incomprehensible that the Senate would have endorsed such a statement. That they did endorse this “separationist” statement evidences that they did not consider themselves to be a Christian “nation” in the legal-institutional sense.



The Treaty of Tripoli is of great significance for understanding the founders’ intention and understanding of the national government’s independence from religion. (even Christianity)



My take on this is that we’d better not kill the goose that laid the golden egg. I’m pretty sure that if we wrest control of all legislative, judicial and executive power from its current mix and turn it over to people like MMMich/elleee/BBBach/mannnnnn or one of her clones, that we can kiss our current freedom of choice Bye Bye.

. . .
We all make mistakes. In fact it was Rory McIlroy and not Cory McIlroy, MrGiz, who captured the U.S. Open at Congressional Country Club but in my book – no harm – no foul! We all knew exactly who you were talking about and the full thrust of your statement congratulating him was in no way diminished. So Hear! Hear! . . . . . Originally Posted by Little Stevie

Ooooooooops... sorry Rory!!

Hope he isn't a regular here.... no, wait... that's Tiger!

As stated earlier... the memory of the day belongs to Mr. Mcllroy!!
He's a fine example of hard work turning into success!

Wonder, how RICH he was born?

@ Little Stevie: Traditions that are changed at a whim cease to be traditions.

If the founders and their political contemporaries saw themselves as a “Christian nation” in a legal-institutional sense, it is politically and religiously incomprehensible that the Senate would have endorsed such a statement.

That they did endorse this “separationist” statement evidences that they did not consider themselves to be a Christian “nation” in the legal-institutional sense. Originally Posted by Little Stevie

What the Founding Fathers established was a nation without a state sanctioned religion; not a nation without Christianity. What people today forget, or don’t know, is the intolerance Catholics had towards Protestants (14th thru 19th centuries), and vice versa. Likewise, the Anglicans despised the Methodists, and vice versa. This back-and-forth persecution was what the Founding Fathers sought to avoid. But even without a state sanctioned religion, the U.S. had an undeniable religious tradition, and that religious tradition is founded in Christianity. Even as you bring up Sharia Law, you are admitting you know that U.S. laws are based on a Christian heritage that is different from non-Christian nations. Otherwise, it wouldn’t be a point worth mentioning.

The United States declared itself a free and independent nation on 4 July 1776 with this statement:

“WHEN in the Course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation.
WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” Here it’s very clear that the Founding Fathers, in this nation’s foundation document, are citing God as justification and cause for the founding of a new nation.” (Like NBC has problems with the Pledge, Obama has a problem citing the full text of this paragraph as written here. So who is attacking whom?)

Intellectually-lazy, atheistic activists commonly cite Article XI of the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli, quoted above, and they do so without providing historical context. They trust they can beguile the ignorant who know no better.

The true purpose for Article XI was to establish that the mutual differences between the two countries, the U.S. and Tripoli,—which did result in war—were not based on religion. This article made it clear to all parties that a “natural state of war” need not exist between the U.S. a Tripoli because of differences in religion. The norm until that time was quite the reverse. Furthermore, Article XI would help insure that U.S. captives were not horribly tortured and/or mutilated, since that was the common fare for prisoners of religious wars at that point in time in history.

Article XI was written as part of the Treaty of Tripoli to re-establish peace between two warring states. The document’s title more than suggests as much. Article XI was not written to prove that the U.S. had no Christian heritage at its founding, or surely it would have been so entitled.

The very man atheists try to employ in this charade was very much a dutiful Christian. John Adams biographer, David McCullough, writes: “On Sunday’s, the one day of respite from Congress, he [John Adams] was at church most of the day, attending service twice, even three times. With numerous denominations to choose from (everything except Congregational), he tried nearly all, the Anglican Christ Church, the meetinghouses of the Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians, Quakers, the German Moravians – and passed judgment on them all, both their music and the comparative quality of their preaching.” Once he even attended mass at a Roman Catholic Church where he was awe struck by the majesty of the service and was left wondering how the Reformation ever succeeded (pp 83-84, John Adams, by David McCullough).

Now, if you are honestly looking for a document written by John Adams attesting to his feelings about Christianity and the founding of the United States, please read the following:

“Without wishing to damp the Ardor of curiosity, or influence the freedom of inquiry, I will hazard a prediction, that after the most industrious and impartial Researches, the longest liver of you all, will find no Principles, Institutions, or Systems of Education, more fit, IN GENERAL to be transmitted to your Posterity, than those you have received from you[r] Ancestors.

"Who composed that Army of fine young Fellows that was then before my Eyes? There were among them, Roman Catholicks, English Episcopalians, Scotch and American Presbyterians, Methodists, Moravians, Anababtists, German Lutherans, German Calvinists Universalists, Arians, Priestleyans, Socinians, Independents, Congregationalists, Horse Protestants and House Protestants, Deists and Atheists; and "Protestans qui ne croyent rien ["Protestants who believe nothing"]." Very few however of several of these Species. Nevertheless all Educated in the general Principles of Christianity: and the general Principles of English and American Liberty.

"Could my Answer be understood, by any candid Reader or Hearer, to recommend, to all the others, the general Principles, Institutions or Systems of Education of the Roman Catholicks? Or those of the Quakers? Or those of the Presbyterians? Or those of the Menonists? Or those of the Methodists? or those of the Moravians? Or those of the Universalists? or those of the Philosophers? No.

