Revolutionary Times an underground newpaper by Ghost Liberty Thursday, 12m7d2023CE --- --- --- America is on the verge of a revolution. The 2024CE elections in the united States are expected to be the most polarized and out of touch in all of American history. While more and more People are pushing for a third party candidate, and Independents along with Libertarians are willing to vote for alternative candidates, the primary reason why third parties do not win is because People tend to not vote for them, perpetuating a loop-logic that forecloses any outcome where a different policy than the two-sides-of-the-same-coin usurping big government that keeps trying to one-up the tyranny and whom are both (major pary democrats and republicans) sold out to the New World order. A report from Gallup on October 4th 2023CE mentions that support for a third united States political party is now up to 63%. The conditions are ripe for constitutional originalists and just naturalists to get a limited- power party into office who can start unraveling the web of woven red tape surrounding free exercise of business and individual autonomy, and start shutting down un-lawful divisions and programmes/projects that constitute a direct threat to the republic and our sovereignty as Persons, such as opening- up drilling off the southern Gulf and de-scheduling cannabis, magic mushrooms, and mescaline. The real pivotal issue though is not who rules this country, but what limitations on their powers and strict penalties for over-reach exist. This is one reason why i worked on re-writing the constitution of the united States with Operation Greenway, a part of "the Plan 2.0"; OpGreenway is a project to create a new nation for citizens of the world or a constitution to use in the event of a revolution... - Remember, remember, the 4th of July, the despot king George the third I know of no reason, why their standing forces should ever be forgot Yankee Doodles and Minutemen, t'was their intent, to emancipate themself Thirteen colonies of the west, trolled the tyrants and fought their best By god's providence in their acts, independence was announced Holla boys, holla boys, let the bells ring Holla boys, holla boys, god save the Government... And what should we do to the traitors? Burn them!!! --- --- --- Opinion: The united States constitution is its own form of tyranny:: The United States is a form of republican monarchy, except composed of members from the common people. If the constitution is so damn perfect, then you have no room to complain of any "king's crown" shit, because plenty of unjust elements exist in it as it stands. Lets name a few: --- Power to tax, especially the case of "direct taxation" (not a natural right the people have which they may then confer to government) quote " Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. ... " un-quote --- Power to suspend habeas corpus (if in an emergency, why can't citizen's have their own court so long as it obeys the procedures and rules required elsewhere in the constitution?) quote " The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it. " un-quote --- Power to instill Intellectual Monopolies and enforce it to the result of violations of free speech and real property rights. quote " To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries; " un-quote --- The existence of the Electoral college (the people's voice does not really matter, all power really belongs to the state) quote " The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows Page 1 of 16 Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector. The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse the President. But in chusing the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; A quorum for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall chuse from them by Ballot the Vice President. The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States. " un-quote --- Not providing "the [general] People" a direct role in ratifying or amending the constitution; all must be done through delegates and other proxies such as through States. (not a government BY the [general] People, but a government BY the few [in power]) quote " The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same. " un-quote --- Eminent domain (do people have the right to take your house from you so long as they use it for something the community will potentially benefit from?) quote " ... No person shall [have their] private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. " un-quote --- Power to remove life, liberty, and property from a person without the person having performed a violation of natural rights; so long as it is a violation of the constitution, such as refusing to surrender property under eminent domain, you could be imprisoned for life or killed (complete tyranny) quote " No person shall ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; ... " un-quote --- Being the decider in cases where itself is a party to a controversy (violation of natural justice) quote " The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. ... The judicial Power shall extend ... to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; ... " un-quote --- and of course, there are more than I spoke of plainly here... See:: wikipedia.org/wiki/Elective_monarchy --- --- --- Stages of denial (1) doubt tending to the false; (2) doubt tending equally toward false and true; (3) doubt tending toward the true; (4) valid reasoned acceptance of truth {this is classical Indian Buddhist valid cognition process schematic adapted to fit to your question lol. See here for further exploration https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mind-indian-buddhism/ - The five stages of grief model (or the Elizabeth Kübler-Ross & Kessler model from 2005CE)) states that those experiencing grief go through a series of five emotions: denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance. Denial – The first reaction is denial. In this stage, individuals believe the diagnosis is somehow mistaken, and cling to a false, preferable reality. Anger – When the individual recognizes that denial cannot continue, they become frustrated, especially at proximate individuals. Certain psychological responses of a person undergoing this phase would be: "Why me? It's not fair!"; "How can this happen to me?"; "Who is to blame?"; "Why would this happen?". Bargaining – The third stage involves the hope that the individual can avoid a cause of grief. Usually, the negotiation for an extended life is made in exchange for a reformed lifestyle. People facing less serious trauma can bargain or seek compromise. Examples include the terminally ill person who "negotiates with God" to attend a daughter's wedding, an attempt to bargain for more time to live in exchange for a reformed lifestyle or a phrase such as "If I could trade their life for mine". Depression – "I'm so sad, why bother with anything?"; "I'm going to die soon, so what's the point?"; "I miss my loved one; why go on?" During the fourth stage, the individual despairs at the recognition of their mortality. In this state, the individual may become silent, refuse visitors and spend much of the time mournful and sullen. Acceptance – "It's going to be okay."; "I can't fight it; I may as well prepare for it." Page 2 of 16 In this last stage, individuals embrace mortality or inevitable future, or that of a loved one, or other tragic event. People dying may precede the survivors in this state, which typically comes with a calm, retrospective view for the individual, and a stable condition of emotions. - The Cycle of Acceptance is a predictable cycle most people and organizations go through upon receipt of very bad news, which includes an opinion that differs radically from one own. Entering the cycle is unavoidable. How long it takes a person or organization to complete the cycle is critical. The longer they're in it, the less likely they will ever fully complete the cycle and the less likely they will be able to deal with the problem wisely. https://www.thwink.org/sustain/glossary/CycleOfAcceptance.htm --- --- --- The Nation is currently going through a spell of hyper-partisanship, causing the whole country to seemingly shoot itself in the feet and cut off their noses despite their [dirty] faces, and then call that self-sacrifice, and accuse those who "refuse to do the same and instead decide for themself rather to call out the collective insanity" as some form/s of traitor/s. Un-questioning obedience is being taught as a virtue, and there has been established a whole culture of [sheer] ignorance, that thinks it can demand of others to know, think, and understand for them, and which performs genetic fallacy and fallacy of appearance/presentation to dismiss any information that runs contrary to their indoctrination and which causes a cognitive dissonance to any degree. Those who know the least are the first and loudest to cry out that their un-informed beliefs are equally as valuable as the learned and thought over opinion of someone who spends their free time educating themself rather than letting the fourth branch of government manufacture their assent to the current narratives in favor of the brave new world order's agenda for today. This is always bolstered by the sheer number that compose the critical mass of society. Control culture within a surveillance society under a 'secured' Nanny-state, that still cannot somehow stop school shooters for more than a half-hour AFTER police arrive onsight, and to which gun control susurpation have been unable to stop gang violence, etc... The disturbing willingness of countrymembers to engage in naturally criminal acts of war by coercing others with force, theft, fraud, or the threat thereof, into submission for the perverse and willingful wrongs/abuses of society at large towards a minority of dissenting members from the social body within it, only surpassed by the People's un-questioning obedience to [false]/[illigitimate] authority and snitching on the non-compliant is seen as a virtue by many on both sides of the isle. Continual foreign conquests overseas and willing pensioneers who participate in the [corrupt] military industrial institutional operations, not justified by the defense of our nation against a real threat of attack or invasion on our soil/territory or against our vessels/craft out in international waters. It is a system that favors dangerous criminals above the people they victimize; A system that promotes the takers and punishes the makers. Criminal laws have been grown with unrestrained enthusiasm, and which have come to cover so much of what was once previously deemed innocent conduct, that now, almost anyone can be arrested for some violation or offense, or others... Supreme court rulings on Qualified and Sovereign immunity, police having no [constitutional] duty to protect and serve, legalizing from the bench retaliation by police against free speech under the guise of disorderly conduct 'peace-keeping' statutes, etc... Legalized injustice: See Ghost's Grievances about the USA constitution Other grievances, best seen in [the] 'Anti-Federalist Papers' and 'New Declaration of Independence' Eternal gridlock of the system against radical reformations that could empower the People to take charge of their lives and resist despots; The People cannot even vote in an amendment to the constitution protecting the concept of "Just Authority". The fact that People still think you can vote to fix the same broken system that allowed such issues in the first place [as we have been having ]. Corporations are able to lawfully purchase un-due influence and un-equal representation in government, to the expense of every other American and the interests of 'the People'. Rather than fixing the most glaring problems with the financial sector, after the various financial crises which have followed the establishment of the federal reserve central banking cartel which is 'too-big-to-fail', nothing has actually been done to reverse this [collectively suicidal] course. In fact, the too big to fail problem is worse in that these institutions are even bigger than they were before these crises. Nothing has been done to reign in their seemingly unlimited power, which at the same time has been helpless to control inflation and maintain economic growth and stability. There is the fact that most Americans (~77%) are not fully accepting of the minority in those who are without faith and whom live secular lives not motivated by any religious/supernatural or otherwise superstitious tenets; A majority of Americans (~61%) say they would never vote for an otherwise qualified atheist candidate for president, regardless of their personal political ideas and motivations. Billboard campaigns launched by atheists have come under fire for being offensive; Meanwhile, churches put up signs all the time demanding people repent or spend an eternity in torment, and then shout about being persecuted and suppressed when they are questioned and subsequently chastised for their demonstrably archaic and delusional beliefs. Americans seem to always be screaming about how somebody else doesn't have some form of freedom, yet most seem to have little or no problem with the erosion of civil liberties through the central tenets of the pernicious USA PATRIOT Act, National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), or warrant-less surveillance of American citizens, or egregious violations of privacy at the airport or the bus station, or on the highways. There is an enormous lack of governmental transparency and honesty through various presidencies which have led very secretive affairs, and have relentlessly pursued whistleblowers and journalists seeking to illuminate the wrongs committed by the government, such as the cases of Edward Snowden and Julian Assange. While the government is seeking greater transparency of and access to our personal [private] lives, it is ensuring that its activities are obscured from view by 'the Public'. That is the exact opposite of how a civil government is supposed to work. AND SO MUCH MORE! INCLUDING, BUT NOT CONSTRAINED SOLEY TO: Deteriorating education, persistent lawlessness and crime, homelessness, the collapse of family values, the crisis in medical care, all of which are worsened by the actions of Government. [And] If you can't crack a damn book or operate a search engine to figure out how, go play in traffic! - see ALSO: https://thenewamerican.com/a-legacy-of-violations-the-u-s-bill-of-rights-hyperlinked/ - 'Whether our Government really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized within itself such abuses as we have had suffered, or it has been powerless to prevent them. In either case it is unfit to exist.' The erosion of our Republic into the current State of decay means I would not die for this country, I would only perhaps fight for what it could someday become. - For more details, see: "The Law"- by Claude Frederic Bastiat "Second Treatise of Government: An essay concerning the true original, extent and end of civil government" - by John Locke Page 3 of 16 "No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority" - by Lysander Spooner "On Liberty" - John Stuart Mill "Why Government Is the Problem (Essays in Public Policy) (Volume 39)" - by Milton Friedman "Anatomy of the State" - by Murray N. Rothbard "Anarchy, State, and Utopia" - by Robert Nozick "Anarchism: From Theory to Practice" - by Daniel Guerin and Noam Chomsky "Resisting Illegitimate Authority: A Thinking Person's Guide to Being an Anti-Authoritarian―Strategies, Tools, and Models" - by Bruce E. Levine "Liberty Defined" - by Ron Paul "Free Market Revolution: How Ayn Rand's Ideas Can End Big Government" - by Yaron Brook and Don Watkins "The Psychology of Totalitarianism" - by Mattias Desmet --- --- --- [begin] --- Radio licenses are unjust: By Ghost Liberty There is no power of Congress to