• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Seattle officials call for ban on 'potentially offensive' language

trfjr said:
this has become beyond absurd
we should go ahead and ban the words white black red and brown from ever being used in a phrase

"what color is that shirt Jimmy"
"I cant say it will offend someone"
Click to expand...

I remember when I was in the military, I gave some papers to one of my soldiers to get picked up by a representative of another company. He forgot the name of the person, so I asked him to describe the person in the unit that picked up the papers. He gave me almost every other description except that the person was black. There was only 1 black person in that unit. When I asked him why didn't he just say the person was black, his response was that he didn't want to offend someone by calling the person black.

It's such a shame that even saying the word "black" to describe someone is considered "offensive" to some.
 
fishinRod said:
no.......it has "racial connotations".....its a term that was once used to judge the skin tone or shade of AAs
Click to expand...

What's funny is even I don't remember that term being used and growing up and I used the term "brown bagging" it to refer to bringing a lunch from home when I was in school. Sometimes I think people dig too much into a phrase when the meaning has been long lost from it's origins.
 
TheNextEra said:
I remember when I was in the military, I gave some papers to one of my soldiers to get picked up by a representative of another company. He forgot the name of the person, so I asked him to describe the person in the unit that picked up the papers. He gave me almost every other description except that the person was black. There was only 1 black person in that unit. When I asked him why didn't he just say the person was black, his response was that he didn't want to offend someone by calling the person black.

It's such a shame that even saying the word "black" to describe someone is considered "offensive" to some.
Click to expand...

when is was young i worked at a furniture store and we got in some furniture that was made in Spain on the box it had the word "Negro" to describe the color and all the black coworkers were offended
 
TheNextEra said:
What's funny is even I don't remember that term being used and growing up and I used the term "brown bagging" it to refer to bringing a lunch from home when I was in school. Sometimes I think people dig too much into a phrase when the meaning has been long lost from it's origins.
Click to expand...

so instead of saying "brown bag".....they want them to say "sack lunch"...like that doesnt have connotations of its own:lamo
 
fishinRod said:
so instead of saying "brown bag".....they want them to say "sack lunch"...like that doesnt have connotations of its own:lamo
Click to expand...

That's the problem, you can pretty much find any meaning you want from a phrase. I remember not too long ago, someone used as an example saying some "common phrases" yet with the tone he used they sounded sexual. I'll have to see if I can find it again.

If people go looking to be offended, they will ALWAYS find something to be offended about.
 
TheNextEra said:
I would like them to stand up for my first amendment rights to say "Brown bagging it" when I am referring to my damn lunch that I am bringing from home.

This is political correctness on crack here.

Wait, can I say "crack" even because it may refer to a minority on drugs? :roll:
Click to expand...

but that is my point, what do you expect the ACLU, or any other entity, to do about this
stupidity cannot be outlawed
and this is nothing more than stupidity
there is nothing illegal for the ACLU to address ... but if you have found it, please share it with us
 
justabubba said:
but that is my point, what do you expect the ACLU, or any other entity, to do about this
stupidity cannot be outlawed
and this is nothing more than stupidity
there is nothing illegal for the ACLU to address ... but if you have found it, please share it with us
Click to expand...

Violation of the first amendment.
 
TheNextEra said:
Violation of the first amendment.
Click to expand...

this is the employer's directions to its employees for their official usage
nothing different than any other employer outlawing use of the terms **** and ****, only a tad more stupid
again, stupidity cannot (unfortunately) be outlawed
nothing in the law prevents the city of seattle from issuing stupid directions to its staff - for official business
 
Erod said:
So "citizen" is an offensive word now. Can't say "brown bag", "dinosaur", "birthday", "Halloween".....

What next? Are they going to outlaw "creepy ass cracka", too?

We've got to be near the Apocalypse.
Click to expand...

Keep on watching us, keep on constraining us, keep infringing upon our rights; this is what government does. You don't control it, and it does exactly these things. So take control of the government and stop it. It's your Republic, keep it.
 
Ikari said:
Keep on watching us, keep on constraining us, keep infringing upon our rights; this is what government does. You don't control it, and it does exactly these things. So take control of the government and stop it. It's your Republic, keep it.
Click to expand...

nothing here deprives you or any other citizen of their rights
seattle has only imposed a stupid restriction on terms/expressions which cannot be used for official business purposes
this infringes on your rights to free speech as much as the employer prohibiting use of personal cells phones in the work place
 
justabubba said:
nothing here deprives you or any other citizen of their rights
seattle has only imposed a stupid restriction on terms/expressions which cannot be used for official business purposes
this infringes on your rights to free speech as much as the employer prohibiting use of personal cells phones in the work place
Click to expand...

Yup, nothing to see here....move along.
 
justabubba said:
was i ever wrong in that speculation.
apologies!
here is the correct excerpt from the linked faux news article:
Click to expand...

Who gives a rats ass if it's expensive, the first ammendment is there to protect offensive speech.

Not happy make you feel good speech.
 
Fenton said:
Who gives a rats ass if it's expensive, the first ammendment is there to protect offensive speech.

Not happy make you feel good speech.
Click to expand...

don't know your age, so it is possible you have not entered the work force and are unable to recognize that when your employer tells you there are certain words/expressions you cannot use you will be expected to heed the employer's directive. the first amendment protects your right to free speech, but that does not trump your employer's right to restrict your speech while you are conducting official business
certainly, you can still insist on exercising your first amendment right, such that you say those things the employer has placed out of bounds while on the clock. but do not be surprised when you are then without a job for having violated the employer's edict
 
justabubba said:
don't know your age, so it is possible you
have not entered the work force and are unable to recognize that when your employer tells you there are certain words/expressions you cannot use you will be expected to heed the employer's directive. the first amendment protects your right to free speech, but that does not trump your employer's right to restrict your speech while you are conducting official business
certainly, you can still insist on exercising your first amendment right, such that you say those things the employer has placed out of bounds while on the clock. but do not be surprised when you are then without a job for having violated the employer's edict
Click to expand...

Oh please.

I'm obviously a mature individual, I'm a Conservative.

Your example may apply if those words were actually offensive.

But a Govt entity arbitrarilly passing laws or edicts against speech like the word " brown bag" exceeds the pale of common sense and I bet a dime to a dollar dollar that their new list of "offensive" words will be challenged.
 
Fenton said:
Oh please.

I'm obviously a mature individual, I'm a Conservative.

Your example may apply if those words were actually offensive.

But a Govt entity arbitrarilly passing laws or edicts against speech like the word " brown bag" exceeds the pale of common sense and I bet a dime to a dollar dollar that their new list of "offensive" words will be challenged.
Click to expand...
the forbidding of those expressions is stupid as hell
but notice such stupidity is neither a violation of law or the bill of rights
so sure, mock the stupidity
but don't share in the stupidity and insist there is anything unlawful about it
 
justabubba said:
the forbidding of those expressions is stupid as hell
but notice such stupidity is neither a violation of law or the bill of rights
so sure, mock the stupidity
but don't share in the stupidity and insist there is anything unlawful about it
Click to expand...

We have the right to be stupid here but please don't make me pay for anothers stupidity.
 
Heebie Jeebie said:
We have the right to be stupid here but please don't make me pay for anothers stupidity.
Click to expand...

i may have missed something

what were you required to pay for another's lawful stupidity?
 
People wonder were all the additional spending in blue states goes. What are the services that they can get by without in red states?

Well, here is your answer. Among other things, they are paying for idiotic panels of morons to make these chicken**** regulations and recommendations. This group deserves to have scorn rained down on them, to be mercilessly ridiculed and lampooned, and to be ridden out of the city on a rail.
 
Heebie Jeebie said:
Aren't those official's salaries paid by the public?
Click to expand...

ok, now i see where you were headed with that remark

trust me on this: you never want to set foot in DC
you are paying for an awful lot of stupidity there
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom