by Christine Zibas

Created on: December 01, 2008

When I first saw this question, "Should there be freedom of speech for Christian broadcasters?" I was stunned. There already is free speech for everyone in the United States,so what is there left to discuss? What are they referring to? Then it became clear that freedom of speech is really double talk for the topic, "Should Christian broadcasters get free air time, much like candidates during a political campaign?" That is, "Should the TV networks provide free air time for religious groups?" And I believe the answer to that is, quite simply, "no."

The reason they should continue to pay for their air time is that they already receive significant tax breaks from the Federal Government in the first place. Christians and other religious groups don't pay property tax for their church properties, they don't pay income tax on the money they raise, they can spend that money freely, including for print or broadcast media. In short, they already have a lot of benefits that ordinary citizens don't have, instead enjoying many valuable exemptions from tax. If broadcasters must then provide them with free air time, who will end up paying for the broadcast time: ultimately, the American taxpayers.

The second problem with assigning Christian broadcasters with free broadcasting time is the huge numbers of churches and denominations of Christians. Does every church get its own show? Daily, weekly, monthly? Does this mean that the government should also pay to produce those programs? Will the airways become clogged with religious programming just to accommodate every sect, every neighborhood church? How will normal broadcasting even accommodate all those groups? Even Public Broadcasting Services (PBS) must raise its own money to develop and air programs.

Finally, what countermeasure can balance out so much religious broadcasting? Do the athiests get their own show? This could be a divisive problem that would tear American public opinion apart even more. It seems unlikely that this could be properly regulated to everyone's satisfaction to make it worthwhile. Then, constittionally, how does the doctrine of the separation of church and state fit in? This opens another can of worms, so to speak.

To leave the present system alone is the best answer to the question posed. It would serve all sides well to remember that there is religious broadcasting on the air today, and there is no ban on what those groups can say. Religious broadcasters ALREADY possess freedom of speech. To open the floodgates with free broadcasting would not improve the situation, only lead to new conflicts and a bigger bill for the US taxpayer.

Learn more about this author, Christine Zibas.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.