regulate interstate radio unless it is commercial, since it is not commerce to simply exchange information and ideas. Licensing radio is the licensing of the naturally free transmission of information, similar to the idea of regulating and licensing the internet! It is outrageous! It places an un-due burden to the free excercise of a right, without a compelling governmental interest in preventing demonstrateable risks of harm to the health, lives, and [real] property of the People. The operation of radios is a right, not a privilege! It is as much of a right as being free to own and operate a computer! Just because what you do can interact in some way with somebody else, doesn't mean the government can step in and restrict that in some way! Simple operation of a HAM radio for emergency communications or even pirate radio for purposes of conversation or personal pleasure [so long as it is without remuneration], does not fall under the scope of the Communications Act of June 19, 1934CE: quote" Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SEC. 1. For the purpose of REGULATING INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN COMMERCE in communication by wire and radio ... there is hereby created a commission to be known as the "Federal Communications Commission", which shall be constituted as hereinafter provided, and which shall execute and enforce the provisions of this Act. "end-quote - from TITLE I--GENERAL PROVISIONS, PURPOSES OF ACT; CREATION OF FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Now under the United States law of the quote"pirate act"end-quote of 2020CEy1m24d, they claim that the constitutional authority for their legislation is simply Article I, Section 8, Clause I of the United States Constitution, which Provides Congress with the power to quote"lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises"end-quote in order to quote"provide for the . . . general Welfare of the United States."end-quote. However, it is our right under the ninth amendment to NOT be obstructed or retarded by any tax that unduly burdens the exercise of our natural, civil, or social rights, or to have a tax be imposed on not doing something, to have deductions offered for doing something there is no power to compel one to do, having taxes made to regulate something not otherwise subject to a power to regulate, or be taxed at a rate beyond the point of diminishing return of revenue. Also, the authority of the original quote"Communications Act of June 19th, 1934CE"end-quote was only provided over commerce, and not over private persons. Therefore, there is no reason to fear the quote"Pirate Act of January 24th 2020CEy"end-quote, and if the government comes to shut me or any other radio pirate down, we will fight to the death to defend our rights. Don't show up here unless you want to be killed for treason against a free/sovereign people, you federal pigs! We will eradicate you slime! You are a pit of vipers, and I intend to rout you out; And by the universe, I swear, I will rout you out! To my comrades: Just like the simulation, you've got to fight to win!; Keep it together People, we are still in this! We as radio pirates and free men, plead the ninth amendment, and its meta-application to itself: " The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the People, which rights are inalienable. All of those other rights which are not specifically mentioned, or otherwise alluded to, in the constitution, are still reserved to the People, in all cases. The existence of an Individual's rights is not contingent upon the "state"/government recognizing them. " & " People have a right to freely use the common electric, magnetic, and electromagnetic frequency spectrums and to operate their equipment thereon within the public or private domain, in accordance with the non-aggression principle; This includes but is not limited to use, experimentation, or operation of oscilloscope, signal generator, radio scanner, spectrum analyzer, RF imager, scientific experiment, transmitter, receiver, transceiver, transmission array, broadcasting or communication equipment, radiotelephone or radiovideophone, modem, computer, robot, particle accelerator, electro-laser or lamdaser, electrodynamic craft, astro-dynamic energy system, or other related device; The legislature has no power to deny to a citizen the right to use the electromagnetic spectrum in the Public or Private domain, and to operate their equipment in the ordinary course of their inclination or pleasure; No government agent or agency may deploy such technology except as needed to properly execute the laws of the union, which trust shall be placed under the authority of the People, who will grant or limit the use of such technology by the government. + There is no right to have customers consuming your services, nor to have receivers tune your transmissions, but you as a Person have a right to provide such services and transmissions as an option available, without obstruction of your freedom to offer them, to others, except for as may be provided under this constitution and by the laws made in conformity underneith it. This shall not prohibit laws being enacted and enforced which protect the People from decibel levels of artificially created or amplified noise which they find interuptive to their ability to think, or which interferes with their person-to-person verbal communication which happens within a physical-proximity of distance reasonable to expect that they may be heard, or that which causes damages to their person or any other rights. This fact of there not being a right to the unwilling co-participation in your rights or priviledges with others extends to the correctly attained interpretation of its base/core principle/s, that there is no protection by law for a business against people speaking out to others in opposition against any particular business or alliance/group of them, nor to people deciding to refuse to transact for any reason; Neither is there any protection against outside sources of interference with one's wireless transmissions, or to have People tune into your transmissions, though there is the right to openly and un-constrainedly produce such emissions for personal purpose, and the [potentially restricted] priviledge for commerce. This shall not prohibit laws being enacted and enforced which protect the People from field strength and power levels of artificially created or amplified wireless transmissions which they find causes physical damages to their Person or another person, or which damages any other rights. The right to excercise one's Page 4 of 16 freedoms is not the power to require another participate in/with such exercise, or to cooperate with or alter their otherwise just behaviour in order to meet conformity to the will or intention expressed through your excercise. " We further claim, that: " No Constitutional authority granted by 'the People' to their government can disenfranchise any free person their inalienable rights. & Neither Congress nor the States are permitted to convert a right into a privilege, or a liberty into a license, and charge a fee therefore, limit, or deny them. Anything that is a right cannot be subject to conditions or licensing. Should any state convert a liberty/right into a privilege, charge a fee and issue a license for it, one may ignore the license and fee and engage in the exercise of the right with impunity, irregardless of its status of security within the constitution. - AS WELL AS - Everyone possesses an inherent right to defend their Natural Rights, including [upon their discression] with lethal force, as may be prescribed by this constitution. & Everyone shall possess the right to resist any law or order that infringes on their rights, freedoms or guarantees, and when it is not possible or reasonable to resort to the public authorities, to use force to repel any aggression. " --- We are opposed to the licensed radio bootlickers who would conspire to have their fellow man who had done no harm to another put into the iminient risk of being agressed upon by the monopoly of violence. We will strongly resist any and all efforts to subdue our will/intention and spirit/essence to perpetuate and forever live in liberty/freedom. If you are listening to this through the radio, know that by reporting us to the FCC or any other government agency you will be initiating an act of violence, and in extention, treason against your fellow human, by calling for violence to be used against us. People from all over believe in and espouse the precepts of natural rights and justice, and your conspiracy to have us deprived of our rights is an act of war, and will be dealt with severely. For those who do not think that having us reported will be an act of violence, and in extention, war against the free universe, you must realize that the big daddy goviani would mandate we pay a fine, which not only are we unable to pay, but would refuse to do so in either case, and we would walk out on any work crew required of us that they may place us to operate under in order to pay off our ransom to the State, therewhich afterwards, we would be arrested and then eventually held in contempt for the kangaroo court. You, if you consider reporting us, are complicit in conspiracy to coerce and kidnapp a free person, all because you believe that big brother is your friend, and that you have a duty to report dissidents for rounding up, because you disagree with their existence as libertads. We have the right to confront the witnesses against us, and if you report us, we will see your slimy invertebrate ass in court, and you should therefor expect you will never be safe again, without the State backing you up, by smashing in the face of humanity with a steel toe boot, forever, you coward/s of the universe. We will eradicate you someday, one way or the other, in the great war of the energies and matters stretching out accross all time throughout all of reality. We await your change of heart and to embrace the cause of natural rights and natural justice. If you cannot be convinced to do what is right, and leave us alone, then expect you will be hunted for the dangerous animal you truly are. This is not a game, this is real life. Your spinelessness, and by extention, your willingness to go along complacently with the powers at be dictates that you and we are natural enemies. There can never be peace between you and we, and there will forever be a battle between us, until there is either one, or none, left standing. we swear, in the similar virtue to Andrew Jackson, that we will eliminate you, one way or the