Why political correctness is dangerous

[oly884]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,271856,00.html

Pretty soon, we won't be able to do anything without being fired. I did realize that we, as citizens of the USA, have the right to not be offended.







































Oh, wait....we don't.

[Paul H.]

It is a sad world when the only people you can joke about are from your own race.

[Bob98SR5]

i'm trying to reconcile everyday what the difference between political correctness and racism is. to me, its impossible. for instance, is it racism or political correctness when a group of agitated, muslim, young arab-looking fellas are singled out at the airport because of the fact that this demographic and religious group is responsible for the vast majority of airline terrorist activities? in my opinion, its political correctness that prevents the NTSB from singling them out, though if i am a young arab dude, and i get singled out, you bet i'd feel discriminated against. i am sure there are some very patriotic arab muslims who are US nationals that have felt like this.

now after listening to this segment on their show, its clear to me that this is not political correctness but just plain old, stupid ignorant racism. ive heard this kind of s##t flung at me when i was younger so i know the difference between a joke being played on me because i'm a random individual vs being an asian person. unless you think that people should be able to mock their accents, make sexual innuendos, etc to humiliate people on a daily basis. i would hope that this kind of stuff would not be acceptable on the radio as it would not be in the workplace.

good topic. sure it'll get heated, but good for discussion.

and for the record, i dont think don imus shouldve been fired. i think the man has apologized enough for an obviously stupid comment. seems to me, his career got f'd by the race mongers (jackson and sharpton)

bob

[oly884]

Bob, I do agree that what was said was ignorant and just stupid. However, when it comes down to it, why not let the public just deal with them? If I don't like the way some one talks on the radio, television, music, and so on, I simply stop listening/watching. However, there's a very fine line between saying, "ok, that's enough" and then having people get canned for saying something that's not even remotely racist but, because it offends some one, "ok, you're fired!"

We all know which direction these things are heading, it's not towards tolerance, but towards control.

[Euphorickaty80]

Bob, I do agree that what was said was ignorant and just stupid. However, when it comes down to it, why not let the public just deal with them? If I don't like the way some one talks on the radio, television, music, and so on, I simply stop listening/watching. However, there's a very fine line between saying, "ok, that's enough" and then having people get canned for saying something that's not even remotely racist but, because it offends some one, "ok, you're fired!"

We all know which direction these things are heading, it's not towards tolerance, but towards control.



I think you hit the nail on the head with that one Oly. IMHO alot of what is wrong with the world today is that we have forgotten how to laugh at ourselves. Everyone is so worried about someone stepping on their toes......Glad i got myself some steel toed boots :D

[jimbo74]

It is a sad world when the only people you can joke about are from your own race.



actually, not even then.....

[Intrepidyota]

It is a sad world when the only people you can joke about are from your own race.





actually, not even then.....


Really? I am pretty sure I have yet to see Chris rock unable to get work, yet he makes racist jokes all the time...hmm....Dave Chappelle does "white impressions", but I have yet to see any backlash there. I am going to be the one to throw it out, it is ok to be racist as long as you are not white.

[BruceTS]

Unless you've been on the receiving end of racist remarks, then it's difficult to understand why this is a sensitive issue. Playing a prank like that over the airways, even if it's funny, only causes more harm than good. Just think of all the kids that will now copycat the same prank. It may seem harmless, but it could cause someone to take it one step further.

[drguitarum2005]

just one more step toward americans being unable to ever speak or do anything again. i absolutely cannot STAND stupid lawsuits and issues such as this one...they tie up the legal system, waste my tax dollars, and give people the completely wrong idea about what is wrong and what is right. if i were president, or a judge or something with the ability to decide on an issue such as this, i'd rule em out a big "GET THE F*CK OVER IT" and be on with my life.

just wait, someone is going to illegally tap my cell phone one day and then sue me for saying "herro?" when its my friends on the other line.

one of my favorite radio pranks was one host talking with a stuttering problem and the other talking with some sort of weird accent...how long before they get sued by people with stutter problems and weird accents? how long before no one is able to talk in any sort of different voice or accent for amusement? where exactly is the line drawn?

[fustercluck]

Political Correctness
by Philip Atkinson
What Is Political Correctness?
Political Correctness (PC) is the communal tyranny that erupted in the 1980s. It was a spontaneous declaration that particular ideas, expressions and behaviour, which were then legal, should be forbidden by law, and people who transgressed should be punished. (see Newspeak) It started with a few voices but grew in popularity until it became unwritten and written law within the community. With those who were publicly declared as being not politically correct becoming the object of persecution by the mob, if not prosecution by the state.

The Odious Nature Of Political Correctness
To attempt to point out the odious nature of Political Correctness is to restate the crucial importance of plain speaking, freedom of choice and freedom of speech; these are the community's safe-guards against the imposition of tyranny, indeed their absence is tyranny (see "On Liberty", Chapter II, by J.S. Mill). Which is why any such restrictions on expression such as those invoked by the laws of libel, slander and public decency, are grave matters to be decided by common law methodology; not by the dictates of the mob.

Clear Inspiration For Political Correctness
The declared rational of this tyranny is to prevent people being offended; to compel everyone to avoid using words or behaviour that may upset homosexuals, women, non-whites, the crippled, the stupid, the fat or the ugly. This reveals not only its absurdity but its inspiration. The set of values that are detested are those held by the previous generation (those who fought the Second World War), which is why the terms niggers, coons, dagos, wogs, poofs, spastics and sheilas, have become heresy, for, in an act of infantile rebellion, their subject have become revered by the new generation. Political Correctness is merely the resentment of spoilt children directed against their parent's values.

The Origins Of Political Correctness
A community declines when the majority of its citizens become selfish, and under this influence it slowly dismantles all the restraints upon self-indulgence established by manners, customs, beliefs and law: tradition. (See the law of reverse civilization) As each subsequent generation of selfish citizens inherits control of the community, it takes its opportunity to abandon more of the irksome restraints that genius and wisdom had installed. The proponents of this social demolition achieve their irrational purpose by publicly embracing absurdity through slogans while vilifying any who do not support their stance. The purpose of the slogan is to enshrine irrational fears, or fancies, as truth through the use of presumptuous words, so public pronouncement:

Dissembles the real nature of the claim
Identifies any dissenters as enemies of the truth
Acts as an excuse for any crimes committed in its name
For example the slogan Australia is Multicultural is a claim that:
Different cultures are compatible.
People who contradict this claim are blinded by prejudice against other cultures.
People who contradict this claim are trouble-making bigots, which makes them enemies of the community, if not humanity, and deserving persecution.
All of which is an attack upon truth, clear thinking and plain speaking.

From Bourgeois To Racist
Naturally as the restraints shrink the rebellion grows ever more extreme in nature. When the author of Animal Farm wrote an article in 1946 about the pleasures of a rose garden, he was criticised for being bourgeois. George Orwell mentions this in his essay A Good Word For The Vicar Of Bray, published in the Tribune, 1946. The term bourgeois was then a popular slogan meaning having humdrum middle class ideas— The Oxford English Dictionary 3rd Edition, 1938 — which is just a blatant attack upon tradition.

Outright Assault Upon Tradition
Now, in the late 1990s, the results of being bourgeois (retaining traditional notions), is being labelled racist, sexist etc. and risk losing your job, your reputation, being jostled in the street, being subject to judicial penalty and death threats. And it is this very extremity of reaction that has won media attention and the name Political Correctness, though the reaction will become even more unpleasant with the next generation.

Parental Values Always Attacked
The inevitable scapegoat for people impatient of restraint must always be parents, because these are society's agents for teaching private restraint. So the cherished notions of the parents are always subject to attack by their maturing offspring. This resentment of tradition was observed in his own civilization by Polybius (c. 200-118 BC), the Greek historian, who said:

"For every democracy which has enjoyed prosperity for a considerable period first develops through its nature an attitude of discontent towards the existing order,.."

Tyranny Grows
Once a community embraces tyranny the penalties can only grow in severity. This gradual increase is easily seen by the example of Toastmasters. As the members of the club became more concerned about the delights of socializing and less concerned about the disciplines of public speaking, they became more intolerant of citizens who were earnest about learning the art of rhetoric. Once those members who did their duty by truthfully pointing out the shortcomings in another member's performance were just labeled as negative or discouraging; later this became a risk of being socially ostracized. Now (since 1998) unpopularity can result in being permanently ejected from the club by a majority vote.

Australian Experience Of PC Tyranny
In my country the tyranny erupted with the persecution of public figures such as Arthur Tunstall for uttering truths that had become unpopular, either directly in a speech, or indirectly by telling jokes. The maiden speech of the Federal Member of Parliament for Ipswich contained so many disliked truths that the rabble escalated the ferocity of their attack and extended them to her supporters, introducing terror into Australian politics. Anyone who watched the TV coverage (1997/8) of Pauline Hanson's political campaign will have seen the nature of her opponents; a throng who looked and behaved more like barbarians than citizens of a civilized community. And any mob that chants "Burn the witch" (when she spoke outside an Ipswich hall after she had been refused entry) leaves no doubt as to their intent or character.

Widespread Throughout The Community
Revealing the extent of the mob's support, their sentiments (suitably refined) were enthusiastically echoed by the media and the administration. And in an unprecedented act of cooperation, all the political parties conspired to eject Ms Hanson from the federal parliament in the election of October 3rd 1998. This was revealed by the how-to-vote cards of the parties contesting the seat of Blaire, which all placed Ms Hanson last. This was a public admission by both the major parties that they would rather risk losing the election than allow this forthright woman to keep her seat in parliament.

International Experience Of PC Tyranny
And it is not just in Australia but in every western democratic country popular demands have been made for restrictions on expression. Bowing to the clamour of the electorate, politicians in these countries have enacted absurd laws. The Australian community wide declaration of irrational hatred displayed by the persecution of Pauline Hanson, paralleled the Canadian experience of Paul Fromm, director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression Inc., and the examples of the national soccer coach of England and a prominent public servant in Washington, USA confirm that the hysteria is everywhere.

The Inevitable Result Of Political Correctness
By using the excuse of not upsetting anyone, the politically correct are demanding that people behave like the fool who would please everyone; that everyone must become such a fool! All must accept the notions of the Politically Correct as truth, or else! This is the same mentality that inspired the Inquisition and forced Galileo to recant; the same mentality that inspired the Nazis and obtained the Holocaust. Once expression gets placed in a straitjacket of official truth, then the madness that occurs in all totalitarian states is obtained. Life, in private and public, becomes a meaningless charade where delusion thrives and terror rules.

Examples Of Denying Freedom Of Speech
Evidence of this effect is amply demonstrated by the Soviets, who embraced Political Correctness with the Communist Revolution. The lumbering, pompous, impoverished, humourless monster this Nation became is now History. And it should be remembered that in 1914 Tsarist Russia was considered by Edmund Cars, a French economist who then published a book about the subject, to be an economic giant set to overshadow Europe. The SBS television program "What Ever Happened To Russia", which was broadcast at 8.30 pm on 25th August 1994, detailed the terrible effect the Bolshevik's oppression had on their empire. And SBS further detailed the terrible crimes inflicted upon the Russians by their leader Stalin, in the series "Blood On The Snow" broadcast in March 1999.

An Old Witness
Helen, a member of Parramatta writers club in 1992, was a citizen of Kiev during the Red Terror, and described living with official truth and the constant threat of arrest. Knowing the content of the latest party newspaper was critical to avoiding internment, as public contradiction, either directly or indirectly, meant denouncement to the KGB. If you complained about being hungry when food shortages were not officially recognized, then you became an enemy of the state. If you failed to praise a Soviet hero, or praised an ex-hero, then again your fate was sealed. The need to be politically correct dominated all conversation and behaviour, as failure meant drastic penalty. Uncertainty and fear pervaded everything, nobody could be sure that an official request to visit Party headquarters meant imprisonment, torture, death, public reward or nothing important.

Living with such a terrible handicap naturally destroyed all spontaneity of thought or action, rendering the whole community mad. The awful effect this had upon Helen's sanity was made clear when she escaped to Australia. Here she encountered the free press, which had an unpleasant impact upon her. One day she read The Australian newspaper which happened to carry two separate articles about Patrick White, one praising, the other denigrating, this well known writer. Poor Helen found herself turning from one to the other, which was she to repeat as correct? She nearly had a nervous breakdown.

Political Correctness Is Social Dementia
Unless plain speaking is allowed, clear thinking is denied. There can be no good reason for denying freedom of expression, there is no case to rebut, only the empty slogans of people inspired by selfishness and unrestrained by morality. The proponents of this nonsense neither understand the implications of what they say, nor why they are saying it: they are insane.

Social Decline Grows Worse With Each Generation
Political Correctness is part of the social decline that generation by generation makes public behaviour less restrained and less rational.


http://www.ourcivilisation.com/pc.htm

[Bob98SR5]

Bob, I do agree that what was said was ignorant and just stupid. However, when it comes down to it, why not let the public just deal with them? If I don't like the way some one talks on the radio, television, music, and so on, I simply stop listening/watching. However, there's a very fine line between saying, "ok, that's enough" and then having people get canned for saying something that's not even remotely racist but, because it offends some one, "ok, you're fired!"

We all know which direction these things are heading, it's not towards tolerance, but towards control.


Let's get some context here as I think there is definitely somethings you said that are missing that context. Same w/ some comments above.

First, there is a difference between public and private airwaves. Same holds true with your private home and your (public) workplace. this was said over the public, FCC regulated airwaves. ...which also addresses and refutes intrepid's argument. intrepid: if these radio guys said this on cable tv, which is a private medium (voluntarily paid thru monthly dues), i dont think i wouldve raised a fuss...but some would....but yes, context (where) it was said makes a big difference.

second point: letting the public deal with it. I dont this statement at all. in fact, i think they did exactly what you said: the public did make a complaint and those guys were fired as a result. now if you are talking about people just not listening, sure, people can do that. but if people are pissed or offended by something, they have the right to complain---and its ultimately management's decision to take action---or not. so in essence, that is what happened.

third point: now if your comment about this 'not being remotely racist', how are you to judge what is racist or not? do you know how many times i have been on the receiving end of s##t like this from white people in my life? now that is not to say that there aren't great white people and that i hate "whitey"...because thats far from the truth and anyone who knows me knows that and i dont believe a few ignorants spoil the bunch...but getting back to my point: so when radio hosts say crap like this, ummm yeah dude, i do get offended based on my personal experience...and it seems that brucets mightve been on the receiving end of bulls##t stuff like that as well.

and last point, you say "we are headed towards control, not tolerance". in the context of this example, where is the tolerance? i see nothing tolerant about making fun of people's accent in a very mean spirited way. as i said, ive heard this crap and this radio host's show was just the same. brings back bad memories and NO, i'm not going to get over it.

why can't people like this show some damn control and tolerance and stop airing crap like this?


bob

[Bob98SR5]

It is a sad world when the only people you can joke about are from your own race.





actually, not even then.....


Really? I am pretty sure I have yet to see Chris rock unable to get work, yet he makes racist jokes all the time...hmm....Dave Chappelle does "white impressions", but I have yet to see any backlash there. I am going to be the one to throw it out, it is ok to be racist as long as you are not white.


yeah, there is a double standard...no denying that. but again, context and medium: dave chappelle's stuff...well you know what its all about. there's no surprises what the material is going to be. second, its on cable tv, not public radio or public tv. i.e. you know what youre getting. now i dont know if that is a valid comparison to that radio show (e.g. is this a regular part of their show?? to make fun of other races?), but i betcha a box of donuts the answer is no.

