View Poll Results: Should certain symbols deemed racist,offensive or threatening be banned by the Gov.?

Voters
34. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes-banned on your own property,but not a crime.

    1 2.94%
  • Yes-banned on your own property and a crime.

    1 2.94%
  • Yes-banned where ever regular protest are allowed but not a crime.

    1 2.94%
  • Yes-banned where ever regular protest are allowed and a crime.

    0 0%
  • Yes-banned on someone else's property or at a school or workplace,but not a crime.

    2 5.88%
  • Yes-banned on someone else's property or at a school or workplace and a crime.

    2 5.88%
  • No-The government has no business deeming any symbol illegal anywhere.

    26 76.47%
  • Other.

    4 11.76%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 31

Thread: Should certain symbols deemed racist,offensive or threatening be banned?

  1. #21
    Goddess of Bacon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Last Seen
    05-28-12 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,988

    Re: Should certain symbols deemed racist,offensive or threatening be banned?

    Quote Originally Posted by Korimyr the Rat View Post
    Pretty simple difference. If I hang a noose over someone else's desk, I'm implying that I'm going to string him up. If I hang a noose over my own desk, I'm implying that I'm going to string someone up, or possibly that someone else wants to string me up.
    If I put a noose on my desk, it means I'm horny and looking for some bondage.

  2. #22
    Sage
    Laila's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Last Seen
    04-28-17 @ 01:48 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    10,095

    Re: Should certain symbols deemed racist,offensive or threatening be banned by the Go

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Should certain symbols deemed racist,offensive or threatening be banned by the government?

    Yes-banned on your own property,but not a crime.
    Yes-banned on your own property and a crime.
    Yes-banned where ever regular protest are allowed but not a crime.
    Yes-banned where ever regular protest are allowed and a crime.
    Yes-banned on someone else's property or at a school or workplace,but not a crime.
    Yes-banned on someone else's property or at a school or workplace and a crime.

    No-The government has no business deeming any symbol illegal anywhere.

    other.

    Please note that a criminal offense is a misdemeanor or greater. A misdemeanor is punishable up to six months in jail.


    New California law bans displaying nooses after Sarah Palin, Barack Obama effigies

    California law already bans threatening displays of swastikas and burning crosses. Now add nooses to the list.

    On Thursday, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed legislation making such displays punishable by up to a year in jail and a fine of up to $5,000.
    I don't want to see swastikas or a KKK hood or a hanging effigy of anyone.
    But i wouldn't want it to be a crime or the Government to get involved in telling me what is offensive or not which they have done anyway. I'd like to be the judge of that and i do always have the option of walking away.

    That is how we have gotten to the stage where we are now. "Omgz, ban the 'black boards' because it is offensive to Black people'
    Last edited by Laila; 08-08-09 at 08:53 AM.


  3. #23
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: Should certain symbols deemed racist,offensive or threatening be banned?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Baron View Post
    Besides, if we start banning things like the swastika we won’t be able to tell who the ***holes are.
    As I understand it, the "swastika" and many other symbols were co-opted by the Nazi party from their original use in some religions.
    Such religions still exist, and have members, a sadly large part of whom are also white supremacists.

    So perhaps not everyone who would wish to wear a swastika is by default then an asshole.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  4. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Should certain symbols deemed racist,offensive or threatening be banned by the Go

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Should certain symbols deemed racist,offensive or threatening be banned by the government?

    Yes-banned on your own property,but not a crime.
    Yes-banned on your own property and a crime.
    Yes-banned where ever regular protest are allowed but not a crime.
    Yes-banned where ever regular protest are allowed and a crime.
    Yes-banned on someone else's property or at a school or workplace,but not a crime.
    Yes-banned on someone else's property or at a school or workplace and a crime.

    No-The government has no business deeming any symbol illegal anywhere.

    other.



    Please note that a criminal offense is a misdemeanor or greater. A misdemeanor is punishable up to six months in jail.


    New California law bans displaying nooses after Sarah Palin, Barack Obama effigies

    California law already bans threatening displays of swastikas and burning crosses. Now add nooses to the list.

    On Thursday, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed legislation making such displays punishable by up to a year in jail and a fine of up to $5,000.
    Yes.

    I find dark skin to be a racist symbol.

    Dark skin should be banned.

    ***
    Wedding rings discriminate against gays.

    Wedding rings should be banned.

    ***
    Gays discriminate against women, and lesbians discriminate against men, therefore homosexuality should be banned.

    Heterosexuality includes both sexes, so it can stay, but bisexuality encouraged among young hot collage teens washing cars in bikinis to raise awareness.
    Last edited by Jerry; 08-08-09 at 01:27 PM.