other. You have one right choice to make, and that is to allow we mankind to be free, or we will have to put an end to you. Death to tyrants, in all forms, shapes, and sizes. Free men do not ask for authorization/permission to excercise their rights. As with newly minted fully automatic weapons, we will possess and use whatever radio equipment we desire, for whatever just purpose we may think of, including resisting tyranny. If you come to deprive us of our rights, expect yourself to loose your life in the process. Our tolerence has been tested to its limit, and our patience has grown cold... Let this serve as a warning to the world and greater multiverse. We will not be fucked with. Fuck with us, and we will make sure to deal with you in the most brutally severe fashion imagineable. Make the right choice, or pay for it with your life. Best luck! --- [next] --- Pirate Act Gets New Life In Congress By Radio Ink January 16, 2019 [article begin] Democratic Congressman Paul Tonko of New York reintroduced the PIRATE ACT Wednesday with Republican co-sponsor Congressman Gus Bilirakis of Florida. The legislation would increase penalties for anyone caught engaging in unlawful radio broadcasting. The bill is similar to the bill introduced in 2018, however the original Republican co-sponsor of the bill was not re-elected. Tonko says part of the reason he's a supporter of the bill has to do with protecting children. In a statement about the PIRATE ACT, Tonko said, "Protecting our public airwaves is critical for preserving community safety, whether for first responders or for working parents who don't want to expose their children to uncontrolled hate and obscenity. Whether a frequency is being used in emergencies to coordinate community response and save lives or by parents who just want to tune their car radios with their kids in the car, our communities are better served when broadcasting is governed by the rule of law. I am hopeful that my new House colleagues will join in support of the PIRATE Act and we can pass this commonsense legislation without delay." The NAB believes the PIRATE ACT has a good chance of being approved by both The House and The Senate and signed by President Trump. NAB Executive Vice President of Communications Dennis Wharton said, "Unlicensed radio stations are not merely a nuisance to legitimate radio broadcasters who play by the rules. They also pose a threat to public safety by disrupting communications between air traffic controllers and airline pilots. We strongly urge bipartisan support of the PIRATE Act and we look forward to its swift passage." Congressman Bilirakis said these pirate radio operators are hurting the economy and they need to be stopped. "This bill will give teeth to enforcement of illegal radio operators by hitting them in their pocketbook and better stop these illegal actors for good." The PIRATE Act stands for Preventing Illegal Radio Abuse Through Enforcement Act. The bill is nearly identical to legislation of the same name that passed the House last year. It has been assigned the new designation H.R. 583 for the new legislative session. [article end] Page 5 of 16 --- [next] --- the pirate act might as well be the save the puppies act. think of the puppies! remember when the article from "Radio Ink" said: ' In a statement about the PIRATE ACT, Tonko said, "Protecting our public airwaves is critical for preserving community safety, ... for working parents who don't want to expose their children to uncontrolled hate and obscenity. [If] a frequency is being used ... by parents who just want to tune their car radios with their kids in the car, our communities are better served when broadcasting is governed by the rule of law. I am hopeful that my new House colleagues will join in support of the PIRATE Act and we can pass this commonsense legislation without delay." ' the pirate act might as well be the save the puppies act. think of the puppies! --- [next] --- Think of the children From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia "Think of the children" (also "What about the children?") is a cliché that evolved into a rhetorical tactic. Literally, it refers to children's rights (as in discussions of child labor). In debate, however, it is a plea for pity that is used as an appeal to emotion, and therefore it becomes a logical fallacy. Art, Argument, and Advocacy (2002) argued that the appeal substitutes emotion for reason in debate. Ethicist Jack Marshall wrote in 2005 that the phrase's popularity stems from its capacity to stunt rationality, particularly discourse on morals. "Think of the children" has been invoked by censorship proponents to shield children from perceived danger. Community, Space and Online Censorship (2009) argued that classifying children in an infantile manner, as innocents in need of protection, is a form of obsession over the concept of purity. A 2011 article in the Journal for Cultural Research observed that the phrase grew out of a moral panic. It was an exhortation in the 1964 Disney film Mary Poppins, when the character of Mrs. Banks pleaded with her departing nanny not to quit and to "think of the children!" The phrase was popularized as a satiric reference on the animated television program The Simpsons in 1996, when character Helen Lovejoy pleaded "Won't somebody please think of the children?" during a contentious debate by citizens of the fictional town of Springfield. In the 2012 Georgia State University Law Review, Charles J. Ten Brink called Lovejoy's use of "Think of the children" a successful parody. The appeal's subsequent use in society was often the subject of mockery. After its popularization on The Simpsons, the phrase has been called "Lovejoy's Law", the "Helen Lovejoy defence", the "Helen Lovejoy syndrome", and "think-of-the-children-ism". Background: Sociologist Joel Best wrote in 1993 that during the late 19th century, adults developed an increased concern for the welfare of children. Best noted that societies experienced decreasing birth rates after industrialization, with parents focusing their attention on fewer children. According to him, at that time adults began to view childhood as a sacred period of development and children as invaluable, adorable, guiltless beings. During the 1970s and 1980s, Best wrote, adults saw children as potential victims and sought to eliminate perceived threats. In the 1995 compilation Children and the Politics of Culture, anthropologist Vivienne Wee analyzed the perception of children by adults and how it supported the concept of children's rights. Wee wrote that in this model (which she called the European pattern), children were seen as defenseless, unadulterated, and in need of protection by authoritative adults. According to Wee, this European pattern led to the idea that children required the sanctuary of the United Nations Charter and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Wee wrote: "Alternatively, children's vulnerability could be interpreted as purity and innocence, needing the protection of responsible adults. It is this second, protective mode of interpretation that underlies the very idea of children's rights, needing the protection of a UN charter – hence the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child." She observed that the view of youth as weak and innocent focused on what might occur if children's rights were not shielded. Wee argued that this behavior towards children was not entirely positive. According to her, this mindset may lead to hypocrisy by adults who assume that all their actions intended to protect children and creates the risk that adults may wield power "for the children's own good". Noting that adult authority may be masked as empathy, Wee concluded: "These alternative cultural interpretations of the vulnerability of children would thus generate their own respective political and psychological consequences." Child advocacy: "Think of the children ... freed of the crushing burden of dangerous and demeaning work." - Bill Clinton "Think of the children" has been used in its literal sense to advocate for the rights of children. Early usage during the 20th century included writings in 1914 by the National Child Labor Committee criticizing child labor standards in the United States. U.S. President Bill Clinton used the phrase in a 1999 speech to the International Labour Organization, asking his audience to imagine a significant reduction in child labor: "Think of the children ... freed of the crushing burden of dangerous and demeaning work, given back those irreplaceable hours of childhood for learning and playing and living." The phrase's literal use extends into the 21st century, with Sara Boyce of the Children's Law Centre in Northern Ireland drawing on it to advocate for the legal rights of the region's children. The 2008 book Child Labour in a Globalized World used the phrase to call attention to the role of debt bondage in child labor. Sara Dillon of Suffolk University Law School used the phrase "What about the children" in her 2009 book, International Children's Rights, to focus on child-labor program conditions. Benjamin Powell used the phrase differently in his book, Out of Poverty: Sweatshops in the Global Economy, writing that in the absence of child labor some youth faced starvation. In a 2010 book on human rights, Children's Rights and Human Development, child psychiatrist Bruce D. Perry used the phrase "think of the children" to urge clinicians to incorporate a process sensitive to developmental stages when counseling youth. Debate tactic: - Logical fallacy In their 2002 book, Art, Argument, and Advocacy: Mastering Parliamentary Debate, John Meany and Kate Shuster called the use of the phrase "Think of the children" in debate a type of logical fallacy and an appeal to emotion. According to the authors, a debater may use the phrase to emotionally sway members of the audience and avoid logical discussion. They provide an example: "I know this national missile defense plan has its detractors, but won't someone please think of the children?" Their assessment was echoed by Margie Borschke in an article for the journal Media International Australia incorporating Culture and Policy, with Borschke calling its use a rhetorical tactic. Ethicist Jack Marshall described "Think of the children!" as a tactic used in an attempt to end discussion by invoking an unanswerable argument. According to Marshall, the strategy succeeds in preventing rational debate. He called its use an unethical manner of obfuscating debate, misdirecting empathy towards an object which may not have been the focus of the original argum