Bad language.

[Lance_Iguana]

Why do we allow words to gain so much power? I just had a thread have a link removed because someone said a bad word in it.

It was a video where a young man was attacked by an older couple. To me, this speaks volumes, because in order for the board to protect you the readers, they had to censor an incident and remove the link. That is to far. We should not be gun shy of words.

I don't make a habit to swear, and I have a decent vocabulary. I just don't understand why we still have this obsession with bad words. It dosen't adress the problem, only ignores and creates new problems.

We need to move away from the idea of bad words, and just consider bad context instead. Thank you.

 

[GojuBrian]

Because people find certain words offensive. It's hard to get away from it sometimes.

I don't know why your thread was deleted, but is this the proper way to address it?

 

[jasoncran]

pms arent working, nor is much of anything yet.

 

[GojuBrian]

Oh...well....i dunno.

 

[Lance_Iguana]

The mods wanting to remove the link isn't really the big concern for me, and I respect their decision. I was just taken aback about how this is an issue that could have triggered a good discussion, but it had to be shut down because of language.

To me, that just shows that there is something wrong where audible clicks become powerful enough that we can't even discuss cometary. My main concern is why do we allow these words to have power. Its a short list, but they have synonyms that we can use that mean the exact same thing. I think offense should not be a reason to ban words.

wanting to censor something based on being offensive actually seems counter productive to the freedoms of belief and speech. Mainly because we aren't judging the source based on its merit, but by who gets upset that certain audible clicks are mentioned.

 

[GojuBrian]

Well, that's where your and mine ideals differ. You see too much grey and I see mostly black and white.

 

[jasoncran]

lance, your community finds a certian audible click offensive.several actually, i avoid them but should the the censors allow those as well?

and this site does and has filtered those out we get jerks that come here and use them. we seem them and change them and inform that person that they need to change their language when posting.

 

[Vic C.]

wanting to censor something based on being offensive actually seems counter productive to the freedoms of belief and speech. Mainly because we aren't judging the source based on its merit, but by who gets upset that certain audible clicks are mentioned.

I'll explain it this way:

This is a Christian site. Most Christians want to avoid subjecting themselves to what we deem offensive. Now I didn't see this video. But imagine a parent sitting down with the young ones, or a young member viewing the video and surprise, surprise!

This is a Christian site, a privately run Christian site. There are plenty of secular sites where these videos can be viewed. Has it occurred to you to simply post a disclaimer warning members of the offensive nature? I bet you didn't.

Don't dwell on freedom of speech. Instead, concentrate on the separation clause that actually comes before freedom of speech in the First Amendment. There is no law which requires us to allow you to post something that is offensive to our beliefs.

Freedom of speech means nothing unless it is handled with a sense of responsibility. Why can't some people understand that? Why can't some people respect the fact that this is a Christian site and we are governed, in a sense, by a different set of standards?

 

[Caroline H]

Lance, your video didn't just have "a bad word" in it. It was filled with the F-bomb and people using Jesus' name as a curse word. Honestly, you should have known it wouldn't be tolerated here because we've had these sort of discussions before. I don't know if you feel like you need to push the envelope here at times, or if you really just don't get some things... but I have a hard time thinking that someone as intelligent as you just doesn't see why a video saturated in foul language won't fly here. There was cussing for the duration of the clip, and the fight actually only lasted about 20 seconds...

 

[Lance_Iguana]

lance, your community finds a certian audible click offensive.several actually, i avoid them but should the the censors allow those as well?

and this site does and has filtered those out we get jerks that come here and use them. we seem them and change them and inform that person that they need to change their language when posting.

I've gotten over slurs. I don't care, I've heard them enough in my life that they don't impact me anymore. Its not the slurs that upset me from the beginning anyway. Its the attitude/micromanagement that upsets me. Banning the words didn't change the fact that there are still people that hate my community.

 

[walter]

Sorry Lance, but I see this as yet another attempt to hammer away at the rights of others. The people here do not want to be subjected to language like that in the video. Why isn't that enough for you? Why do people insist on forcing their beliefs or lack thereof on others. Isn't that the battle cry of the left when it comes to confronting christianity?

 

[Lance_Iguana]

I'll explain it this way:

This is a Christian site. Most Christians want to avoid subjecting themselves to what we deem offensive. Now I didn't see this video. But imagine a parent sitting down with the young ones, or a young member viewing the video and surprise, surprise!

This goes back to the heart of the problem. What is so powerful about those words that children can't hear them? What dose being Christian have to do with being able to say a Navy term, a term for breading stock, Male orphans, urine, condemnation, and a word that actually has no meaning? What's so powerful about those specific terms?

This is a Christian site, a privately run Christian site. There are plenty of secular sites where these videos can be viewed. Has it occurred to you to simply post a disclaimer warning members of the offensive nature? I bet you didn't.

Then why wasn't shot a message and I could have put a disclaimer. I also think its irrelevant that there are other sites, this is the site I'm having a discussion, and this site is my audience.

Don't dwell on freedom of speech. Instead, concentrate on the separation clause that actually comes before freedom of speech in the First Amendment. There is no law which requires us to allow you to post something that is offensive to our beliefs.

Now show me where it says in the scripture that these words are bad. They aren't there, the words I'm speaking of are cultural, and bad words change country to county. Canada and England have different swears and bad word then us, and don't consider some of our words to be bad.

Freedom of speech means nothing unless it is handled with a sense of responsibility. Why can't some people understand that? Why can't some people respect the fact that this is a Christian site and we are governed, in a sense, by a different set of standards?

Because there Christian reason to ban these words. There is no reason the words to be anyway. There is no logic for word with the same meaning to be said, but these specific words are bad, with scripture to back it up. It make no sense.

Your argument is basically this, This place is Christian, therefore we don't have to provide a reason. That's not logic, that's an excuse because it dosen't address why the words are bad.

 

[walter]

Your argument is basically this, This place is Christian, therefore we don't have to provide a reason. That's not logic, that's an excuse because it dosen't address why the words are bad.

Lance, can I come to your private dwelling and do something you don't want me to do?

Words carry connotations. Different from person to person. Personally most words don't offend me, but I believe that bad language in the wrong places is harmful, both to the speaker and the listener. They can make the speaker appear less intelligent and cause stress to the listener among other things. Just because the "real world" is like that video doesn't give you or anyone else the right to drag it into a place where it isn't wanted.

 

[Lance_Iguana]

Lance, your video didn't just have "a bad word" in it. It was filled with the F-bomb and people using Jesus' name as a curse word. Honestly, you should have known it wouldn't be tolerated here because we've had these sort of discussions before.

I've never had this discussion with you before. Its irrelevant, the bad words weren't the issue, its the fight that's the issue. Why the fight happened is the issue. Our culture response to siding with children and older people is the issue. Pretty much, the responses I'm getting here are solidifying my opinion. People don't want to question social structure, and instead make up or ignore reasons instead of using logic. The fight was illogical, and banning words is illogical.

I don't know if you feel like you need to push the envelope here at times, or if you really just don't get some things...

There nothing to get, the words have no power. We give them power because we have cultural reason to give them power. Its not logical, and there is no reason these word should have power. Thats what I'm looking for, a reaosn why audlble clicks are damaging

but I have a hard time thinking that someone as intelligent as you just doesn't see why a video saturated in foul language won't fly here.

The reason why I didn't think it would be a problem, is because curse word don't register and I don't think about them. I concentrated on the content of the video where the fight was lead up to. I don't allow myself to shut down because of bad words, if I did that, I wouldn't be able to think. To me its just as logical to ban every word that begins with N, then its to ban any word.

There was cussing for the duration of the clip, and the fight actually only lasted about 20 seconds...

How long the fight lasted is not the point. Its the build up that shows where the kid, while rude, actually remained civil, while the older couple slapped at him and kept trying to subdue him with their will. When they couldn't do it, they attacked him.

Words being banned - Illogical, People actually resorting to fist fights because of bad words - Extremely illogical.

 

[Lance_Iguana]

Lance, can I come to your private dwelling and do something you don't want me to do?

Here is the main difference. I'll say no. The I'll give you a coherent reason why I don't want you to do it, and I'll use logic. For example. If you would want to steal something, I can show where stealing is bad because I had to sacrifice my time in order to acquire the money to pay for the item. See, that's logic. There is none for banning words.

Words carry connotations. Different from person to person. Personally most words don't offend me, but I believe that bad language in the wrong places is harmful, both to the speaker and the listener. They can make the speaker appear less intelligent and cause stress to the listener among other things. Just because the "real world" is like that video doesn't give you or anyone else the right to drag it into a place where it isn't wanted.

The problem is not being solved, only ignored. Banning words dosen't change the attitude or views of the person or persons. Only hides it. Its still there. Address the attitude, not the word. We need to stop scape goating and take responsibility. We need to question why these words have power. We should not just accept it without a logical reason.

 

[Pard]

Lance, you have no basis for an argument, don't even try.

This is a privately owned and funded website. It is paid for by ads and donations. Anything that does not come out of those two sources is paid for by the owner's own pockets. Now, the owner has appointed people to police his PRIVATELY owned website. The owner has a set of rules that have been developed over time and that fit the MAIN audience of this website, that is Christians.

The rules explicitly state that vulgar language or links to vulgar language can be removed at the digression of the police, appointed by the owner. Who ever removed your post was doing so with the inferred permission of the owner, based on the rules he has approved and issued.

You have no basis to argue that your post was wrongly removed. It contained vulgar language and that is against the rules. This is not a violation of your freedom of speech, this is a privately owned and run institution. If you want to ramble on about freedom of speech than please find a forum owned and operated by the United States government, your rights are with them, not with us.

 

[Lance_Iguana]

Lance, you have no basis for an argument, don't even try.

Yes, I have a basis, and you're not addressing it. You doing what society dose as a whole, because I'm aiming this at society as well. You are ignoring my point, and substituting it with an excuse. You haven't addressed why the words are bad. The logic you are using is aquivilent to saying that the word pink is bad, because a mod simply says so. That's not a reason, only an excuse.

This is a privately owned and funded website. It is paid for by ads and donations. Anything that does not come out of those two sources is paid for by the owner's own pockets. Now, the owner has appointed people to police his PRIVATELY owned website. The owner has a set of rules that have been developed over time and that fit the MAIN audience of this website, that is Christians.

Now address my point, what is so bad about a handful of word? You haven't answered it yet.

The rules explicitly state that vulgar language or links to vulgar language can be removed at the digression of the police, appointed by the owner. Who ever removed your post was doing so with the inferred permission of the owner, based on the rules he has approved and issued.

Now tell me how the words are bad. Like I asked several times.

You have no basis to argue that your post was wrongly removed.

Good thing this thread isn't about that then, isn't it?

It contained vulgar language and that is against the rules.

Now explain how those words where vulgur.

This is not a violation of your freedom of speech, this is a privately owned and run institution.

And this thread is not about my freedom of speech, its is about why some words are bad.

If you want to ramble on about freedom of speech than please find a forum owned and operated by the United States government, your rights are with them, not with us.

Actually you are on rambling about it. You ignored my argument and premises. You are the are one who derailing the thread. You are the one who I question if you even read the OP.

Answer the question. What is vulgar about a handful of words that are banned, but we have synonyms to and are aloud to use? This is the topic.

This is what you failed to address. And I'm thinking of reporting your post as spam.

That is what we call logic.

 

[walter]

Lance,
You're just itchin for a fight. I for one resent this tactic. You ignore the fact that certain words are prohibited here and instead focus on causing a fight disguised as a logical argument because you don't agree with the rules.

This tactic is wearing very thin.

 

[Lance_Iguana]

Lance,
You're just itchin for a fight.

No, I just want verification. I'm asking a logical question. What makes these words special. No one is giveing my an answer.

I for one resent this tactic.

I'm not using any tactic. I'm plain out asking what is special about some words.

You ignore the fact that certain words are prohibited here and instead focus on causing a fight disguised as a logical argument because you don't agree with the rules.

NO!, THIS IS MY PREMISE - WHY ARE SOME WORDS TABOO?

No one is answering. Instead I'm getting off topic responses giving excuse to why I'm not allowed to know why the words are bad. I'm a getting a wall. The logic is they are bad because they are bad. I refuse to accept it because its circular reasoning and dosen't answer the question. If feel like a five year old when people talk to me like that. Its a simple question, break down the wall and give me a simple answer. If there is no answer, just say so. If you don't know, just say so.

It dose not hurt to simply state that you don't know.

This tactic is wearing very thin.

There is no tactic. What you are probably feeling, is ingrained social taboo that demands you not question this. You where taught that some words are bad. It is imprinted in your mind, and you expect that society should also agree with you. Now that someone like me is questioning it, its setting off alarm bells because you don't understand why I just can't see and agree with your position.
Its called indoctrination, and there is no logic to indoctrination, only acceptance.

 

[handy]

Lance, you are an intelligent adult. You know well that certain words are taboo in this society, whether you agree that they should be or not. The F-bomb, certain words that describe bodily functions, so on and so forth are what they are. They are intended to be somewhat offensive, that is their point. One uses them when one wants to be edgy, or to strongly get a point across, or to ruffle some feathers or to express very strong emotion.

Whether or not one is offended by such words depends largely on the person. I could care less really if someone is dropping the F-bomb or swearing like a sailor around me. I worked too long in a large corporation I guess for it to bother me, and there are few words, considered offensive, mainly relating to waste, that I've used myself, living with so much of it here on the ranch. But, for the most part, it is considered rude to use such language during social interaction, especially in very mixed company, such as one would find at church. And, this board is very much a church, with Christians who are older, younger, new in the Lord or been on their walk for decades. Being church, those words will be considered out of line.

And you are far to intelligent a person to look wide eyed and innocent, asking "Why are some words taboo?" It would be like me going on to a GLBT forum and dropping words like f****t, d**e, or q***r and then asking wide eyed, "Why are you offended? What's wrong, don't you believe in Freedom of Speech?"

Now, one thing that truly is offensive is using the name of our Lord and Savior as an expletive. This isn't only offensive to Christians, it also goes against our first and foremost commandment that we should love God with all our heart, all our soul, all our mind and all our strength. Spitting out the name that, to us Christians, is the name above all names is not only deeply offensive, but also sinful.

But, you knew that already as well.

Come on, Lance, the boy doth protest too much (to misquote the Bard). The rules here clearly state that the mods not only can, but most certainly will remove links to sites that contain such language.