Sunday, February 20, 2011
Video Gaming and the 1st Amendment
Here we go again, another extremely violent video game to shock the public with graphic mutilations and sexual implications; Bulletstorm takes gaming to another level of brutality. Bulletstorm promises to reward player’s ability to mutilate, destroy or sexually assault victims in the most graphic realism possible with today’s computers. The new game is set for release in the US on February 22nd following certain problems with Germany’s prudish view of modern gaming.
“EA acknowledged the censorship by German advisory board USK, explaining that the country censors many videogames, a policy the publisher disagrees with.”
The game’s intended for “adult/mature” use (exactly what definition of adult/mature covers mutilation and sexual assault are gamers using; just a thought); however nothing prevents younger folks from entering the arena. How demented do you have to be to participate in a game where someone gets their entrails exploded all over the place? What does having such a game available to any section of our populace say about our society?
There was a quotation in the article which caught my attention, even more than my inability to appreciate the degenerate nature of the game. Pay close attention to the prevarication as it hints at the level of depravity our nation has sunk.
“The primary difference why other countries can outright ban certain types of games, music, movies and even books is simply because they don’t have a First Amendment in place,” said Hal Halpin, the president of consumer advocacy group ECA. “Controlled substances such as alcohol and tobacco are merchandized differently primarily because they’re ingested or absorbed and the chemicals cross the blood-brain barrier. Movies, music and video game are First Amendment-protected free speech.”
Did you catch that; according to somebody’s twisted interpretation of the 1st Amendment, a God given inalienable right covers intent to murder, rape, mutilate and otherwise destroy human forms. It doesn’t matter if it’s a game or for real ; the thought process involved remains the same. Halpin, (and the Supreme Court), are suggesting God, the Eternal Father, has authorized mankind to partake of that which previously had been labeled sinful .
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
The Bill of Rights provides protection from government interference with an individual’s God Given Rights; they are not a free pass to reckless abandon of the Commandments. If you read those shorter parts, as if they were completed thoughts, the flaws of removing “God Given Rights” from the sentence become more apparent and make it harder to digest the bilge which purports or suggests individuals no longer are subject to the Commandments . At no time does the 1st Amendment suggest in anyway that individuals are free to violate the laws of God , laws which are eternal in nature .
Congress shall make no law respecting (an individual’s God Given Right as pertain) to the establishment of religion. Congress shall make no law prohibiting (an individual’s God Given Right) to the free exercise of religion. Congress shall make no law abridging (an individual’s God Given Right which includes) the freedom of speech. Congress shall make no law restricting the (God Given Right of an individual or individuals to have) freedom of the press. Congress shall make no law prohibiting the (God Given Right) of an individual or a group of individuals to assemble and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Modern progressive folks would have us separate our founding documents, as if one were not dependent upon the other. “Separation of state and religion”, as interpreted yet not found in our founding documents, has been a wedge used to destroy our foundations.
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”
We cannot have God Given Rights without acknowledging God’s Laws. If we ignore this foundation of American government we must then consider the alternative . Ezra Taft Benson expressed this idea so well:
“If we accept the premise that human rights are granted by government, then we must be willing to accept the corollary that they can be denied by government. I, for one, shall never accept that premise. As the French political economist, Frederick Bastiat, phrased it so succinctly, “Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.”’
I must have one of the older out of date versions of the Bible which doesn’t include, as acceptable in the eyes of the Lord, murder, sexual assault, mutilation or any other destruction of God’s children. My version of the Bible still limits the use of profanity too; guess I need one of those “progressive” Bibles.
I’m not in favor of censuring violent games, music or movies or imposing my standards on anyone; instead I’m suggesting not to purchase or use such media. It would be more responsible for individuals living in a nation built under divine influence to simply not purchase products which are in direct conflict with that which we know to be sinful; let them collect dust on the shelves. The beauty of supply and demand rests in making a profit; if it doesn’t sell it won’t last long. We are the sum of our thoughts and actions .
If an individual is the sum of his/her thoughts and actions we must also accept that our society is a reflection of those individuals who comprise it. Is it any wonder we are in decline when video games like Bulletstorm are common place items on store shelves, available to anyone with enough money to purchase them?
This article has been cross posted to The Moral Liberal , a publication whose banner reads, “Defending The Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & The American Constitution”.
Posted by T. F. Stern at 7:45 PM