ity, and necessity are thereby challenged. An overarching political theme surrounds the dynamics of social acceptability for homosexuality: is this association considered acceptable in the fabric of the American household? Furthermore, should our children be well informed of these “abnormalities” through sensationalized television? While several studies indicate that exposure to truthful information about lesbians and gay men often leads to a reduction in homophobia, is that what we really want?Trash TV talk shows are an important venue for the transformation of public-service news into an entertainment form. From the abolitionist’s of trash TV’s point-of-view the medium is a powerful tool of persuasion that must be guarded vehemently, lest it be abused by the underlings of society. For the network managers, trash talk hosts and producers and ultimately the for freak show participants, the right to an open forum must be defended.Contrary to Bennett’s view, the majority of Americans are indifferent towards what people’s sexual preference, orientation and identity are. The current “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on gays in the military exemplifies this indifference. If you enjoy certain things that do not bring harm to others than who has the power to condemn such acts? Who decides what is ethical for all and what is not. The political question correctly remains an enigma. The law of the land guarantees equal rights and gives people free will to make their own choices. If that means living by the moral minimum, and abiding by the law, then we cannot force certain beliefs onto others. We cannot condemn those who hold unpopular beliefs. If the public is negatively affected by what they watch on television, and by the personal lives of people made public on television, then they have the power to change the channel. No one is forced to watch television. Therefore, if there is somet...