Swearing Ban!

Jesus Wept

Teen urges Southern California city council to enforce foul langauge ban


And the council actually hears this right-wing Nazi like law proposal, and accept free t-shirts from the campaign?!
Do they regularly accept gifts from people proposing law reforms?
I would be surprised if they would accept so much as a sticker or t-shirt from an adult.

They have a website which has an E-STORE selling t-shirts, books, cd's and cards, with no mention that I can see as to where the monies received go.

IMO, it's a clear stunt by the father pushing his kid into the spotlight to get some publicity via this bullsh1t council hearing in order to promote his cause and the website.
it's the parents agenda, he is using his son to promote it, not to say the kid isn't enjoying his 15 minutes, but it's off putting to say the least for the reasons mentioned.

Now, if they purely started their little club to promote people not to swear (or cuss as the Americans like to say), then good for them, whatever floats their boat, but
proposing that it be illegal for anyone to curse in the city? Fúck off.

Geez people (council members, TV producers) are so easily swayed when a child is shunted to the front to promote some bullsh1t.

TPD

Whatever happened to freedom of speech...

I dont see why people get so offended by swearing, if its not directly aimed at them then its just another word.

jester77

ah for fuck sake, some people have little to be worried about. Life must be fucking great for them if swearing is their biggest concern!

Archeron

Bollox.

Jesus Wept

TPD wrote: »

Whatever happened to freedom of speech...

That's what I was wondering, but clearly the council only entertained this bullsh1t so they could also get their 15 minutes and point at the telly and tell their friends to turn the news on at 6pm!!! etc.

Surely they don't entertain law reform proposals that fully ignore the constitution?

humanji

What about peoples freedom of speech when it comes to putting forward ideas? It may be a dumb idea, but that doesn't mean they should be stopped from practicing their freedoms, does it?

Dragan

**** that ****

is_that_so

Would this be three strikes and you're out?
"Jon Spartan one violation." :rolleyes:

Jesus Wept

humanji wrote: »

What about peoples freedom of speech when it comes to putting forward ideas? It may be a dumb idea, but that doesn't mean they should be stopped from practicing their freedoms, does it?

I don't understand why the council are hearing a law proposal when it in my mind it contradicts the constitution they have in place, and one of the most celebrated basic freedoms the united states has. (or is meant to have)

If they are obliged to hear it (and I don't know that they are), then they should hear it and immediately reject it stating that the first amendment ensures freedom of speech.
Tell them to be on their merry way, and to take it up at the appropriate level.

And I don't think it's fine that they accept gifts (yes a free t-shirt is a gift) promoting said cause, purely because it's a 14 year old that is handing it to them.

My 2cents.

humanji

Well I was just saying that the council should hear them out, but just ignore it. If they're allowed to ignore one proposal, who decides what other ones they can ignore?

Karl Hungus

is_that_so wrote: »

Would this be three strikes and you're out?
"Jon Spartan one violation." :rolleyes:

John Spartan, you are fined five credits for repeated violations of the verbal morality statute.

Jesus Wept

humanji wrote: »

Well I was just saying that the council should hear them out, but just ignore it. If they're allowed to ignore one proposal, who decides what other ones they can ignore?

I have no idea what the rules are tbh.

Can anyone get a hearing with any insane law proposal?

If someone proposed a law to bring back slavery for all African-Americans, would they hear it? Where's the line?
If someone proposed that everyone wear underwear on their head every Tuesday, would they hear it?

If i had a child propose it, they might air it on the telly too?

kevmy

So essentially they are trying to makes cursing illegal (and it is cursing or swearing not ****ing cussing man I hate that word)

Which is against the constitution of the US (First Amendment). Would they be so quick to accept a kid saying ban all guns? Unlikely. (Gotta admit I laughed when the auld lad brought up Columbine, yeah like cursing make those kids go crazy)

I think it's stupid. Maybe people shouldn't curse so much but you can't ban that ****.

Swear words have a legitimate place in any language to express surprise, place emphasis and of course to insult or shock. If you ban for example fcuk, sh1t, cnut and bastard then people will come up with new curses to fill the void. So it's not only stupid it is useless. Not that I blame the kid he's to naive to realise this is stupid, as mentioned before it's the auld lads fault

kevmy

is_that_so wrote: »

Would this be three strikes and you're out?
"Jon Spartan one violation." :rolleyes:

Karl Hungus wrote: »

John Spartan, you are fined five credits for repeated violations of the verbal morality statute.

LOL

dade

The-Rigger wrote: »

and one of the most celebrated basic freedoms the united states has. (or is meant to have)

that would be until you ctiticize bush or the war on terror then you become satans bastard son

Dirty Dave

The little ****-knuckle in question has also made a rap video.

