Tags: fairness | doctrine | pitt

Fairness Doctrine Could Doom Nation

Tuesday, 08 Sep 2009 02:31 PM

By Pat Boone

Share:
  Comment  |
   Contact Us  |
  Print  
|  A   A  
  Copy Shortlink

I was quite shocked a few nights ago while briefly checking in on the Bill Maher TV show. His guest was Brad Pitt, and I was curious to see how that conversation might go. At a media fellowship prayer breakfast some time back, I was given two media names to privately pray for, and one was Pitt.

I have mixed feelings about Maher, though we’ve gotten along fine the several times we’ve butted heads on his shows, but I’ve greatly admired Pitt, both for his exceptional ability as an actor and his much publicized humanitarian efforts. So I’ve been happy to pray for him (and his growing family), and I recently got to know his brother Doug.

The brothers’ dad was, and is, a Christian minister. The family, based in the Midwest, is a typical church-going, Bible-believing American family — and that’s why I was shocked to hear what Pitt had to say.

When chronically cynical and anti-religious Maher asked Pitt if he’d consider running for elective office, the handsome actor replied “I wouldn’t have a chance. I’m pro-choice (abortion), for gay marriage, all those things. I grew up in a Christian home, but it doesn’t make sense to me now. I’m on the highway to hell with you, Bill.”

And they both chuckled heartily.

I’m really sad for both guys personally — I really like them — but I’m troubled on other levels as well. I’m deeply concerned about what that particular incident portends for our country.

One concern is the growing divide between believers and nonbelievers. In the greatest and most free country the world has ever known, the vast majority of citizens have always equated the Bible and our Constitution as the bedrock foundation of our liberties. The linkage is obvious, because most, if not all, of our founding constitutional principles sprang from Bible roots, Bible truth.

In the sublime Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson voiced the core belief of Americans “that all men are created equal, and . . . endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights . . . among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

And though the liberty for every man to speak his mind and voice his opinions, politically or religiously or whatever, is guaranteed by our Constitution — and implicitly by our creator — there is an increasing tide of citizens who use that very liberty to decry and deny the existence of liberty’s source.

Atheistic diatribes by people like Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris have become big best-sellers, bought by hundreds of thousands of Americans. Maher and Michael Moore mock, deride, and ridicule Christian faith and those who uphold it, and make millions at the box office. Astounding!

Militant atheist Michael Newdow continues his crusade in sometimes sympathetic courts to have “under God” removed from our Pledge of Allegiance because he doesn’t like it, ignoring the fact that the First Amendment specifically forbids Congress from restricting the free exercise of religion.

The ACLU is more diabolically committed than ever to stamping out all public expressions of Christian faith, not even waiting for a citizen complaint, demanding that crosses be removed from county seals, from patriotic memorials, even from private property. And just days from now, they’ll drag a school’s principal and its athletic director into court, wanting them to be jailed for six months and fined $5,000 because they dared to suggest and lead a prayer before a lunch meeting of supporters on school property.

How could these Constitution lawyers defend all this to those who wrote that document?

But an additional concern underscored by the Pitt-Maher conversation is this terrible irony: While they can laugh, on live TV, at their own cynical declaration that they’re “on a highway to hell” for their religious and political views, the president’s team and the Democrat-controlled Congress seem hell-bent on reinstituting the infamous “fairness doctrine,” to stop others from expressing theirs.

This pernicious, totally unconstitutional scheme is now a top priority for Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Steny Hoyer, and all the liberal activists who are stung by the surprising and vocal resistance to their plans for taking over the healthcare systems of virtually all Americans. They see an aroused citizenry, they see their poll numbers plummeting, they face growing crowds of ordinary folks demanding that Big Brother government take its hands off our healthcare, and they lamely blame it all on conservative voices on radio and TV.

So they’re determined to silence those voices.

They shrewdly label it “fairness.” But what, please explain to me, is “fair” about bringing government mandated pressure on broadcasters to severely limit the speech and expressed opinions of their on-air personalities? At least 90 percent of TV and radio hosts are admittedly liberal, including those who report the news. So if the general public chooses and prefers to hear from conservative alternatives, what in heaven’s name is “fair” about denying them that First Amendment privilege?

What is “fair” about a liberal campaign to stifle the voices of those who believe an unborn child has the right to live? Those who believe otherwise are applauded and provided prime-time opportunities aplenty to voice their views; but others who differ, on Christian and Biblical grounds, are “unfair,” and must be throttled?

Now, as the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) points out, there’s an additional threat from the FCC, under new direction, perhaps slipping this rank censorship strategy into its own regulations “under the radar.” Supposedly promoting “diversity,” the commission can force all broadcasters to give all differing opinions “equal time,” or lose their licenses. The FCC has never objected to the incessant, ever present preponderance of liberal views on our broadcast air; it’s just those pesky conservative ones that too many Americans seem to resonate to.

Friend, fellow citizen, please visit www.aclj.org and support with me the Broadcaster Freedom Act (S.34/H.R.226), which will effectively ban the “Fairness Doctrine” in any form. The ACLJ has the legal strategy and the strong team that can protect our basic freedom to speak our minds and express our beliefs.

And further, go to www.conservative.org, the American Conservative Union, and participate in a massive “Stop the Obama Gag Order” petition to Congress. If we speak up now, and in sufficient numbers, we can preserve these precious freedoms.

If we don’t, we may doom our nation to join Brad and Bill on their highway to hell.

© 2014 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Share:
  Comment  |
   Contact Us  |
  Print  
  Copy Shortlink
Around the Web
Join the Newsmax Community
Please review Community Guidelines before posting a comment.
>> Register to share your comments with the community.
>> Login if you are already a member.
blog comments powered by Disqus
 
Email:
Country
Zip Code:
Privacy: We never share your email.
 
Hot Topics
Follow Newsmax
Like us
on Facebook
Follow us
on Twitter
Add us
on Google Plus
Around the Web
Top Stories
You May Also Like

Obamacare Trampling Constitution

Sunday, 09 Mar 2014 12:52 PM

Why isn’t anybody defending the right of any business or property owner to serve anybody he wants to or decline to produ . . .

Celebrate the Nativity - in All Its Glory

Monday, 23 Dec 2013 08:15 AM

Paradoxically, there is a growing aversion to the nativity in this country, a number of people and groups who seem deter . . .

'Smart Meter' Protects Your Privacy

Monday, 16 Dec 2013 14:31 PM

The government has come up with a way to monitor your energy usage , and mine your data. . . .

Most Commented

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

 
NEWSMAX.COM
America's News Page
©  Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved