It's finally here...restriction of FREE SPEECH!!!

[MisterHappy]

I agree that you should speak up if you or your family are offended. The owner of an establishment is also well within his or her right to throw out on their ass anyone who is offending other customers. Offensive speech, however, is not and should not be legally enforceable. Moral standards should be dictated by the community, not the government.

How do you define "community"? That's going to be a problem.....if in Mass the "Community" had their way, a bunch of people here would have different hobbies!

All too often "community" is interchangable with "government" as it's good for the Public Health (community) to have no trans-fats, and smoknig. It will be good for the Public Health to put a tax on sugary soft drinks (I wonder if Diet Coke will be exempt...I'm sure that in the interest of "simplicity" it will be all soda....).

You see where I'm headed.

I have 2 sons, 11 and 12. On the subject of "bad" language, I've explained that I have no problem with them having a full, rich, vocabulary....but if they use it inappropriately, there will be....trouble.

Unfortunatly, there are a lot of people that have not this restraint (internal or external).

 

[TomH]

If I hear that crap in a public place, or on private property which I'm paying to be allowed into, I'm going to speak up. There are some things that you can't say in public, and that's not automatically a bad thing.

A Constitutional amendment says otherwise... you are free to not like it and to convince restaurant owners etc to kick out people who are profane. And that's as far as it should go. Do I think our society should be a more polite society? Yes. I'm just not going to try to "enforce" it, to a "reasonable" restriction.

Swearing like a drunken sailor in a restaurant ought to be. Illegal, that is.

Really? I hope you aren't serious.

 

[TimMcG74]

How do you define "community"? That's going to be a problem.....if in Mass the "Community" had their way, a bunch of people here would have different hobbies!

All too often "community" is interchangable with "government" as it's good for the Public Health (community) to have no trans-fats, and smoknig. It will be good for the Public Health to put a tax on sugary soft drinks (I wonder if Diet Coke will be exempt...I'm sure that in the interest of "simplicity" it will be all soda....).

You see where I'm headed.

I have 2 sons, 11 and 12. On the subject of "bad" language, I've explained that I have no problem with them having a full, rich, vocabulary....but if they use it inappropriately, there will be....trouble.

Unfortunatly, there are a lot of people that have not this restraint (internal or external).

Poor choice of words on my part. When I said "community" I meant that people are free to make their own personal moral judgements, and that they are free to speak out if they are offended by something that isn't compatible with their value system. The "community" does not have the privledge, however, to enact laws that legislate personal morality.

 

[theGringo]

A Constitutional amendment says otherwise... you are free to not like it and to convince restaurant owners etc to kick out people who are profane. And that's as far as it should go. Do I think our society should be a more polite society? Yes. I'm just not going to try to "enforce" it, to a "reasonable" restriction.

Really? I hope you aren't serious.

Sure. Freedom of speech became freedom of expression, and the rest is history. Some of you youngsters will one day come to regret your anything-goes libertarianism. Something like ... "fighting words" will come up and grab you by the throat one day. This thread reminds me why I don't call myself a Libertarian anymore. Too many nuts in the trail mix.

 

[Erebus]

Sure. Freedom of speech became freedom of expression, and the rest is history. Some of you youngsters will one day come to regret your anything-goes libertarianism. Something like ... "fighting words" will come up and grab you by the throat one day. This thread reminds me why I don't call myself a Libertarian anymore. Too many nuts in the trail mix.

It also reminds me why I don't call myself a Republican anymore. Republicans are just as quick as Democrats to call on big nanny government to force other people to bend to their will. Republicans just have other rights they want to infringe on in the name of "reasonable restrictions". When you start placing "reasonable restrictions" on a right you only pave the way for unreasonable restrictions that seem reasonable in the eyes of the next guy. Like when someone decides to ban the word "gun" or "firearm" from the lexicon because it's too scary.

 

[theGringo]

It also reminds me why I don't call myself a Republican anymore. Republicans are just as quick as Democrats to call on big nanny government to force other people to bend to their will. Republicans just have other rights they want to infringe on in the name of "reasonable restrictions". When you start placing "reasonable restrictions" on a right you only pave the way for unreasonable restrictions that seem reasonable in the eyes of the next guy. Like when someone decides to ban the word "gun" or "firearm" from the lexicon because it's too scary.

Sounds good in theory.

 

[TimMcG74]

It also reminds me why I don't call myself a Republican anymore. Republicans are just as quick as Democrats to call on big nanny government to force other people to bend to their will. Republicans just have other rights they want to infringe on in the name of "reasonable restrictions". When you start placing "reasonable restrictions" on a right you only pave the way for unreasonable restrictions that seem reasonable in the eyes of the next guy. Like when someone decides to ban the word "gun" or "firearm" from the lexicon because it's too scary.

I absolutely agree. There is little difference between forced philanthropy through legislation (read: Democrat) and forced morality through legislation (read: Republican.) Two sides of the same sinister coin IMO.

 

[MisterHappy]

Poor choice of words on my part. When I said "community" I meant that people are free to make their own personal moral judgements, and that they are free to speak out if they are offended by something that isn't compatible with their value system. The "community" does not have the privledge, however, to enact laws that legislate personal morality.

I understand where you're coming from, but in the immortal words from "Witch Hunt" by Rush, "Those who know what's best for us / Must rise and save us from ourselves."

There are a lot of folks that would be happy to start with our speech.

I'm sure that my kids' Gadsen-flag tee shirts bother some at their schools.

It's all too easy for "Government" to legislate "community standards" when the "community" is a bunch of spoon-on-the-high-chair-pounding complainers.

Think of this: the "community" has decided that a veteran, retuning from overseas, can't have a beer. It's for the children, after all.

I'm just glad that here we have a venue to [type] freely!

 

[Zombieoutfitters]

Swearing like a drunken sailor in a restaurant ought to be. Illegal, that is...
...

It is already via "disturbing the peace", "public nuisance", "public menace", or whatever other misdemeanor charge police can currently use to help belligerents take some time to cool off and respect the "community standard". Anything beyond that power is a perversion of the Constitution and absolutely degrades not just political rights, but human rights.

You go to New York City and cuss in a bar to fit in. You go to a small rural community and cuss too much in a bar and you will inevitably be spoken to. Things are as they ought to be for the most part...but the whole point of this post is THAT IS CHANGING. And people (sheeple) are letting it. Not most of us, but most everyone else...because they are blind to it. They can't think far enough ahead of where this type of shit CAN LEAD TO. It might not ever lead there, but it could. And that is quite enough reason for folks to pay attention to it.

It's a bizarre world where, selling anything with sex, UBER-violent movies, rappers and gangsta millionaires, Paris Hilton, the Kim Kardashian show, and any other mind-boggling "anomalies" are considered commonplace and encouraged WHILE AT THE SAME TIME things like swear-words are being suggestively banned in California for a week...restrictions on radio broadcasts are being considered...other commonplace words like "gay", "retard", "Hussein" are being scrutinized. Why?

Because the first list of mind-boggling anomalies can be used to control us, interest us, guide our social mores. The second list of common place things have to do with us expressing ourselves...and if we do that too much we might think differently than they want us to. If they lose control of how we think, act, what we buy, our passions, our hobbies, our spending...then they lose control. Period. Who are "they"? Anyone trying to tell us what we can't do, and most likely the ones that stand to profit off our activities by gaining money or power.

Telling us we can't swear is FAR different from telling us to please not swear right NOW in front of my kids or grandma, etc.

 

[drgrant]

It is already via "disturbing the peace", "public nuisance", "public menace", or whatever other misdemeanor charge police can currently use to help belligerents take some time to cool off and respect the "community standard". Anything beyond that power is a perversion of the Constitution and absolutely degrades not just political rights, but human rights.

You go to New York City and cuss in a bar to fit in. You go to a small rural community and cuss too much in a bar and you will inevitably be spoken to. Things are as they ought to be for the most part...but the whole point of this post is THAT IS CHANGING. And people (sheeple) are letting it. Not most of us, but most everyone else...because they are blind to it. They can't think far enough ahead of where this type of shit CAN LEAD TO. It might not ever lead there, but it could. And that is quite enough reason for folks to pay attention to it.

It's a bizarre world where, selling anything with sex, UBER-violent movies, rappers and gangsta millionaires, Paris Hilton, the Kim Kardashian show, and any other mind-boggling "anomalies" are considered commonplace and encouraged WHILE AT THE SAME TIME things like swear-words are being suggestively banned in California for a week...restrictions on radio broadcasts are being considered...other commonplace words like "gay", "retard", "Hussein" are being scrutinized. Why?

Because the first list of mind-boggling anomalies can be used to control us, interest us, guide our social mores. The second list of common place things have to do with us expressing ourselves...and if we do that too much we might think differently than they want us to. If they lose control of how we think, act, what we buy, our passions, our hobbies, our spending...then they lose control. Period. Who are "they"? Anyone trying to tell us what we can't do, and most likely the ones that stand to profit off our activities by gaining money or power.

Telling us we can't swear is FAR different from telling us to please not swear right NOW in front of my kids or grandma, etc.

This.

-Mike

 

[theGringo]

This.

-Mike

Yeah. There IS a law against it. How slow we theoreticians of liberty (hippies of the political right) can be to conclude the obvious.

Now, in the stark light of the obvious, maybe we can mount a resistance movement.