that said, i do agree that racism goes both ways. personally, it disgusts me, even though from my own life experiences, i have my own prejudices too. but dare i ever say the N-word or something bad like that in my office, well, i should deserve every bit of social correction or firing. it shouldnt be tolerated and it should not be labeled as political correctness

bob

[Bob98SR5]

just one more step toward americans being unable to ever speak or do anything again. i absolutely cannot STAND stupid lawsuits and issues such as this one...they tie up the legal system, waste my tax dollars, and give people the completely wrong idea about what is wrong and what is right. if i were president, or a judge or something with the ability to decide on an issue such as this, i'd rule em out a big "GET THE F*CK OVER IT" and be on with my life.


eerrrghhh! hold on a sec...dont you think you are taking this a little far here in your assessment? havent there been other radio show hosts fired for non-racist things? now would you equate that to the decline of american's right to free speech? and the definition of free speech can be regulated. on the airwaves, in a plane, in a public park, etc. not saying that that is right, but every civil society has its own rules. don't like it? lobby for the change. but to say that examples like this contribute to the end of free speech (public or private)...well, i think thats a stretch.



just wait, someone is going to illegally tap my cell phone one day and then sue me for saying "herro?" when its my friends on the other line.


c'mon dude.



one of my favorite radio pranks was one host talking with a stuttering problem and the other talking with some sort of weird accent...how long before they get sued by people with stutter problems and weird accents? how long before no one is able to talk in any sort of different voice or accent for amusement? where exactly is the line drawn?


good question. only time will tell. with everything, someone will be offended. i am sure there are a lot of you who can't understand where i'm coming from and be offended or mad at what i write and vice versa...just as much as a stuttering person who listens to that show might be personally hurt by the show and just can't 'get over it' because of years of humiliation in school by people who thinks it funny. but if anything, talking about this stuff definitely helps give perspective and might change a mind or two.

bob

[Euphorickaty80]

Any sort of comment about someone wether it be because of a disability, a religious preference, a sexual orientation, or race takes at least 2 people. One to make the statement and the other to be offended. If noone is offended then there would be no such thing as offensive commentary or material. The reason that people make these types of remarks are because they get a reaction. Do you think that if noone reacted to these types of situations then they would continue? Its like teaching a child how to behave....Ignore the negative behavior and praise the positive.....



God i hope that makes sense.......lol

[oly884]

Bob, you sure went to town!

You shed a light on this that I can never begin to understand. I've never been on the receiving end of a racist joke ever in my life (the nerdy, smart kid, ALL the time though).

To your second point, you are completely right. The public did deal with them, plain and simple.

You brought up exactly what I was talking about when I said, "not being remotely racist." My point was that there's a fine line, what is funny to one person, is destructive to another. What make make one mexican laugh, may make a black very troubled. As a side note, I just watched the SNL best of Chris Farley and watched the skit where he goes on the Japanese game show. May I ask, and feel free to say no, is that offensive? I'm only doing this for my interest so I can attempt to understand. People laugh at the funniest things, but when it targets them, the fun has to stop. Please don't take that as any attack or rude gesture to you, not my intent at all, you know me, Bob. Of course, I say that because I've never been on the receiving end of a racist joke. I'm not going to attempt to say they are equal, but I was a HUGE nerd back in the day (still kinda am), and I do see the avenue where jokes can bring back very bad memories.

As for the tolerance, where should it lie? Should tolerance lie in the masses? Or should it be with the individual(s)? That being said, there was nothing tolerant of what was done, but I think there has to be tolerance from both sides. The one thing I DO see happening is, "intolerance will not be tolerated." Sure there are some thinks that I will NEVER tolerate (my old roomie for example), but it's such a small fraction of people that I do not have to encounter it often.

I want to share with you, and the rest of you guys, a quote from the article;


The initial airing of the call went unnoticed, but a rebroadcast after Imus's firing prompted an outcry from Asian-American groups. Vandergrift and Lay were initially suspended without pay, but Asian-Americans quickly demanded the same penalty applied to the much higher-profile Imus.

I wanted to point this out to show the dangers of what I see happening.

[oly884]

one of my favorite radio pranks was one host talking with a stuttering problem and the other talking with some sort of weird accent...how long before they get sued by people with stutter problems and weird accents? how long before no one is able to talk in any sort of different voice or accent for amusement? where exactly is the line drawn?


good question. only time will tell. with everything, someone will be offended. i am sure there are a lot of you who can't understand where i'm coming from and be offended or mad at what i write and vice versa...just as much as a stuttering person who listens to that show might be personally hurt by the show and just can't 'get over it' because of years of humiliation in school by people who thinks it funny. but if anything, talking about this stuff definitely helps give perspective and might change a mind or two.

bob



This is what happens when I don't read the whole thread and reply half way through, haha.

Bob, once again, you bring up a good point, and any of us who have not been on the receiving end of racist comments like you received can never understand. We simply can't, we can take past experiences and attempt to apply them, but it's far from the same. All I ask is that people, whether they are offended by certain jokes or not, realize what the dangers are of this.

[BruceTS]

As a side note, I just watched the SNL best of Chris Farley and watched the skit where he goes on the Japanese game show. May I ask, and feel free to say no, is that offensive? I'm only doing this for my interest so I can attempt to understand.


There is a big difference, when it's done on a show where everyone is involved, unlike calling an unknowing person and pulling a prank. Over the years I've learned just to ignore racist comments and usually avoid hanging out with people ignorant to the fact.

I remember going to the Comedy Club where the comedians act was belittling people in the audience, about halfway through the act he remarks out toward the back, like he was asking someone "OK, how many jokes is that?" I quickly remarked back "One!" the audience busted out laughing. In his disgust, tried a failing comback. Needless to say I had everyone laughing again. He quickly switched gears.......

[oly884]

Cool, thanks Bruce. Makes good sense.

[skyrat]

Anyone here that know me knows that I think Political Correctness is bad for individuals and bad for the country.

When Chappelle or Chris Rock do something idiotic on their club show they sell tickets or they don't. That is the free market working, and almost never makes news. I avoid them like the plague because talk that is meant to stereotype a person on race is cruel and wrong. Period.

When Imus or the knucklehead jocks above say something over the airwaves that we all own, that is something else. We don't have to put up with it, but the reason Imus was fired is that the free market works differently over the airwaves. Those personalities have something to sell. Now, they are not selling tickets, they are selling airtime. Nothing mentioned here comes to the threshold of FCC sanctions, nor should it. But, the persons that support their programming do so by purchasing airtime on the show. When the personality says something they do not want to be associated with, the free market kicks in differently. When there is enough uproar about something and the people that sponsor the show no longer want to continue that sponsorship, or be associated with the show. That is how the free market works in the land of public airwaves. That is why Imus was fired. Not because he did not apologize, and not because of PC. Just the free market.

It is sort of like the difference between a democracy and a representative republic.

[fustercluck]

Anyone here that know me knows that I think Political Correctness is bad for individuals and bad for the country.

When Chappelle or Chris Rock do something idiotic on their club show they sell tickets or they don't. That is the free market working, and almost never makes news. I avoid them like the plague because talk that is meant to stereotype a person on race is cruel and wrong. Period.

When Imus or the knucklehead jocks above say something over the airwaves that we all own, that is something else. We don't have to put up with it, but the reason Imus was fired is that the free market works differently over the airwaves. Those personalities have something to sell. Now, they are not selling tickets, they are selling airtime. Nothing mentioned here comes to the threshold of FCC sanctions, nor should it. But, the persons that support their programming do so by purchasing airtime on the show. When the personality says something they do not want to be associated with, the free market kicks in differently. When there is enough uproar about something and the people that sponsor the show no longer want to continue that sponsorship, or be associated with the show. That is how the free market works in the land of public airwaves. That is why Imus was fired. Not because he did not apologize, and not because of PC. Just the free market.

