Freedom of speech? Not on our plane!!

[Qdrop]

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/07/national/07passenger.html

Air Passenger Is Grounded Over T-Shirt

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: October 7, 2005

RENO, Nev., Oct. 6 (AP) - A woman was ordered off a Southwest Airlines flight in Reno for wearing a T-shirt with the pictures of President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney and an obscene word.

The woman, Lorrie Heasley of Woodland, Wash., said she planned to file a civil rights complaint against the airline over the incident, which occurred Tuesday at Reno-Tahoe International Airport.

Ms. Heasley, 32, said she wore the shirt as a joke and wanted her parents, who are Democrats, to see it when they picked her up at the airport in Portland, Ore. Ms. Heasley, who sells lumber, argued that she had a right to wear it.

"I just thought it was hilarious," Ms. Heasley told The Reno Gazette-Journal. "I have cousins in Iraq and other relatives going to war. Here we are trying to free another country, and I have to get off an airplane - over a T-shirt. That's not freedom."

Marilee McInnis, a spokeswoman for the airline, said the shirt became an issue after several passengers complained as they boarded during a scheduled stop in Reno.

After several conversations with flight attendants, Ms. Heasley agreed to cover the word with a sweatshirt. When the sweatshirt slipped while she was trying to sleep, she was ordered to wear her T-shirt inside-out or leave. She and husband, Ron, chose to leave.

Ms. McInnis said Southwest rules allowed the airline to deny boarding to anyone whose clothing was "lewd, obscene or patently offensive."

Allen Lichtenstein, a lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union in Las Vegas, said Ms. Heasley's shirt was protected political speech under the Constitution. The real issue, Mr. Lichtenstein said, is that the airline allowed her to wear the shirt onboard and then objected only when passengers complained.

The flight originated in Los Angeles before making the stop in Reno. No one from Southwest complained about the shirt at Los Angeles International Airport, and neither the pilot nor crew members objected when she boarded the aircraft, Ms. Heasley said.

Ms. Heasley said she had been in touch with A.C.L.U. lawyers in Seattle and wanted Southwest to reimburse her for the last leg of their trip.

[ms.peachy]

Why did you feel it neccessary to post this in two places, Q?

[TonsOfFun]

two arguments

[ms.peachy]

two arguments
Right, I forgot, he's on a double dosage. *slaps forehead*

;)

[Qdrop]

Why did you feel it neccessary to post this in two places, Q?

i posted it in BF on accident.

but actually, i'm glad i did....cause you get 2 differant groups of people talking about it...
it's interesting hearing the differant views.....

[Ace42X]

I can see both sides. Generally I'd come down on the freedom of speech / expression side. People put too much stock in four letter words that most people use semi-frequently. You shouldn't get in trouble for using words you see on TV any day of the week. I mean, if it had been a plane full of nuns and school-children, maybe then I'd have a bit more sympathy for the airlines, but I got the impression it was the usual cult of Bush people with their insipid diffidence to the moron rather than a literal objection to a four letter descriptor.

[checkyourprez]

I can see both sides. Generally I'd come down on the freedom of speech / expression side. People put too much stock in four letter words that most people use semi-frequently. You shouldn't get in trouble for using words you see on TV any day of the week. I mean, if it had been a plane full of nuns and school-children, maybe then I'd have a bit more sympathy for the airlines, but I got the impression it was the usual cult of Bush people with their insipid diffidence to the moron rather than a literal objection to a four letter descriptor.


agreed, i doubt if it had clinton on their the reaction would have been the same.

[yeahwho]

agreed, i doubt if it had clinton on their the reaction would have been the same.

Clinton forgot to invoke God in his disasters.

American Foreign Policy is being dictated to Bush by God (http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2005/10_october/06/bush.shtml).

She's at her wits end if your asking me. A moron with her 15 seconds of fame. Thats it, her claim to fame is wearing a shirt that says, "Meet the Fuckers" and not wondering how it would offend say....like parents with kids trapped on a plane? Democrats have their idiot bloc too, she is right in her thoughts, but in the wrong forum...completly.