  5. #25
    DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
    Apocalypse's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Israel
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    17,171

    Re: Should certain symbols deemed racist,offensive or threatening be banned?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    As I understand it, the "swastika" and many other symbols were co-opted by the Nazi party from their original use in some religions.
    Such religions still exist, and have members, a sadly large part of whom are also white supremacists.

    So perhaps not everyone who would wish to wear a swastika is by default then an asshole.
    The Nazi swastika and the original swastika(Buddhism's or what-ever's symbol), are different in their shape and appearance.
    "The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis."

    Dante Alighieri

  6. #26
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    17,976

    Re: Should certain symbols deemed racist,offensive or threatening be banned?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    The main reason that symbols are banned in the military is not so much about "image" as it is about not wanting to offend which ever territory/country a particular soldier is in at the time. It wouldn't exactly do to send a soldier to Israel if he/she has a tattoo of a swastika on their head now would it?

    And yes I know this also has to do with image...but a different kind than you were referring to.
    No...this is not the main reason. If it were, then crosses would be banned as well. I can get a cross on my forearm. Would that not offend Sauds during training? I kbnow it would because I know the culture and I know that it is prohibited for even us to wear crosses around our necks (showing). Nothing states that we can't get a religious tatoo.

    It very much is about the "ambassador" image and good order. Hate and gang associated symbols are prohibited because it can cause disorder amongst the ranks and it doesn't look good to the civilian public for their military to look like a gang of thugs. An embassy guard with "sleeves" down his arms while in the "Charlie" or "Delta" uniform looks nasty and thusly reflects poorly on what America's image is pretended to be.
    Last edited by MSgt; 08-08-09 at 02:23 PM.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

  7. #27
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: Should certain symbols deemed racist,offensive or threatening be banned?

    Quote Originally Posted by Apocalypse View Post
    The Nazi swastika and the original swastika(Buddhism's or what-ever's symbol), are different in their shape and appearance.
    This is interesting: [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika]Swastika - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

    Some of the examples given look very similar in shape, if not in appearance, to the symbol used by the Nazi party.

    So I would agree with your statement.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  8. #28
    Baby Eating Monster
    Korimyr the Rat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Laramie, WY
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 02:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    18,709
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Should certain symbols deemed racist,offensive or threatening be banned?

    Quote Originally Posted by Apocalypse View Post
    The Nazi swastika and the original swastika(Buddhism's or what-ever's symbol), are different in their shape and appearance.
    They're actually quite similar. The main difference is the red/white/black color scheme.

    Of course, the swastika is also a holy symbol in my faith, and the colors red, white, and black are considered sacred, especially in combination. This is the exact reason that the Nazi party designed their flag the way they did.

  9. #29
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,856
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Should certain symbols deemed racist,offensive or threatening be banned?

    Quote Originally Posted by GySgt View Post
    No...this is not the main reason. If it were, then crosses would be banned as well. I can get a cross on my forearm. Would that not offend Sauds during training? I kbnow it would because I know the culture and I know that it is prohibited for even us to wear crosses around our necks (showing). Nothing states that we can't get a religious tatoo.

    It very much is about the "ambassador" image and good order. Hate and gang associated symbols are prohibited because it can cause disorder amongst the ranks and it doesn't look good to the civilian public for their military to look like a gang of thugs. An embassy guard with "sleeves" down his arms while in the "Charlie" or "Delta" uniform looks nasty and thusly reflects poorly on what America's image is pretended to be.
    The part in bold: Do the Saudis see the tatoo?

    The reason that I ask this is because I have never seen someone in any branch of the military except the Airforce and Navy wear anything but long sleeves while out of their base.... Inside a base might be different but outside? And I've never seen anyone in the Navy or Airforce have any religious type tattoos. Not saying that there isn't any...just saying what I've seen. I've always been under the impression that the only tattoos really allowed were those of a persons division and or military branch.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  10. #30
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    17,976

    Re: Should certain symbols deemed racist,offensive or threatening be banned?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    The part in bold: Do the Saudis see the tatoo?
    If it is on the forearm...then......yes. Uniforms are prohibited outside of the training bases in this region. Civilian attire is worn and this involves short sleeves. This may insult the tender emotions of some Muslims, but there is no requirment to cover this tatoo up. However, a cross around the neck cannot be visible.

    Only hate symbols and gang symbols are prohibited. Marines may get anything else they want as a tatoo just as long as they do not appear above the shoulders. Recently, the Marine Corps banned the "sleeves" because of appearance.
    Last edited by MSgt; 08-09-09 at 02:15 PM.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •