It seems downright old-fashioned to obsess about television demons these days since we have so many shiny new ones on the Internet. But there is something about that evil box in the corner of our living room that keeps whipping us into frenzies of fright.

Not that the good old fears — sex, violence and trash talk — aren't bad enough, but for those charged with saving us from perdition it is helpful from time to time to unearth new demons lurking in our TV sets. The alleged gay menace on television seems to be readymade for a new campaign to control what producers can produce, networks can air and people can watch.

And the Christian Action Network, which claims a nationwide membership of 250,000, seems just the group to lead the anti-menace forces into battle. CAN's previous 15 minutes of fame came last year in its efforts to generate opposition to the National Endowment for the Arts. CAN mounted a sidewalk exhibit of objectionable art in front of the NEA building in Washington, D.C., that had passersby gagging. A similarly grotesque exhibit in Salt Lake City met with similar results. But then you have to fight filth with filth.

So, the Christian Action Network is now fighting what it considers a conspiracy to convert into homosexuals our children and anyone else not alerted to the infiltration of our TV programming.

One of the coming events energizing the CAN campaign is that HBO plans to air in June a program called "The Sissy Duckling," which CAN president Martin Mawyer says HBO describes as "a fuzzy little yellow bird who learns he's gay."

Actually it's not just the programs, says Mawyer. You have to watch out for the commercials, too. Homosexual messages are hidden there, he says, but you have to have finely tuned sensibilities to detect them. "These commercials are called 'gay vague' because homosexuals understand the advertisements are directed toward them. But the so-called straight community just can't figure it out."

CAN has not yet called for labeling these stealth commercials GV for 'gay vague.'

The chilling aspect of such demagoguery, of course, is where it might lead. The possibilities beckon. After all, the TV rating system designed to implement the v-chip for television was hardly difficult to achieve. A few hearings in Congress, a few threats from elected officials, some panic by the TV industry and suddenly last March 12, without fanfare or much attention from the press, the FCC announced that it had adopted something called "TV Parental Guidelines."

The guidelines require that half of all TV sets with 13-inch or larger screens manufactured after July 1 this year will have the v-chip technology. After Jan. 1, 2000, all the rest will have the technology. So will personal computers with TV tuners of that size.

The guidelines also codify rules for those little icons appearing in the upper left-hand corner of your TV screens for 15 seconds at the beginning of a program (or when you touch a remote control button after the v-chips are installed). Since October 1997, TV shows have been rated in six different age-maturity categories as well as content indicators for sex, violence, language, suggestive dialogue, and fantasy violence. Thus for adults, the label TV-PG SVD means a program with sex, violence and suggestive dialogue; for youngsters, of course, it is code for "a really cool show."

But the CAN offensive proves that there is no satisfying those who want to dictate what comes into your living room through your television set:

Proponents of the v-chip insist that the TV rating system is not about censorship but about providing more information for the consumer.

For its part, the Christian Action Network apparently doesn't see a contradiction between calling for labeling of TV programming and its court battles against a West Virginia law requiring it to label all of its solicitation letters with a public disclosure statement.

Consistency is one of the first casualties in a cultural war.

Rationality becomes one of the walking wounded early on, too. For example, if the advocacy groups trying to "clean up" television are successful, they may well make watching TV so safe that there is absolutely no reason to watch it. Certainly there won't be much reason to go there for new ideas, bold statements, creativity, stimulation, originality, variety or challenge.

And that brings us to the overall problem of rating systems, whether for comic books, movies, television, records or video games.

They are an end-run around the First Amendment, allowing the government to do by coercion what it cannot do under the Constitution.

They homogenize and sap all the energy from the medium, robbing it of individuality and potential.

They substitute arbitrary standards and reduce decisions about artistic merit to a formula.

They deny the audience a choice and advocate conformity and uniformity in a society that thrives on the value it places on individuality and uniqueness.

And as if that were not enough, each rating scheme becomes a rationale for the next.

Once started, it is next to impossible to stop because the goal is not more information; it is less information. The purpose is not to clean up the medium or the message; it is to control it. The approach is not reason and persuasion but ignorance and coercion. The result is not a better America but one molded in the likeness of charlatans and bigots, people who either do not know the difference between righteousness and self-righteousness — between freedom and tyranny — or just don't care.

Paul McMasters can be contacted at pmcmasters@freedomforum.org.