"The general Principles, on which the Fathers Atchieved Independence, were the only Principles in which that beautiful Assembly of young Gentlemen could Unite, and these Principles only could be intended by them in their Address, or by me in my Answer. And what were these general Principles? I answer, the general Principles of Christianity, in which all those Sects were united: And the general Principles of English and American Liberty, in which all those young Men United, and which had United all Parties in America, in Majorities sufficient to assert and maintain her Independence.

"Now I will avow, that I then believed, and now believe, that those general Principles of Christianity, are as eternal and immutable, as the Existence and Attributes of God; and that those Principles of Liberty, are as unalterable as human Nature and our terrestrial, mundane System. I could therefore safely say, consistently with all my then and present Information, that I believed they would never make Discoveries in contradiction to these general Principles. In favour of these general Principles in Phylosophy, Religion and Government, I could fill Sheets of quotations from Frederick of Prussia, from Hume, Gibbon, Bolingbroke, Reausseau and Voltaire, as well as Neuton and Locke: not to mention thousands of Divines and Philosophers of inferiour Fame.”

Source: John Adams to Thomas Jefferson, June 28th, 1813, from Quincy. The Adams-Jefferson Letters: The Complete Correspondence Between Thomas Jefferson and Abigail and John Adams, edited by Lester J. Cappon, 1988, the University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, NC, pp. 338-340.

The First Amendment does prohibit the Federal government from establishing a religion and requiring that all citizens subscribe to that same religion. The Founding Fathers rightly sought to prohibit; thus, avoid excesses similar to those wrought by Henry VIII, Bloody Mary and Cromwell in the name of a “state” religion. However, the First Amendment in no manner prohibits an individual’s right to worship, but instead guarantees that individual the right to express his religion through speech and the right to assemble with others to worship. This is a formal recognition by the state that religion has an important place in the society of its citizens. and that that right shall not be abridged by the state. If you doubt me, please read the First Amendment.


*The italicized and bold emphasis were my own except where grammatically required.

As stated earlier... the memory of the day belongs to Mr. Mcllroy!!
He's a fine example of hard work turning into success!

Wonder, how RICH he was born? Originally Posted by MrGiz

Yeah, as we all know, anyone who doesn't win the US Open is just a lazy sloth who didn't work hard enough.

Yeah, as we all know, anyone who doesn't win the US Open is just a lazy sloth who didn't work hard enough. Originally Posted by Doove

Just as we all know, in this unfair world we live in... it's next to impossible to even be allowed in the clubhouse, unless born with a silver putter! * How is it even possible to make it to the top?

Just as we all know, in this unfair world we live in... it's next to impossible to even be allowed in the clubhouse, unless born with a silver putter! * How is it even possible to make it to the top? Originally Posted by MrGiz

Right on! If Lucious is born with the talents to make him one of the best golfers in the world and he doesn't escape from poverty, it's his own fault. I think we've reached agreement.

WTF, the Pledge matters. Just like the Flag and the National Anthem matter. They aren’t dogma; they are national traditions and symbols. If you want to have no respect for national symbols so be it, but trust me, not everyone feels that way. Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

I don't give a fuc how everyone 'feels'.

I care about actions. If some dipshit is more worried about a God Damn flag or Pledge than WTF the Fed is doing then they are going to get a broke ass country to say that pledge to.

Besides in this country you are suppossed to be smart enough to know that just because you 'feel' a certain way about something that nobody else has to 'feel' that way.

I judge things on merit, not national fucking pride.

I guess when you see the government do some things that they do , you become wise that this is just a devisive issue that certain folks are trying to use for political gain.

I have no use for those kind and will not kowtow to that type of ignorance.

This is much ado about nothing. People upset about this rate about as high on my meter as folks that watch Jersey Shores and care about Snookey! LOL

WE live in a country where you do not have to 'feel' like others. Feel like you want but expect to have to defend your feelings if you try and force them down others throat. That is wtf some folks are trying to do with NBC. If I was NBC, I just tell'em to go fuc themselves and watch Fox for the US Open results if they did not like my broadcast.

A nonsensical arguement; of course NBC can do what they want (within legal bounds); but what erked everybody was that they dressed the Pledge of Allegiance up in patriotic symbolism; but left out one of the most improtant of symbol to a majority of Americans - the referenece to God.......if you don't get that, too bad.

The question is WTF do you want? All you do is complain about what we think. You're posts are all reactive to our threads; go ahead and tell us what do you want?

BTW, here is what I want:

-An apology from NBC that explicity states they left out important phrases like "Under God" and "indivsible" and that this will never happen again in any of their future broadcasts, including the Olympics.
-A statement from the USGA condeming the mistake of NBC. Afterall it was a USGA event.
-A stement from the Golf Channel ( who co-broadcasted with NBC) that they were equally offended and have received assurances from NBC that it won't happen again in of their future broadcasts.

None of these things have transpired.

Why? Their network, they can do as they please. What happened to 'Land of the Free'? Deregulation? You want a law saying you have to say the pledge correctly? WTF is it you whiners want?
Originally Posted by WTF

That is pretty much what NBC did.............

If I was NBC, I just tell'em to go fuc themselves (viewers) .... Originally Posted by WTF