Not "if" but "how" to make a stand...

I recently got on facebook (crazy, I know), and got a link that stunned me.  I checked it out on snopes. com, and, yes the FCC (that regulates public media) is seeking public input for "the next 30 days**"about whether or not it should contine to regulate use of offensive language and nudity on public television.

Snopes article: http://www.snopes.com/politics/sexuality/fccban.asp

Actual statement by FCC: http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2013/db0401/DA-13-581A1.pdf

Link to site that tells you how to send feedback very easily.
http://action.afa.net/item.aspx?id=2147534194

Here's an excerpt from the FCC (sorry, I didn't take the time to adjust the margins): 

We now seek comment on whether thefullCommission should make changes to its current broadcast indecency policiesor maintain them as theyare.For example, shouldtheCommission treat isolated expletives in a manner consistent with our decision in PacificaFoundation, Inc.,Memorandum Opinion and Order: “If a complaint focuses solely on the use of expletives, we believe that . . . deliberate and repetitive use in a patently offensive manner is a requisite to a finding of indecency.”?Should the Commission instead maintain the approach to isolated expletives set forth in its decision in Complaints Against Various Broadcast Licensees Regarding Their Airing of the“Golden GlobeAwards” Program, Memorandum Opinionand Order,19 FCC Rcd 4975(2004)?As another example,should the Commission treat isolated (non-sexual) nudity the same as or differently than isolated expletives? Commenters are invited to address these issues as well as any otheraspect of the Commission’ssubstantive indecency policies

I got all fired up.  I wanted to write an email saying: 

You have a voice.  The creed of our government is "by the people, for the people."  The government represents us, and here is a very easy way to make a powerful stand.

THE "NEXT 30 DAYS" ENDS ON MAY 8TH!  Even if you don't watch public television, send a message to the government that the voice of the people is strong in support of a return to public virtue, one of the founding principles of liberty in our society according to the Founding Fathers.
With love and concern,Mary Biesinger

Then I started writing a p.s. that said:

p.s.  I respect your right to disagree...use your voice as well.  

...and sensed the hypocrisy of it.

Do I really want to send a message to the government that I expect it to regulate our virtue on TV?  Wouldn't that be like banning books? I mean if we give the government the right to ban literature and words and graphics in other's actions, is that a precursor to them banning religious literature and other items on the "moral battle ground"?  Is it really the government's job to take care of that? 

Now, I am not saying we shouldn't speak out and say we don't like it.  I am not saying we should just let people "do their thing" and look the other way. But what I am saying is: What about good, ol' fashioned boycotting?  Wouldn't that address the problem better?  I feel like we are little kids, running to the government and tattling, instead of taking care of it ourselves.  

What if, instead, we took the time to write the media stations, explaining to them that, because of the lack of decent programming, we no longer support public programming.  What if people actually turned off their TV sets instead?  Or, perhaps we could send in our opinion, but then politely include that we don't feel that it is the FCC's job to regulate those standards, but, rather, our job as an American people to support media and influences that uplifts and sustains.

I tend to be "inflammatory" at times, act first, think later.

I know our religious leaders tell us to "take a stand" in virtue...but does that mean asking the government to regulate it or for us to go to the source and make it non-profitable?

Now, this issue I mentioned above addresses things in the private sector.  I can turn off the TV.  However, advertisements and slogans that are morally offensive I believe should not be in public places.  What about my right to not see offensive things?  

It really hit home that we lose freedoms in the name of security when people lack virtue, for I do want to ensure a public environment that doesn't foster other types of addiction and bondage, such as profane language and pornography.  You know, kind of like keeping public smoking within limits so others don't have to suffer from second-hand smoking?  We just must be careful what powers we give to the "government" (in other words, "our neighbors" or "people who might not agree with us".

I would love to hear other people's opinions in this matter, especially if expressed in a voice "respectful of others human dignity." :)