Raise your hands, parents, if you recognize this: You're enjoying a Sunday afternoon of NFL football with your pre-teen children, talking touchdowns and Cam Newton, until a commercial comes on. Suddenly, you find yourself wincing at a somebody-gets-slain police show trailer - or fumbling for the remote before your 7-year-old asks why people need something called Cialis before they start smooching.

It's a push-the-envelope, cover-their-eyes broadcast world out there. Do we want it to become even coarser?

That's the question Supreme Court justices debated this week as they considered whether the Federal Communications Commission should continue to police profanity and nudity during hours that children watch broadcast TV. Broadcasters want the Court to overturn a 1978 decision that upheld the FCC's power to regulate radio and TV programming, including prime time hours before 10 p.m. The FCC has authority over content that can be received by an antenna - even if that content also is delivered through cable and satellite services.

The case originally involved an FCC policy that punished broadcasters for spontaneous vulgarities uttered during live broadcasts - an issue during several awards shows almost a decade ago. After examining those incidents and others, however, the U.S. 2nd Court of Appeals ruled against the FCC's entire indecency policy, arguing that it was inconsistent, subjective and could have a chilling effect on speech. As evidence, the appeals court cited how some CBS stations declined to run a 9/11 documentary because the program contained firefighters cursing.

Broadcasters argued this week that the FCC policy also is archaic, and they have a point: Media alternatives now offer children plenty of new ways to pollute their minds, including exposure to mature programming through cable TV and the Internet.

That, however, makes it all the better that government allow us a refuge, flimsy as it may be in a world where even commercials are filled with implicit (and sometimes not-so-implicit) violence and sex. The justices seemed to agree: "These are public airwaves," Justice Antonin Scalia said. "The government is entitled to insist upon a certain modicum of decency."

Broadcasters have complained rightfully about inconsistencies in the FCC's policy, which found obscenities in Saving Private Ryan and nudity in Schindler's List acceptable when those movies were broadcast on network TV, but balked at bare bottoms and curse words in other shows. Justice Elena Kagan's summation of FCC policy: "Nobody can use dirty words or nudity except Steven Spielberg." That should be fixed.

The judges clearly seem to be leaning toward keeping the status quo on broadcast profanity and obscenity, a ruling we'd welcome. It all might soon become moot, as fewer and fewer viewers get their television programming with an antenna. But until then, we're happier having a good idea what to expect when watching TV with our children - at least until we get to the commercials.