Defund PBS

[PLC1]

Assuming that Sesame Street and Nova are the LEAST liberal programs on PBS don't you find it interesting that multiculturalism is so predominant on Sesame Street and that it just happens to be an issue that is far more important to the left rather than the right? Multiculturalism is a good thing and age appropriate too. What about two daddies and a boy? That is controversial and not age appropriate.

Doesn't Nova also present far more programing in support of the kind of science that is favored by the left rather than by the right?

I am not saying that other types of programming ever exist in these shows. I am not saying that the programming they have is not good. But a lot can be done by presenting weighted or one sided programming.

If "multiculturalism" means accepting that people who are different from ourselves should be accepted as equals, is that really a "liberal" idea? Sometimes, the meaning of words like "multicultural" and "liberal" get blurred, but if the opposite, non acceptance of people who are different, is a "conservative" idea, what does that mean about conservatism?

As for science, there is only one kind. Science is not "liberal" nor is it "conservative", not by any reasonable definition of those terms.

So, we are left with a depiction of homosexuality as normal, the one controversial issue you've brought up.

 

[Rick]

If "multiculturalism" means accepting that people who are different from ourselves should be accepted as equals, is that really a "liberal" idea? Sometimes, the meaning of words like "multicultural" and "liberal" get blurred, but if the opposite, non acceptance of people who are different, is a "conservative" idea, what does that mean about conservatism?

As for science, there is only one kind. Science is not "liberal" nor is it "conservative", not by any reasonable definition of those terms.

So, we are left with a depiction of homosexuality as normal, the one controversial issue you've brought up.

Your take on liberal-type multiculturalism is naive. The idea on america's multinational origins USED TO BE that expressed in the motto of the US: "E pluribus unum" - from many, one. The liberal idea is "from many, many". At the same time they do things to downplay and denigrate the unifying aspects of this country, ie, a common language, a shared pride in its history and achievements, it's (previous to 2008 ) values of democracy and adherence to the Constitution - they "celebrates diversity" - in their take of it focussing very strongly on the divisive. No wonder illegals come here and live in LA county for 30 years, never learning to speak a word of english, and have no more loyalty to or identification with America than I have to the planet Pluto.

 

[PLC1]

Your take on liberal-type multiculturalism is naive. The idea on america's multinational origins USED TO BE that expressed in the motto of the US: "E pluribus unum" - from many, one. The liberal idea is "from many, many". At the same time they do things to downplay and denigrate the unifying aspects of this country, ie, a common language, a shared pride in its history and achievements, it's (previous to 2008 ) values of democracy and adherence to the Constitution - they "celebrates diversity" - in their take of it focussing very strongly on the divisive. No wonder illegals come here and live in LA county for 30 years, never learning to speak a word of english, and have no more loyalty to or identification with America than I have to the planet Pluto.

Yes, and yet the original meaning of "all men are created equal" was "all white males are created equal. The dang liberals have been trying to change that eternal verity for centuries now.

 

[Rick]

Yes, and yet the original meaning of "all men are created equal" was "all white males are created equal. The dang liberals have been trying to change that eternal verity for centuries now.

Criticism that the country didn't start out in pure perfection from its very beginnings is, well, unschooled, and actually down right stupid.

As for liberals, they are NOT trying to support equality, but in fact have established every type of anti-white male discrimination imaginable - ask the New Haven firefighters.

 

[PLC1]

Criticism that the country didn't start out in pure perfection from its very beginnings is, well, unschooled, and actually down right stupid.

As for liberals, they are NOT trying to support equality, but in fact have established every type of anti-white male discrimination imaginable - ask the New Haven firefighters.

So, your observation about how multiculturalism used to be is not meant as high praise for the ideas of past times, but in how flawed it was and how great it is that we've started to put away the ideas of the past.

 

[Rick]

So, your observation about how multiculturalism used to be is not meant as high praise for the ideas of past times, but in how flawed it was and how great it is that we've started to put away the ideas of the past.

How far past is "past"? You are trying to portray it (by implication, innuendo) as a choice between such as slavery 150 years ago versus the divisive racial spoils system created by the left that prevails today.

 

[Dr.Who]

If "multiculturalism" means accepting that people who are different from ourselves should be accepted as equals, is that really a "liberal" idea? Sometimes, the meaning of words like "multicultural" and "liberal" get blurred, but if the opposite, non acceptance of people who are different, is a "conservative" idea, what does that mean about conservatism?

As for science, there is only one kind. Science is not "liberal" nor is it "conservative", not by any reasonable definition of those terms.

So, we are left with a depiction of homosexuality as normal, the one controversial issue you've brought up.

I never said that multiculturalism were wrong nor that conservatives do not embrace it under different names.

What happens on PBS is they weight programming so that accepting people who are different is highlighted it is done in ways that promote one way of thinking about it rather than a showcasing a more cosmopolitan message.

Science may at best be politic-free but that is not true of NOVA.

 

[PLC1]

I never said that multiculturalism were wrong nor that conservatives do not embrace it under different names.

What happens on PBS is they weight programming so that accepting people who are different is highlighted it is done in ways that promote one way of thinking about it rather than a showcasing a more cosmopolitan message.

I'm not sure just what that means. Multiculturalism is by definition a cosmopolitan way of looking at the world.

Science may at best be politic-free but that is not true of NOVA.

I've seen several NOVA programs and haven't noticed any sort of political bias. Do you have examples?

 

[Dr.Who]

I'm not sure just what that means. Multiculturalism is by definition a cosmopolitan way of looking at the world.



I've seen several NOVA programs and haven't noticed any sort of political bias. Do you have examples?

I have not checked all these links but their existence leads one to understand that there is a controversy:

# PBS Airs False Facts in its "Inherit the Wind" Version of the Kitzmiller Trial

>> http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/11/pbs_airs_its_inherit_the_wind.html
# PBS, Darwin and Dover: an Interview with Phillip Johnson [ID the Future Podcast]

>> http://www.idthefuture.com/2007/11/pbs_darwin_and_dover_an_interv.html
# The Theory of Intelligent Design: A Briefing Packet for Educators [B & W Version]

>> http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=1453
# NOVA Program on Intelligent Design Biased, Not by Chance but Because They Designed It That Way

>> http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/11/needs_title.html
# The Truth about the Kitzmiller v. Dover Trial

>> http://www.traipsingintoevolution.com
# PBS Encouraging Teachers to Violate the First Amendment's Establishment Clause, Discovery Institute Reports

>> http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=4304
# Who's on Trial? A Look at NOVA's Judgment Day [ID the Future Podcast]

>> http://www.idthefuture.com/2007/11/whos_on_trial_a_look_at_novas.html
# Paula Apsell's Lessons Not Learned from the History of Science

 

[Dr.Who]

I'm not sure just what that means. Multiculturalism is by definition a cosmopolitan way of looking at the world.

When advancing ideas of accepting all people there are a variety of ways to advance such acceptance.

Multiculturalism is only one way to do so.

Yet, it is the predominant concept on sesame street whenit comes to accepting different people.

 

[PLC1]

I have not checked all these links but their existence leads one to understand that there is a controversy:

# PBS Airs False Facts in its "Inherit the Wind" Version of the Kitzmiller Trial

>> http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/11/pbs_airs_its_inherit_the_wind.html
# PBS, Darwin and Dover: an Interview with Phillip Johnson [ID the Future Podcast]

>> http://www.idthefuture.com/2007/11/pbs_darwin_and_dover_an_interv.html
# The Theory of Intelligent Design: A Briefing Packet for Educators [B & W Version]

>> http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=1453
# NOVA Program on Intelligent Design Biased, Not by Chance but Because They Designed It That Way

>> http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/11/needs_title.html
# The Truth about the Kitzmiller v. Dover Trial

>> http://www.traipsingintoevolution.com
# PBS Encouraging Teachers to Violate the First Amendment's Establishment Clause, Discovery Institute Reports

>> http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=4304
# Who's on Trial? A Look at NOVA's Judgment Day [ID the Future Podcast]

>> http://www.idthefuture.com/2007/11/whos_on_trial_a_look_at_novas.html
# Paula Apsell's Lessons Not Learned from the History of Science

No doubt there is controversy. There is always controversy when the theory of evolution is being discussed.

I didn't take time to follow all of the links, but did the second one. It is about the "Theory of intelligent design". Of course, anyone who refers to ID as a "theory" is going to be uncomfortable with an objective discussion of evolution.

 

[PLC1]

A second link leads to this:

Traipsing into Evolution is a book-length critique of federal Judge John E. Jones's decision in the Kitzmiller v. Dover case. In this concise yet comprehensive response, Discovery Institute scholars and attorneys show how Judge Jones's Kitzmiller decision was based upon faulty reasoning, non-existent evidence, and a serious misrepresentation of the scientific theory of intelligent design.

Again, the "scientific theory of intelligent design." There is no such thing. ID is not science, not a scientific theory.

Just looking at those two, it appears that NOVA is not on the side of "liberals" or of "conservatives", but of science.

Maybe there's something on one of the other links that is really controversial in the scientific community.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

A second link leads to this:




Again, the "scientific theory of intelligent design." There is no such thing. ID is not science, not a scientific theory.

Just looking at those two, it appears that NOVA is not on the side of "liberals" or of "conservatives", but of science.

Maybe there's something on one of the other links that is really controversial in the scientific community.

sometimes the right gets mad that science does not side with them. so its best to punish Science.

 

[Dr.Who]

A second link leads to this:




Again, the "scientific theory of intelligent design." There is no such thing. ID is not science, not a scientific theory.

Just looking at those two, it appears that NOVA is not on the side of "liberals" or of "conservatives", but of science.

Maybe there's something on one of the other links that is really controversial in the scientific community.

It really does not matter if the issues were conroversial or right or wrong.

It only matters if NOVA presented them in a balanced way or if NOVA had bias.

YOu say you did not read all the links then you conclude that NOVA is fair and the people complaining are wrong. That proves you have a bias at least.

Anyway, it could be that all those people who think it is biased are wrong and that you are right. Or it could be that nova is biased. We don't have clear proof from what has been said on this thread so far.

But imo they are biased. Less than many other programs.

 

[Dr.Who]

sometimes the right gets mad that science does not side with them. so its best to punish Science.

That is a prejudiced generalization with an assumption of motives.