If she were truly clever she would have a shirt with the same pics and then just not changed the vowel.....or even better, "Meet the Inchwhippers".

[Ace42X]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2005/10_october/06/bush.shtml

And the bbc is accused of a LIBERAL bias...

http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,14173,1587440,00.html?gusrc=rss

[yeahwho]

And the bbc is accused of a LIBERAL bias...

http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,14173,1587440,00.html?gusrc=rss

That is some scary stuff, makes me want to rethink my T Shirt philosophy. Blair is setting the tone for Bush's portrayal in the media?

Yesterday afternoon, as newspapers and other agencies began inquiring into the story, the White House refused to comment. But later in the day a spokesman, Scott McClellan, said Mr Bush had "never made such comments."

However, Mr McClellan admitted he had not been at the June 2003 meeting referred to in the BBC2 programme. :confused:

[ASsman]

Im glad to see nothing has changed. It'ts pretty obvious is just people in certain positions feeling defensive.

[yeahwho]

Im glad to see nothing has changed. It'ts pretty obvious is just people in certain positions feeling defensive.

ASsman, you bitch! Fucker. Summer break MF. Everything has changed. We're smarter than shit now.

[ASsman]

ASsman, you bitch! Fucker. Summer break MF. Everything has changed. We're smarter than shit now.
Hahah. Naw moved and didn't have a computer. I only know what is going on from John Stewart.

[Qdrop]

the Assman cometh....

[Funkaloyd]

While I think that "fuck" should definitely be considered protected speech, what the airline says goes when you're on their property, and they should have the right to refuse service for any reason.

But when they next need a bailout, the government can say "Fuck off, fascists!"

[catatonic]

Obviously she knew her t-shirt could offend some people, and stirring up people's hearts to anger is the devil!

That's right, I'm serious.

[QueenAdrock]

If people can't deal with measly 4-lettered words, then fuck them.

[D_Raay]

And the bbc is accused of a LIBERAL bias...

http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,14173,1587440,00.html?gusrc=rss
I find it ironic that Bush and Blair are always playing the "trust me" card and the people in both nations do not trust them.

[valvano]

wouldnt the airplane be considered personal property of the airline, and they would reserve the right to require passengers to wear appropriate clothing???

:confused:

[K-nowledge]

This lady wanted to stir up controversy. If she wore it so her parents could see, it she could have done it at a different time. Nice excuse. Fuck is an offenesive word to a lot of people. Wether it had a picture of Bush or Bin Laden on it, it's still offensive in that context.

[Ace42X]

Fuck is an offenesive word to a lot of people. Wether it had a picture of Bush or Bin Laden on it, it's still offensive in that context.

As you are a "fuckhead" does that mean you won't be leaving your house, thereby protecting the world from your offensive nature?

[Classic Iconocl]

wouldnt the airplane be considered personal property of the airline, and they would reserve the right to require passengers to wear appropriate clothing???

:confused:

That's right. And citizens reserve the right not to ever give a FUCKing dime to that airline again.

[K-nowledge]

As you are a "fuckhead" does that mean you won't be leaving your house, thereby protecting the world from your offensive nature?
Can you have a normal conversation without berating someone? Give it a break man.

[Ace42X]

Can you have a normal conversation without berating someone?

Yes, I just dislike you strongly because you are an ignorant hick. You can take that personally if you want.

[K-nowledge]

Dude, it's time to end this little spat. Peace!




Oh, ignorant hick, I am not.

[ms.peachy]

That's right. And citizens reserve the right not to ever give a FUCKing dime to that airline again.
I am quite sure that if you care to research it, every airline in the US has a similar if not identical policy on record.

So, just don't fly anywhere. Stay home, and type out angry, inconsequential messages on the internet to a bunch of strangers instead. Yeah, that'll show them!

[yeahwho]

I am quite sure that if you care to research it, every airline in the US has a similar if not identical policy on record.

So, just don't fly anywhere. Stay home, and type out angry, inconsequential messages on the internet to a bunch of strangers instead. Yeah, that'll show them!

hahahahaha....you forgot to add, while you wear your old proverbial "Meet the Fuckers" T-Shirt! :D

[Classic Iconocl]

I am quite sure that if you care to research it, every airline in the US has a similar if not identical policy on record.

So, just don't fly anywhere. Stay home, and type out angry, inconsequential messages on the internet to a bunch of strangers instead. Yeah, that'll show them!

Them? Whom?

You are "quite sure". I don't have time to research your assertion, but do you care to back it up? I'll just bet there are a few airlines that have better things to do than impose political and cultural homogeneity on their passengers. Better things like KEEPING THE PLANE SAFE!

I fly several times a year, when I give public speeches.

Don't fear the person who wears a MEET THE FUCKERS t-shirt. Be very afraid of the person who blends in completely. When is the last time you saw a terrorist board an airplane wearing a FUCK THE STATE shirt and a green mohawk. Get over it. If a wear a Bush/Cheney shirt that reads FUGGIN AND SUGGIN, will that suffice?

[racer5.0stang]

Yes, I just dislike you strongly because you are an ignorant hick. You can take that personally if you want.

You shouldn't try so hard to get along with others.

[ms.peachy]

Them? Whom?

You are "quite sure". I don't have time to research your assertion, but do you care to back it up? I'll just bet there are a few airlines that have better things to do than impose political and cultural homogeneity on their passengers. Better things like KEEPING THE PLANE SAFE!

I fly several times a year, when I give public speeches.

Don't fear the person who wears a MEET THE FUCKERS t-shirt. Be very afraid of the person who blends in completely. When is the last time you saw a terrorist board an airplane wearing a FUCK THE STATE shirt and a green mohawk. Get over it. If a wear a Bush/Cheney shirt that reads FUGGIN AND SUGGIN, will that suffice?
Crikey, are you naturally daft, or do you work at it?

The issue of the offensive language has NOTHINGn - zero, zip, nada - to do with the safe operation of the airline. No one has asserted that the woman's shirt in any way posed threat of injury to anyone. How on earth did the dots in your brain get connected to think this is about 'terrorism'? Who claims that they were 'fearful' of the T-shirt?

Also, the political content of the shirt is entirely irrelevant. I know that is hard for some to accept, because the whole incident has been escalated by the involvement of the ACLU to a political level. However, the real crux of the issue in this case is the offending language. If the woman had worn a shirt that simply said 'fuckers' on it, without the pictures and the politics and all, the issue would have been clear. However it has become muddles with irrelevancies by idealogues.

Personally I don't feel inclined to go look up the policies of every major US commercial carrier for you, but if anyone else wanted to do it, I'd still be quite willing to wager money on it. Since you travel so often, as a highly in-demand public speaker and all, and since this issue is clearly so important to you, I am sure that next time you are due to fly, you will diligently reseach the policies of your chosen carrier so as to ensure that you are not giving a FUCKing dime of your money to an airline that would dare to think of themselves as a private enterprise with the right to refuse service to a nitwit who thinks that he/she is the center of the bleedin' universe and has a right to engage in offensive behaviour wherever and whenver they damn well please and fuck everyone else damn it.

[Funkaloyd]

Would it make a difference if the shirt was offensive due to political content rather than vulgarity?

[ms.peachy]

Would it make a difference if the shirt was offensive due to political content rather than vulgarity?
Quite possibly, but that would depend on the situation. That's not the case here. (No matter how badly some would like it to be.)

Let's answer your hypothetical question with another hypothetical question (or two):

Assume, for this purpose, that you are a young-ish black man, traveling with your wife and young child. (I've no idea who is and who isn't black here so if you are, then clearly you need not suppose it.) You're booked onto a flight from LA to NY. You check in, board, stow your stuff in the overhead, get comfy in your seats, etc.