It is sort of like the difference between a democracy and a representative republic.



I agree with you on all accounts Skyrat. You have an admirable grasp on the concepts at play. I think that political correctness distorted how the sponsors reacted to Imus' imprudence and hubris. I think there was politically corrected pressure applied on them from the race profiteers (propheteers) whose infamy increases exponentially and directly opposite their credibility by the day....

[skyrat]

I think that political correctness distorted how the sponsors reacted to Imus' imprudence and hubris. I think there was politically corrected pressure applied on them from the race profiteers (propheteers) whose infamy increases exponentially and directly opposite their credibility by the day....

ditto

[expatoz]

I would like to weigh in on this.

I am please to see some people using the word "understanding". "Tolerance" is wrong because by its very nature it indicates you are "putting up with" rather than seeking understanding and acceptance.


I deal EVERY day with racism, stereotyping, sexism and other forms of bullying because I am am a teacher. Kids do it to each other all day long. We are very proactive at out school about deliberately teaching understanding and acceptance. It's a long hard road for these kids who are getting bombarded by all forms of media that tend to justify intolerance and all forms of bullying as humor (sic) and the old favorite "I was just kidding".

Fact is, you do not know how your message (humor/statement/comment) may be taken (recieved) by another person. Like IM and email, much of the message can be lost in the translation. For this reason you have to become a discerning person with the words you use. There's plenty to joke and talk about without denigrating a person who may stutter, walk with a limp, has green skin, grey hair, is gay, is the opposite sex, has one parent..........

In the public area there is no room for flippancy when using humor to describe someone. To some extent it is also not a measure of whether you pay for a service and therefore it is open slather. I buy a newspaper and I expect it to be free from adolescent comments and view points. I will certainly support the right to express an opinion that is supported by evidence, but too much today is people just liking to hear themselves. The sad thing is that there are professionals being paid big bucks to get a reaction and that we all buy into it, me included. I often question myself over my practice of listening to Howard Stern on Satellite Radio (but that's another issue!)

There's a great book called The Phantom Tollbooth written in about 1970. In it some of the characters visit a fanciful place called Dictionopolis. There you buy letters and words that allow you to communicate. Because you have to buy the right to speak or write, you chose your words well and don't waste them. Interesting thought...

I wholeheratedly support ERACISM - erase racism (and all forms of bullying.) I hope you will too!

Thanks
Mark

[fustercluck]

There is another document written about 1789 called the bill of rights. In the first amendment we are guaranteed the freedom to speak our minds without federal abridgment. I agree that society should not tolerate ignorant speech, but the consequences must come from society, not from government or it's myriad tendrils.

[skyrat]

There is another document written about 1789 called the bill of rights. In the first amendment we are guaranteed the freedom to speak our minds without federal abridgment. I agree that society should not tolerate ignorant speech, but the consequences must come from society, not from government or it's myriad tendrils.

Absolutely,
And yet another document written over a period of about 2500 years and finished about 1950 years ago, who's values our nation was founded on. My goal, with mixed success, is to follow something written to the church in Ephesus.

"Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen." Ephesians 4:29

We have the right to do much.
However, we should not do much of what we have the right to do.

[BruceTS]

There is another document written about 1789 called the bill of rights. In the first amendment we are guaranteed the freedom to speak our minds without federal abridgment. I agree that society should not tolerate ignorant speech, but the consequences must come from society, not from government or it's myriad tendrils.



This incident wasn't government related, simply a public outcry.... totally different.

[fustercluck]

There is another document written about 1789 called the bill of rights. In the first amendment we are guaranteed the freedom to speak our minds without federal abridgment. I agree that society should not tolerate ignorant speech, but the consequences must come from society, not from government or it's myriad tendrils.



This incident wasn't government related, simply a public outcry.... totally different.


understood. My post was to respond to another point being made. If private sector consequences are endured, then fine. The other gentleman sounded as though he thought that this sort of speech had no place in society and so some omnipotent authority should police it. Therefore, my response...