It's Christian persecution!

[Max Power]

NOT!

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-indecency29nov29,0,2685885.story?coll=la-home-business

The issue involves a debate over whether cable companies should continue offering subscribers mainstream and niche channels in bundles, or let them buy what they want on an a la carte basis.

Consumer groups are pushing to let people choose their channels rather than pay for ones they don't watch. One Federal Communications Commission study showed people on average regularly watch only 17 of the more than 100 cable channels they typically receive.

But what started largely as a consumer issue has now morphed into a larger controversy involving whether cable operators should be required to continue exposing subscribers to niche channels, including religious ones, that people might not order on their own.

"We don't just want to preach to the choir; we want to reach the unchurched," said Paul Crouch Jr. of Trinity Broadcast Network in Santa Ana. "The bottom line is that we want to be everywhere on cable."

Christian groups are opposed to letting people choose what channels they recieve, because then they would no longer be forced to recieve Christian networks.

ROFL

Someone come on, claim how this is religious persecution, just like how it's persecution to not allow nativity scenes on public property.

For the record:
It's not persecution to NOT be allowed to shove your religion down other peoples throats.

 

[Gunny]

NOT!

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-indecency29nov29,0,2685885.story?coll=la-home-business



Christian groups are opposed to letting people choose what channels they recieve, because then they would no longer be forced to recieve Christian networks.

ROFL

Someone come on, claim how this is religious persecution, just like how it's persecution to not allow nativity scenes on public property.

For the record:
It's not persecution to NOT be allowed to shove your religion down other peoples throats.

What's there to explain? Those religious groups that don't own their channels outright, at a nominal sum of course, rent the airtime. If they are paying the cable company to broadcast their channels/shows, then the cable companies are contractualy bound to do so.

For the record: It is not shoving your religion down other people's throats if they are intelligent enough to operate the remote control.

 

[William Joyce]

NOT!

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-indecency29nov29,0,2685885.story?coll=la-home-business



Christian groups are opposed to letting people choose what channels they recieve, because then they would no longer be forced to recieve Christian networks.

ROFL

Someone come on, claim how this is religious persecution, just like how it's persecution to not allow nativity scenes on public property.

For the record:
It's not persecution to NOT be allowed to shove your religion down other peoples throats.

OK, Max, point made. Now what do you think of conservative America being forced to subsidize the left-leaning PBS and NPR with our tax dollars? For the record, that IS having liberalism shoved down our throats.

 

[Max Power]

OK, Max, point made. Now what do you think of conservative America being forced to subsidize the left-leaning PBS and NPR with our tax dollars? For the record, that IS having liberalism shoved down our throats.

I agree. I don't think arts should be subsidized.

 

[Max Power]

What's there to explain? Those religious groups that don't own their channels outright, at a nominal sum of course, rent the airtime. If they are paying the cable company to broadcast their channels/shows, then the cable companies are contractualy bound to do so.

For the record: It is not shoving your religion down other people's throats if they are intelligent enough to operate the remote control.

And legislation is in order to make it so subscribers are not contractually bound to recieve all the channels.

Why can't these people be happy reaching only those who want to be reached?

 

[Gunny]

And legislation is in order to make it so subscribers are not contractually bound to recieve all the channels.

Why can't these people be happy reaching only those who want to be reached?

Putting preaching their religion to as many as possible aside, I would say it would determine how much said organization paid for air time. There is also the fact that it represents a change in the way things have always been. Anyone who paid for basic cable got all basic cable channels. If they don't want to watch them, no one is twisting anyone's arm.

I have several problems with this. One, in order for cable companies to maintain the profit margin, they will have to increase the rates of individual channels effectively making all channels pay per view, and the cost, which is a ripoff to begin with, will be even more to the consumer.

Two, I don't see what you folks who don't believe in God fear so much about people spreading the world of a nonexistent, mythological being.

 

[manu1959]

i agree wipe out all the christain channels as well as all the spanish channels make pay to watch that crap......bet you we hear from all the illegal aliens that this is discrimination aginst the poor mexicans

 

[Powerman]

And legislation is in order to make it so subscribers are not contractually bound to recieve all the channels.

Why can't these people be happy reaching only those who want to be reached?

Because they know hardly anyone would watch the shit. Only time I watch it is for a good laugh. They have a ton of those channels here in BR.

 

[Mr. P]

Until I can choose the channels I want I will not have cable.
Simple as that.

One Federal Communications Commission study showed people on average regularly watch only 17 of the more than 100 cable channels they typically receive.

Why pay for what you DON'T want? Besides, I don't think I'm missing much.

 

[manu1959]

Because they know hardly anyone would watch the shit. Only time I watch it is for a good laugh. They have a ton of those channels here in BR.

hey that is the same reason i watch network news, cnn and pbs

 

[007]

Until I can choose the channels I want I will not have cable.
Simple as that. Why pay for what you DON'T want? Besides, I don't think I'm missing much.

Only FOX News...

 

[Powerman]

I've always thought it would be nice if you could just pay for the channels you really want. I watch maybe 5 channels. And most of that is only during football season. I really get nothing out of my cable agreement.

 

[007]

Because they know hardly anyone would watch the shit. Only time I watch it is for a good laugh. They have a ton of those channels here in BR.

OK.... we get it you're a heathen and hate religon. I'm glad it makes you laugh. It doesn't me.

But as far as the people pushing to have their religous channels always on, I say let the people receive what they want. If they want the preaching channels, they'll get them. If not, they won't. Sounds extremely fair to me.

Buying only the channels you want... an excelent idea. I hope they do it, but only if it will REDUCE my cable bill. But somehow I know they'll fuck me even if I get fewer channels. They always do.

 

[KarlMarx]

There is a reason that cable companies don't provide a subscribe by channel service even though the technology is available.

It has to do with economics, the laws regulating the industry and so forth.

I don't know much about it, but that's what I've read....

 

[Bullypulpit]

NOT!

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-indecency29nov29,0,2685885.story?coll=la-home-business



Christian groups are opposed to letting people choose what channels they recieve, because then they would no longer be forced to recieve Christian networks.

ROFL

Someone come on, claim how this is religious persecution, just like how it's persecution to not allow nativity scenes on public property.

For the record:
It's not persecution to NOT be allowed to shove your religion down other peoples throats.

If Mr. Crouch, and the rest of these spiritual snake-oil salesmen want to get first-hand experience with persecution, they need to move to Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Iran, Afghanistan, North Korea or some other religio-socialist utopia. They can then become true martyrs instead of whining about cable access.

 

[Bullypulpit]

There is a reason that cable companies don't provide a subscribe by channel service even though the technology is available.

It has to do with economics, the laws regulating the industry and so forth.

I don't know much about it, but that's what I've read....

They bundle the various channels to keep prices much lower than what they'd be if you paid for each channel separately.

 

[KarlMarx]

If Mr. Crouch, and the rest of these spiritual snake-oil salesmen want to get first-hand experience with persecution, they need to move to Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Iran, Afghanistan, North Korea or some other religio-socialist utopia. They can then become true martyrs instead of whining about cable access.

Good for you Bully that defaming Buddhists isn't popular.....

I could take some swipes at the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, who built a financial empire on Transcendental Meditation.... he had even the Beatles under his spell, until Lennon and the others saw him for what he was... "a fake and a womanizer"....

I suppose I could take a swipe at the Dalai Lama, too, but he seems too honest a man, but I could be wrong. I understand that he seems to lead a somewhat simple life. I don't see photos of him cavorting with women or living it up at some Hollywood event. I feel that his country, Tibet, was wrongly confiscated by the Rat Fink Chinese Commies.... But, his followers, e.g. Tina Turner, Richard Geer and a lot of Hollywood lead much less than saintly lives. They live in posh mansions, lead an "eat drink and be merry" lifestyle.... have slept with more people than I will in twenty lifetimes... yes, they're a shining example of what it means to be Buddhist. Strange though, not a word about that from you!

I guess what I'm about to say amounts to an "ad hominem" attack, but enough is enough already....

It really stinks that you throw rocks at the "Religious (read "Christian") Right" as often as you'd like and you're not an adherent of the religion, you claim to be Buddhist.... what's with that? I thought Buddhism was a religion of compassion or is it that you follow the Bullypulpit Sect of Buddhism? If that's the case, then who are you to judge those you see as being hypocritical? Perhaps you ought to look at what is going on in your house before telling us what's wrong in ours!

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I would Imagine ALL of the lesser watched content providers would be opposed to this. But of course, I don't have links; it's just my imagination.

 

[dilloduck]

If you want to buy anything that is custom made to your individual specifications, you will pay more for it.

 

[Max Power]

If you want to buy anything that is custom made to your individual specifications, you will pay more for it.

I'm sure that cable packages will still be around, at the same rates.

If you only purchase a handful of channels, I'm sure it will be cheaper than taking the whole lot... you'll be paying more per channel, but less overall (and only getting what you want).