After a few minutes, a man and a woman come down the aisle and find their seats across from your family. He is wearing a t-shirt that says "White Power". Hers says "KKK all the way". You child, who is learning her alphabet, says "Daddy, what's KKK?"

Do you risk starting a confrontation directly with these other passengers (and getting yourself removed from the flight for causing a disturbance)?

Do you think to yourself "Well, they have free speech, I'll just sit here and seethe quietly" and allow your dignity to be diminished?

Do you go to a member of the flight crew and say "Excuse me but I am not comfortable sitting next to these people as I find that extremely offensive?"

What would your reaction be if the response you got was effectively a shrug and "Yeah well, it's too bad but whaddya gonna do, it's a free country"?

[Classic Iconocl]

Crikey, are you naturally daft, or do you work at it?

I WORK AT IT.

The issue of the offensive language has NOTHINGn - zero, zip, nada - to do with the safe operation of the airline.

NO SHIT? GEE, I THOUGHT THAT WAS THE POINT I WAS MAKING.

How on earth did the dots in your brain get connected to think this is about 'terrorism'?

WHEN AIRLINES ARE FOCUSED ON IMPOSING THEIR BRAND OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS ON INDIVIDUAL PASSENGERS, THEY HAVE LESS RESOURCES TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THE PLANE. AS SOMEBODY WHO FLIES, I DON'T WANT HUMAN RESOURCES BEING DIVESTED FROM ENSURING THE SAFETY OF THE PLANE.

Also, the political content of the shirt is entirely irrelevant.

NO SHIT. SO WHY MAKE HER REMOVE IT?

Personally I don't feel inclined to go look up the policies of every major US commercial carrier for you

I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO. YOU CAN'T BACK UP YOUR OWN ASSERTION.

but if anyone else wanted to do it, I'd still be quite willing to wager money on it. Since you travel so often

ABOUT FOUR TIMES A YEAR.

as a highly in-demand public speaker and all

I DON'T GIVE A FLYING FUCK AT A ROLLING DONUT ABOUT THE EGO TRIP BS.

and since this issue is clearly so important to you, I am sure that next time you are due to fly, you will diligently reseach the policies of your chosen carrier so as to ensure that you are not giving a FUCKing dime of your money to an airline that would dare to think of themselves as a private enterprise with the right to refuse service

I WOULD NEVER DENY THEM THAT RIGHT. BUT I'M A PASSENGER TOO. I'M OFFENDED BY CENSORSHIP. I'M OFFENDED BY DO-GOODERS WHO SEEK TO CONTROL THE PERSONAL ACTIONS OF OTHERS. I'M OFFENDED BY AIRLINE RESOURCES BEING SPENT MONITORING PASSENGER WARDROBES INSTEAD OF KEEPING THE FUCKING PLANE SAFE.

to a nitwit who thinks that he/she is the center of the bleedin' universe and has a right to engage in offensive behaviour wherever and whenver they damn well please and fuck everyone else damn it.

SHE WASN'T GETTING UP IN PASSENGERS' FACES. SHE WASN'T DANCING AROUND THE PLANE, SCREAMING, CAUSING A DISTURBANCE. SHE WASN'T NAKED. SHE WASN'T TRYING TO BLOW UP THE PLANE. SHE WAS WEARING A FUCKING SHIRT.

YOU BETTER EASE BACK, SUCKER! I"LL STRAIGHT UP OPEN A CAN OF EXISTENTIAL CIRCUMLOCUTION OF ICONOCLASTIC ANTIDISESTABLISHMENTARIANISM ON YO ASS! (THAT WAS A JOKE)

[Ace42X]

Urm, using ['quote']['/quote'] tags will make your posting structure much more readable. That is without the apostrophes...

[EN[i]GMA]

Fuck is an offenesive word to a lot of people. Wether it had a picture of Bush or Bin Laden on it, it's still offensive in that context.

It's only offensive because people pretend it's offensive.

IF the shirt said 'screw Bush' instead 'fuck Bush', how would the situation have been different?

The two words have the same literal meaning, but one is 'dirty' and the isn't as much so?

What's 'wrong' about words are the meanings behind them, so how can two things convey the same meaning and one of them be wrong? How can anything conveying a salient point be considered obscene?

Yes, someone just going 'fuck fuck fuck' over and over again would be in the wrong, but similarly, someone going 'the the the' over and over again would not be doing much better.

[ms.peachy]

I WORK AT IT.

(y) Congratulations then, nice job.

I do want to thank Q for bringing this up though. As an ACLU supporter for most of my adult life, I find it very disappointing that they dare squander their resources (i.e., my money) on ridiculous, trivial, frivolous cases like this one, when there are REAL issues of free speech at stake around the country that are actually worthy, and then come to me hat in hand begging for more. Makes me very annoyed.

[Ace42X]

I concur with Enigma, there is a lot of childish brew-ha-ha about censorship, as if adults are somehow injured by an arbitrary collection of phonemes. Kids use as bad in the playground, if someone has a problem with it on a plane, FUCK THEM.

Bush is guilty of crimes against humanity, and it is the people with four little letters on their t-shirts getting in trouble?!?

FUCK YOU ALL.

[ms.peachy]

I disagree. There is a time and a place for everything. The airline - a private company - decided "this is not the time or the place, it is not the standard we adhere to" and were well within their rights to do so. It's quite simple, really.

[Classic Iconocl]

Thanks for the congrats, Peach. Good to know I'm doing something right.

I agree, the ACLU shouldn't be involved. This is out of their league, no?

BTW, since the literal meaning of FUCK is to breed, as in cattle, it gives a whole new angle to the Bush Cheney gangbang! Now I know what that guy really meant when he shouted, "Go FUCK yourself, Mr. Cheney!"

Moo. Moo-hoo.

[yeahwho]

Every business in the United States has a "we reserve the right to refuse service" clause, otherwise whats the use? This isn't about the adult world, it's about an all ages airline that wants to avoid parents having to explain fornication under consent of king.

Southwest airline does have verbage to this effect, it's in their contract of carriage passenger section. Southwest Airlines excercised that option, and actually they win in the "Fuck You" war. To me it's hilarious, that woman is an idiot IMO, but that is just my two cents. Her freedom of speech would be tossed out my business too.

The best bet for the people who would like to express themselves without the constraints of offending the majority of the flying public would be to fly fucker airlines and enjoy the freedom of the fucker skies.

SW Airlines policy is in the addendum, SWAirlines Customer, page 10 (http://www.southwest.com/travel_center/coc.pdf)
page starts blank, you'll have to scroll down.

that took about 3 minutes to research on google.

[Classic Iconocl]

For the record, I welcome anyone into my home office wearing MEET THE FUCKERS or FUCK BUSH or FUCK CLINTON or FUCK YOUR MOTHER, for that matter. As a writer, I will defend my words (and yours) against the childish mentality of any reactionary mob that would throw stones to silence them. Come to my home. I'll cook you some JUNK food.

BTW, a Google search on "Fuck Bush" returned 342,000 results. That took about 30 seconds to research. Sounds like it's becoming a popular refrain.

The word police. Novel concept. Don't think it will ever work. But if you want to try, then make sure you don't play Beastie Boys on your IPOD when you fly. Someone might hear the word "dick" and get offended. And watch out for those DICK Cheney shirts, while you're at it. Dick Cheney - that's an order! Or how about a George Bush t-shirt with the e missing: Gorge Bush? Don't forget your duct tape.

And by the way, when I used to put my balls on the line to protest the KKK all over Texas, I still supported their right to speak (and wear t-shirts).

I wonder what the Boys Beastie might say about this issue.

