| |
Calum Tsang wrote:
> In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Chris Magno wrote:
>
> > When I get to that bridge, my intention is to teach my kids something about
> > "right time, right place."
> >
> > Using the magic seven in .general might not be the right place, but to make a
> > stronger emotional point in .debate, SURE. Go for it.
>
>
> Some would say that you don't need those seven to make any point that's worth
> making. I mean, when Madeline Albright or Paul Martin stood before the United
> Nations, I didn't see them using those magic seven, did they? I don't see
> lawyers using profanity in the courtroom to make a point. I don't even see Dan
> Rather or Peter Mansbridge using profanity to tell us the news. When I read a
> blue collar paper like the Toronto Sun, even they don't swear in their op-ed
> pieces.
>
> So tell me why this is a requirement for you to?
>
>
> > I wanted to say that your point regarding Lugnet being "for children" is wrong.
> >
> > The ~TOY~ we talk about is for children. (and some adults)
> >
> > BUT most of these forums are for adults.
>
>
>
> > Do you get these letters?
>
>
> And what if the answer is yes? Cue argument that your morals are different than
> others, so you shouldn't have them imposed on you.
>
>
> > What I want to express is that the entire WORLD is a big bad scary place.
>
>
> Yes, it certainly is. But why use that as an argument in a place that doesn't
> REQUIRE profanity to have profanity?
>
> Try this on for size: "Graffiti is commonplace in big cities." Is the resulting
> action "Let's spray graffiti everywhere, it's a given."?
>
> Simply put, I see this argument as:
>
> Weirdo Churchie Types: Let's save the children!
>
> More Liberal Types (Chris, maybe Janey, etc): Who cares about the kids, I don't
> care if my kids swear or hear swearing.
>
> Weirdo Churchie Types: (Rod and Todd voice) But swearing is bad! You will be
> be cast in h-e-double-implement-of-Canada's-national-pastime!
>
> More Liberal Types: (Eric Cartman voice) "You have warped my fragile wittle
> mind!" The world is cruel and harsh. I demand democracy and freedom of speech
> (mind you, freedom of choice of words, not freedom of message) on this privately
> operated web board with no constitution! I will swear to my kids all I want!
> Your churchie views don't represent me!
>
> Weirdo Churchie Types: Yes, but laissez-faire views don't represent me either!
>
> More Liberal Types: But I WANT TO MAKE A POINT.
>
> Weirdo Churchie Types: But so DO WE.
>
> Me: Why do we need to swear here when there isn't a need for such a thing?
> We'll leave that to the rtlToronto meetings where we KNOW there aren't kids
> around. Stop trying to make a point. Both sides know better.
>
> The truth is, even if you had a TOS protected right to swear on Lugnet, you
> probably wouldn't anyways.
>
> Calum
Calum,
You make some excellent points.
I can even see that wishy-washy-easily-swayed Dave K says that you are
right.
BUT, Calum, you made my point in your very last sentence. At no point
have I ever(STRESS EVER) advocated that I want to swear at ever second
word.
ALL I ASK is that if I feel I can best express a F E E L I N G by
using something as harmless as B$#&*^IT, then I dont ever want to have
to fear the wrath of seven people I have never met.
Chris
I'll leave it to people with more time than me to show you COUNTLESS
examples of unparliamentary llanguage as used in public.
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
42 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
