Howdy

Apr 30, 2012 -- 11:33AM, Girlchristian wrote:

Absolutely. The press should be ignoring him and not giving him ANY recognition just as they should do with the Westboro group.

Should "the press" be forced by law to ignore Pastor Terry and Pastor Phelps?  

I did hear about Pastor Terry burning paper and ink until I read about it in this forum.  

I watch a lot of news from a variety of sources both the left and right, private and public.  

I think that Beliefnet and BDboy should ignore Pastor Terry and not give him any recognition. 

Apr 30, 2012 -- 12:30PM, mountain_man wrote:

The press is doing what it was created to do, it's only purpose, what it does best; make a profit. They are not there to bring you news, or even the truth. The press exists to make a profit. Burning Korans sells soap.

I think the claim that the only purpose of  the press was to make a profit.  However if the press fails to make a profit, the press will go out of business. 

So what is "the truth"  in this news story that has been reported by "the press"?  

Did Pastor Terry burn a Quran? 

Was it to protest the convicition and death sentence in the Islamic Republic of Iran of a Christian by an Islamic  Court under Sharia Law?

I will certainly agree that the burning of Korans sells soap.    I would also agree that molestation of children by Roman Catholic priests "sells soap".  

The murder of tweleve innocent women and children by an American soldier in Afghanistan "sells soap".  

I would be willing to bet more than a dollar that this has resulted in deaths of Americans as well as their lackeys and Afghani collaboraters.    

Should these news stories be suprressed by "the press" because a "tiny minority"  of people might behave.....inapportiately? 

When an airplane crashes and people die the press will report the truth(?)in order to "sell soap".

When an airplane lands safely "the press"  does not report the truth(?) because safe landings do not "sell soap".   

It is not the fault of the soap sellers it is the fault of the soap buyers.

May 3, 2012 -- 10:30AM, IDBC wrote:

However if the press fails to make a profit, the press will go out of business.

Not if it is public and tax funded, as BDBoy pointed out.

You must be living in the more distant past if the USSR is all you can think of here, farragut. In any case, even there & back then, the tax funding was NOT the problem.

A press owned by those who post ads is hardly free... and having publicly funded news is hardly 'government worship'. Why don't you speak normally, but use these buzzwords?

May 3, 2012 -- 1:53PM, CharikIeia wrote:

May 3, 2012 -- 10:30AM, IDBC wrote:

However if the press fails to make a profit, the press will go out of business.

Not if it is public and tax funded, as BDBoy pointed out.

That's not so true anymore. PBS takes "donations" from large corporations and if you notice they don't report anything that would make those donors look bad.