[ms.peachy]

For the record, I welcome anyone into my home office wearing MEET THE FUCKERS or FUCK BUSH or FUCK CLINTON or FUCK YOUR MOTHER, for that matter. As a writer, I will defend my words (and yours) against the childish mentality of any reactionary mob that would throw stones to silence them. Come to my home. I'll cook you some JUNK food.

Oh please, no need to be wso melodramatic. Your 'home office' is your private property, so of course you are free to welcome in anyone wearing anything YOU choose. As well as refuse admission, if you so choose. That is the whole bloody point - the airplane T-shirt debacle is not a 'free speech' issue, it is a matter of private ownership.

As far as what the Beastie Boys would say about it - I seem to recall that this same issue was dealt with last year on this very board, when a big sticky post with the title "DO NOT THREATEN THE PRESIDENT ON HERE" appeared, and then we all had big lovely discussions about what is protected speech and what is not and what the first amendmant guarantees you and what it doesn't ad nauseum. Guess some people didn't get that memo.

[yeahwho]

For the record, I welcome anyone into my home office wearing MEET THE FUCKERS or FUCK BUSH or FUCK CLINTON or FUCK YOUR MOTHER, for that matter. As a writer, I will defend my words (and yours) against the childish mentality of any reactionary mob that would throw stones to silence them. Come to my home. I'll cook you some JUNK food.

That is exactly what Southwest airlines did. They made a policy and welcomed people aboard to follow it.

I'm an avid defender of freedom of speech, the first amendment and the ability to express artistic freedom in all mediums. I'm also an advocate of childrens rights and setting limitations on how much exposure of hatred a child must endear in her/his formative years.

Do you get your kicks by saying the word fuck in mixed company, parents, kids, relatives and strangers? Because that borders on a mental condition. Plus you would get your free expression ass kicked severly by almost every liberal fucker I know if you pulled that crap in front of their kids.

[Documad]

I know the guy from the ACLU made a statement to the press, but I hope they don't end up taking her case. They lose their focus sometimes.

[Ali]

Hahah. Naw moved and didn't have a computer. I only know what is going on from John Stewart.Are you still in the States?

You were going to move either to Denmark or UK last time you sullied this board... I woundered where you'd ended up! I presumed somewhere without a decent internet connection!

[sam i am]

Crikey, are you naturally daft, or do you work at it?

The issue of the offensive language has NOTHINGn - zero, zip, nada - to do with the safe operation of the airline. No one has asserted that the woman's shirt in any way posed threat of injury to anyone. How on earth did the dots in your brain get connected to think this is about 'terrorism'? Who claims that they were 'fearful' of the T-shirt?

Also, the political content of the shirt is entirely irrelevant. I know that is hard for some to accept, because the whole incident has been escalated by the involvement of the ACLU to a political level. However, the real crux of the issue in this case is the offending language. If the woman had worn a shirt that simply said 'fuckers' on it, without the pictures and the politics and all, the issue would have been clear. However it has become muddles with irrelevancies by idealogues.

Personally I don't feel inclined to go look up the policies of every major US commercial carrier for you, but if anyone else wanted to do it, I'd still be quite willing to wager money on it. Since you travel so often, as a highly in-demand public speaker and all, and since this issue is clearly so important to you, I am sure that next time you are due to fly, you will diligently reseach the policies of your chosen carrier so as to ensure that you are not giving a FUCKing dime of your money to an airline that would dare to think of themselves as a private enterprise with the right to refuse service to a nitwit who thinks that he/she is the center of the bleedin' universe and has a right to engage in offensive behaviour wherever and whenver they damn well please and fuck everyone else damn it.

Amen.

[Whois]

I'll throw a log on the fire:

How does the fact that the airline is a 'common carrier' effect this case?

[sam i am]

I'll throw a log on the fire:

How does the fact that the airline is a 'common carrier' effect this case?

It doesn't. It's still private property. They have the right to refuse service to anyone.

Just like a restaurant or any business on private property in the US.

If there existed a nationalized common US carrier, run by the government with taxpayer dollars solely, then there would be more of a case for this being a freedom of speech issue.

