It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


South Carolina Senator wants to outlaw profanity AKA DESTROY THE 1ST AMENDMENT

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 08:45 AM
South Carolina senator Robert Ford wants to push a bill through that would make profane language a felony both VERBAL and WRITTEN.

Under the pre-filed bill, profanity could land you in jail for up to 5 years and/or cost you up to $5,000 in fines.

Child molesters get less time !!!

Fords reasoning skills are so simple minded, short sighted and myopic he shouldn't be working at a fast food drive through let alone be a state senator.

Which words are exactly considered profane is still unclear, but the bill does have a list of qualifications for profanity including words or actions that are lewd, vulgar or indecent in nature.

So which 1 or 2 people get to decide what we can and cannot say?
Which list will we need to memorize so we don't end up in a FEDERAL PRISON?

A state senator doesn't realize what he's proposing is violating the Constitution of The United States. That scares the hell out of me !!! oops, do I go to jail now? I just said hell. Oops, did it again. That could be a 10 year, $10,000 sentence. And of course nobody is ever going to slip. Nobody is ever going to make a mistake. Ford isn't accidently let an F bomb drop if he were to get into a car accident right?

Here's a direct link to the bill:

Here are a few sections from his bill

"Section 16-15-370. (A) It is unlawful for a person in a public forum or place of public accommodation wilfully and knowingly to publish orally or in writing, exhibit, or otherwise make available material containing words, language, or actions of a profane, vulgar, lewd, lascivious, or indecent nature.

(B) A person who violates the provisions of this section is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction, must be fined not more than five thousand dollars or imprisoned not more than five years, or both."

SECTION 2. Article 3, Chapter 15, Title 16 of the 1976 Code is amended by adding:

"Section 16-15-430. (A) It is unlawful for a person to disseminate PreviousprofanityNext to a minor if he wilfully and knowingly publishes orally or in writing, exhibits, or otherwise makes available material containing words, language, or actions of profane, vulgar, lewd, lascivious, or indecent nature.

Excellent so now schools are going to have to ban classic literature or chance being charged with a FELONY.

And what about the bible? Are bibles going to be banned everywhere in the state? No more bibles in churches, hotel rooms, swearing in's, etc. ?

SECTION 3. Section 16-15-305(A)(3) of the 1976 Code is amended to read:

"(3) publishes orally or in writing, exhibits, or otherwise makes available anything obscene to any a group or individual; or"


This bill is written under the guise of protecting minors but it's not exclusive to minors so this bill is a launching platform to charge whomever they like.

posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 08:45 AM
The 1st Amendment of the United States

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is the part of the United States Bill of Rights that expressly prohibits the United States Congress from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion" or that prohibit the free exercise of religion, laws that infringe the freedom of speech, infringe the freedom of the press, limit the right to peaceably assemble, or limit the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Freedom of Speech

Freedom of speech in the United States is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and by many state constitutions and state and federal laws. Criticism of the government and advocacy of unpopular ideas that people may find distasteful or against public policy, such as racism, are generally permitted. There are exceptions to the general protection of speech, however, including the Miller test for obscenity, child pornography laws, and regulation of commercial speech such as advertising. Other limitations on free speech often balance rights to free speech and other rights, such as property rights for authors and inventors (copyright), interests in "fair" political campaigns (Campaign finance laws), protection from imminent or potential violence against particular persons (restrictions on Hate speech or fighting words), or the use of untruths to harm others (slander). Distinctions are often made between speech and other acts which may have symbolic significance. Efforts have been made to ban flag desecration, for example, though currently that act remains protected speech.

So the African American senator is going to just ban profane language. So we can't swear anymore but he's not going to ban racist speech? He doesn't find the N word profane? I know I personally do and I'm caucasion.

I would never do the following but theoretically based on Ford's bill, I could actually take a S"]T on the American flag but couldn't actually say I did?????

I realize the 1st Amendment is not absolute but when we start banning words that people don't like for no other reason except they find those words distasteful, they are violating the 1st amendment. Ford wants to ban foul language because he finds it distasteful. Someone in his position should know better and those who are responsible for putting him in office should think VERY carefully before doing so again. This type of thinking is nothing short of Orwellian.

In my opinion, there's an even more disturbing part to this bill.

This bill includes written profanity. How Fahrenheit 451 ish of him.

“Local school boards may not remove books from school library shelves simply because they dislike the ideas contained in those books,” said the U.S. Supreme Court in Board of Education, Island Trees School District v. Pico in 1982.

“If we want to get rid of all books with inappropriate content, let’s get rid of the Bible. That’s where we’d start,” Moen said.

Moen encourages her English 250 class to face the book-banning issue by reading a novel from a list of historically banned books. Some of these books include The Great Gatsby, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, The Catcher in the Rye and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.

So now the Supreme Court would be interfering with Fords bill so is he going to take on the supreme court over this?

[edit on 24-1-2009 by jfj123]

posted on Jan, 24 2009 @ 08:47 AM
Existing thread here:

Please add further comments to the ongoing discussion.
Thank you

-thread closed-

for future reference:
Search ATS

new topics

log in