Whoops! Sorry. Mother****ing rap video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTNv2dOBFJk

The Bollox

**** the ****ing ****ers

Jesus Wept

Well that rap video was ****ing ****!

What a ****ing little Nazi this child is.

TheAlmightyArse

BEST BIT: Where the little twat says he wants his censorship law passed so his friends don't feel pressured into conforming to a certain way of speaking.

Jesus Wept

TheAlmightyArse wrote: »

BEST BIT: Where the little twat says he wants his censorship law passed so his friends don't feel pressured into conforming to a certain way of speaking.

The ironing.

Ruu_Old

It is the hugging they are after now! :eek:

Public displays of affection are against the rules at Sky View Middle School (search) in Bend, and 14-year-old Cazz Altomare found that out the hard way.

She got detention earlier this year after hugging her boyfriend in the hallway as he headed to lunch and she went to gym class.
Her mother, Leslee Swanson, was infuriated by the punishment — in fact, when she went to pick her daughter up from detention, she gave her a good, hard hug.

"I'm trying to understand what's wrong with a hug," said Swanson, 42.
But administrators said such policies are standard-issue at middle schools across the country.
"Really, all we're trying to do is create an environment that's focused on learning, and learning proper manners is part of that," said Dave Haack, the principal of Cascade Middle School (search), also in Bend. "This is not us being the romance police."

Students only end up with detention after repeated warnings, he said.

Outside Pilot Butte Middle School (search) on a recent lunch break, two seventh-grade girls said they disagreed with the school's policies.
"I think we should be able to hold hands or hug at least," Annie Wilson, 12, told The Bulletin in Bend. "Because it's not doing anything bad."

Others are more in favor of the rule, like Christina Barackman, 13, also a Pilot Butte seventh-grader.
"I think they're nice to keep boundaries for kids," she said.

Schools need to define and actively teach what they do want to see in student behavior, said Rob Horner, a University of Oregon (search) professor who works with schools across the nation on "building social culture that supports effective learning."
"To say 'no hugging' really blows it," Horner said. "That's exactly the sort of trap that, as soon as you say that, what is the first thing everyone is going to want to do?"

At home after school on a recent afternoon, Cazz, the Sky View student, described the no-hug rule as "dumb."
"Hugging is like a sign of affection," she said.
Her mother has told her that if she likes Sky View and wants to stay at the school, she'll have to abide by the rules.

But Swanson, the mother, said she wonders if a hugging ban would fly in a more metropolitan place.
For her, this is a politically charged issue.
"The more people blindly accept these fundamental rights being taken away from them, the easier it becomes for them to be taken away," Swanson said.

humanji

Others are more in favor of the rule, like Christina Barackman, 13, also a Pilot Butte seventh-grader.
"I think they're nice to keep boundaries for kids," she said.

Bet she's ugly!

bangersandmash

Ruu wrote: »

It is the hugging they are after now! :eek:

My school has a relationships policy.

One bit of it goes a bit like this:

Students are forbidden to demonstrate that an exclusive relationship exists by conventional means e.g. holding hands

It isn't really enforced - i think it is there in case the school ever needs an excuse to do something e.g. last year there was a 5th year lad going out with a 1st year girl.

Jesus Wept

bangersandmash wrote: »

My school has a relationships policy.

One bit of it goes a bit like this:


It isn't really enforced - i think it is there in case the school ever needs an excuse to do something e.g. last year there was a 5th year lad going out with a 1st year girl.

What if they held hands with more than one person at the same time to show that they are getting around.

HAPPYGIRL

The-Rigger wrote: »

What if they held hands with more than one person at the same time to show that they are getting around.

You cannot seriously be suggesting that kids go around randomly holding hands. Why is there no morals anymore?

dame

Hmm, how would a ban on swearing on boards.ie work?

Jesus Wept

HAPPYGIRL wrote: »

You cannot seriously be suggesting that kids go around randomly holding hands. Why is there no morals anymore?

The lurker speaks! ;)

Guy:Incognito

humanji wrote: »

What about peoples freedom of speech when it comes to putting forward ideas? It may be a dumb idea, but that doesn't mean they should be stopped from practicing their freedoms, does it?

Yes, stupid people should be censored.


They should tell him to **** off.

bangersandmash wrote: »

One bit of it goes a bit like this:

Students are forbidden to demonstrate that an exclusive relationship exists by conventional means e.g. holding hands
.

So if you have an army of ho's your knocking off that follow you around, all is well until you try to settle down with one girl and make physical contact?

dame wrote: »

Hmm, how would a ban on swearing on boards.ie work?

Maybe the could make the boards swear filter into a little box that you stick to someones face. When they swear, puppies and flowers come out the front on the box.:D