It goes back to the old "Can you yell 'fire' in a crowded theater" argument?

On a public street or sidewalk or property, do what you want as long as it doesn't endanger public security. On a private street or business, etc., you are subject to the whims of the proprietor.

Thank God for private property.

[ms.peachy]

You know, I just went and had a good search of the ACLU's website because I intended to possibly write a letter expressing my disappointment that resources would be wasted on such frivolity, depending on what the ACLU had to say about its involvement in this case.

But I could find nothing, absolutely no mention of it whatsoever, anywhere on the ACLU site.

So let's hope that they have washed their hands of this woman, who has now had her 15 minutes.

[sam i am]

You know, I just went and had a good search of the ACLU's website because I intended to possibly write a letter expressing my disappointment that resources would be wasted on such frivolity, depending on what the ACLU had to say about its involvement in this case.

But I could find nothing, absolutely no mention of it whatsoever, anywhere on the ACLU site.

So let's hope that they have washed their hands of this woman, who has now had her 15 minutes.

They've probably not washed their hands, but rather farmed it out to the local chapter.

They KNOW it's a loser, nationally.

They'll only bring it back up if they want to lose more House and Senate seats next year....

[Classic Iconocl]

That is exactly what Southwest airlines did. They made a policy and welcomed people aboard to follow it.

I'm an avid defender of freedom of speech, the first amendment and the ability to express artistic freedom in all mediums. I'm also an advocate of childrens rights and setting limitations on how much exposure of hatred a child must endear in her/his formative years.

Do you get your kicks by saying the word fuck in mixed company, parents, kids, relatives and strangers? Because that borders on a mental condition. Plus you would get your free expression ass kicked severly by almost every liberal fucker I know if you pulled that crap in front of their kids.

Bullshit. "Liberal" Hollywood does it all the time. I suspect some of you are linguistic control freaks. There are no such things as "good words" and "bad words", only the context in which they are said. I wish you had left kids out of the argument, but since you brought them up, that's what I teach my children, in fact. Besides, were I to attempt to control their language, forbidden fruit tastes much sweeter.

I want them to be able to think for themselves, once they inevitably reach the point where they will be exposed to a broad spectrum of beliefs, ideologies, and words. And hopefully they won't become as reactionary as some of the posters on this board.

As for private property, our FUCKing Supremes (I don't mean Diana Ross) just undermined any solid application of that concept, with their ruling on imminent domain. But that's another topic for another time.

[sam i am]

As for private property, our FUCKing Supremes (I don't mean Diana Ross) just undermined any solid application of that concept, with their ruling on imminent domain. But that's another topic for another time.

Start another thread on it. It's a good topic for discussion....

[yeahwho]

Bullshit. "Liberal" Hollywood does it all the time. I suspect some of you are linguistic control freaks. There are no such things as "good words" and "bad words", only the context in which they are said. I wish you had left kids out of the argument, but since you brought them up, that's what I teach my children, in fact. Besides, were I to attempt to control their language, forbidden fruit tastes much sweeter.

I want them to be able to think for themselves, once they inevitably reach the point where they will be exposed to a broad spectrum of beliefs, ideologies, and words. And hopefully they won't become as reactionary as some of the posters on this board.

As for private property, our FUCKing Supremes (I don't mean Diana Ross) just undermined any solid application of that concept, with their ruling on imminent domain. But that's another topic for another time.

Some people are more easily provoked than others, how one expresses this manifestation of summoned emotion can explain alot about their intelligence.

I'll run this idea of "swearing in your kids curriculum" by the stupid parents who don't swear or appreciate people swearing around their pre-schooler's, toddlers and elementary age children. I've already viewed the results in action and I can assure you no swearing was involved in the resolution.

By the time a normal kid reaches junior high, with or without mom and dad, they'll have the word "fuck" figured out. It's not rocket science, it's respecting other peoples families, dipshit.

[Classic Iconocl]

Some people are more easily provoked than others, how one expresses this manifestation of summoned emotion can explain alot about their intelligence.

I'll run this idea of "swearing in your kids curriculum" by the stupid parents who don't swear or appreciate people swearing around their pre-schooler's, toddlers and elementary age children. I've already viewed the results in action and I can assure you no swearing was involved in the resolution.

By the time a normal kid reaches junior high, with or without mom and dad, they'll have the word "fuck" figured out. It's not rocket science, it's respecting other peoples families, dipshit.

Now you're twisting my words - I never proposed "swearing in your kids curriculum".

Are you the type who would ban Twain's Huckleberry Finn from curriculums because it uses the word "nigger"? Or Catcher in the Rye (tons of cursing)? Or Shakespeare (lots of sex and violence)? How about the Bible (again, sex and violence)? Better not play the Beastie Boys around your kids! Or let them surf the internet, especially sites where people call strangers "dipshit"! And don't even mention, well, you know... S-E-X. Maybe you will get lucky, and your friendly neighborhood pedophile won't assault them (which happens more frequently to children who are naive and sheltered).

Knowledge is power. Educating your children requires more than covering their ears and eyes.

As for intelligence - I'm not into cerebral cockswinging.

[Ace42X]

I'm not into cerebral cockswinging.

What about literal cock-swinging? Photos?

[ms.peachy]

Knowledge is power. Educating your children requires more than covering their ears and eyes.

The point is, people deserve the right to choose how and when they educate their children. You may think it's OK for your five year old to be exposed to certain language, but you have no right to decide it's OK for eveyone else's kids too.

[Ace42X]

but you have no right to decide it's OK for eveyone else's kids too.

"When you're on a privately own plane..."

[Classic Iconocl]

What about literal cock-swinging? Photos?

HAHA!! You know why my last name is Largen?

[Classic Iconocl]

The point is, people deserve the right to choose how and when they educate their children. You may think it's OK for your five year old to be exposed to certain language, but you have no right to decide it's OK for eveyone else's kids too.

I agree with you, Peachy. I do respect the wishes of other parents, and I observe a sense of public decorum.

BTW, I participated in a demonstration today, in protest of "free speech zones" at public universities. Anyone deal with that issue?

[Classic Iconocl]

Those of you in support of private ownership of property dictating public behavior on that property (I actually agree with this).

Would you also support the right of an airline to require their pilots and attendents to wear FUCK YOU t-shirts? A joke, yes. But let's see how consistent you are with this private ownership concept.

Devil's advocate I am.

[sam i am]

Those of you in support of private ownership of property dictating public behavior on that property (I actually agree with this).

Would you also support the right of an airline to require their pilots and attendents to wear FUCK YOU t-shirts? A joke, yes. But let's see how consistent you are with this private ownership concept.

Devil's advocate I am.

Sure. It would work out about as well as the smoking airline did.....

Unfortunately, we live in the REAL world of consumer choice. Any airline like that would quickly lose it's novelty....and novelty acts rarely, if ever, are profitable.

Who would finance such stupidity?

Oh, wait a second.....not an intellectual cock-swinger, eh? :D

[Classic Iconocl]

Sure. It would work out about as well as the smoking airline did.....

Unfortunately, we live in the REAL world of consumer choice. Any airline like that would quickly lose it's novelty....and novelty acts rarely, if ever, are profitable.

Who would finance such stupidity?

Oh, wait a second.....not an intellectual cock-swinger, eh? :D

Don't think I would sink my money into that venture, no.

[yeahwho]

I agree with you, Peachy. I do respect the wishes of other parents, and I observe a sense of public decorum.

But you disagree with me? Because that is what I'm saying.

So now I guess the next question is this, if you really wanted to make a statement why avoid flying Southwest Airlines? During your free speech zones activities, why don't you do something cool and take up a collection, book a flight on SWAirlines with say 70-100 students, all wear fucker T-Shirts under your jackets and make a scene. Now that would be cool.