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.


Race-hate words found not illegal

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 09:23 AM


And maybe you need to read the bill of rights and the constitution again. When you start deciding what is free speech and what is not. It is a bad thing. Because people like you will mix personal feelings with the common good. These are bad things and lead to one place. Check out Germany in the 1930s. They also thought they were doing the so called right thing.


I wondered whether I had missed something, but no, I was right to respond to your rather snarky response with a WTF!. Australia does have a Constitution, but no Bill of Rights appurtenent to it. And as best I read it, the Australia Act of 2003 ( the Oz Constitution) doesn't mention free speech.
I'm now waiting for your best Emily Latella impersonation. "Never mind."

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 09:32 AM
reply to post by alien

I have to say this.
I am constantly, bringing to others attention,this...
Can't you post without cussing?

I forgot to ask before this a play thread
or a serious one?

[edit on 10-8-2010 by mamabeth]

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 09:34 AM
Sorry if my earlier post was denigrating to anyone.

I will repeat what I meant again without the words.

I will stand along side the one using words, I will stand along side the one being denigrated.

But words have no power, force is the power.

Once words are determined to be illegal, does not the VERY PERSON using words become illegal?

Shakespeare had no power except to expand theater.

Hitler had the power to enforce his words, that is the DIFFERENCE.

Words inspire, you either inspire or you use FORCE.

Who has the force?

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 11:17 AM
First of all, yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater is not about banning a word. It is about banning the action of misrepresentation of an emergency situation. The analogy is intended to show that freedom of speech is not meant to be construed as, "say what you want when you want." Freedom of speech is actually intended to mean you are free to express your opinion about things. You are doing that right here, right now. Your freedom to speak has not been infringed.

Making threatening remarks and/or making remarks with the sole intent of disrupting the state of affairs is not expressing an opinion.

However, speaking about "hate" legislation: hate is a feeling.


S: (v) hate, detest (dislike intensely; feel antipathy or aversion towards)

You cannot outlaw a feeling. Outlawing a words usage simply because of the feeling it evokes is tantamount to or a short step away from outlawing the feeling itself. The same goes for worsening a punishment for a crime because of the feeling that may have motivated it.

Human beings are entitled to feel however they want. You cannot argue that and that entitlement does not need to be written down.

Expression of those feelings is done through language. We use and propagate taboo language because it allows us to express our feelings in ways that the normal language cannot.

If you want to erase the stigma of taboo language you do not outlaw it. This will make the word come into common usage in social circles in the same way you loved to use curse words when your parents weren't around. The more taboo a word is the more people will want to use it.

If you want to end the usage it can only be done by the majority of the populace scolding and ostracizing those that use it which is an educational approach rather than a violent or legal one. If you want to erase the stigma then bring the word into common usage and adapt it to mean something different.

The First Amendment

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Thats what was written.

I'm pretty sure, though, that those who wrote that have this:

common sense

–noun sound practical judgment that is independent of specialized knowledge, training, or the like; normal native intelligence.

On a personal note:

Stop being cry baby sissies. Waaah you're offended. So what? Who cares? Grow up and stop being such a baby. I spent all of high school being affronted by all kinds of insults. We all do. This world is full of sissies, I swear. You are offended by someone or something? Simple, don't associate with it. The end.

[edit on 8/10/2010 by dbloch7986]

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 11:28 AM

Originally posted by dbloch7986
On a personal note:

Stop being cry baby sissies. Waaah you're offended. So what? Who cares? Grow up and stop being such a baby. I spent all of high school being affronted by all kinds of insults. We all do. This world is full of sissies, I swear. You are offended by someone or something? Simple, don't associate with it. The end.

How should this have been handled then? Should it have been ignored?

It was and look how that turned out.

This kind of reasoning seems to be getting 'common' again. What does that mean for the future?

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 11:35 AM

Originally posted by Dark Ghost
I see what you are saying, but I still stand by my comments before. Bigotry is due more to a lack of tolerance for those that are different than it is a lack of intelligence or ability to reason.

You're correct to point out that some bigotry is slightly different to a lack of intelligence.
This tends to be borne out of a weariness and intolerance of anybody different.
I actually believe that many people who think along these lines are more ''culturalist'' than ''racist''.

This could be used as more of an excuse in the old days, when different races and cultures were more novel, but most people growing up nowadays have less excuse, due to adequate experiences with people of all different races.

I'm assuming many racist people come to their beliefs because of negative personal experiences and observations about the race that they are prejudiced against.

These are the people that I was referring to as having a lack of intelligence and reasoning skills.

For some people to not be able to see that the connection between ''A black man robbed me'' to ''Blacks are robbers'' is illogical and flawed, denotes a lack of intelligence and reasoning.

Originally posted by Dark Ghost
Intelligence or a lack of empathy? There are extremely smart people without a shred of empathy, and very simple people who are in abundance of that attribute. If I meet 5 people with blue skin (assuming they are a race for argument's sake) and decide they all talk too much, am I being racist when I avoid engaging in conversation with other people with blue skin I am yet to have met? What if the number of people I have met with blue hair rises to 25, 50, 75, 100...and I still feel the same way? At what point have I stopped being racist and woken up to reality?

It may show a lack of empathy, but it also shows a lack of intelligence to not be able to objectively analyse your own viewpoint.

Your hypothetical example of blue people is unlikely to be replicated in experiences with people from races that we come into contact with.
For example, if you think: ''All Jews are clever'', ''All Blacks are muscular'' or ''All Japanese are inscrutable'', then it's not going to take you long before you find someone of these races that doesn't fit the stereotype, which should make an intelligent, logical person stop believing the stereotype.

There may be some general truth in these and other stereotypes, but if you start automatically associating a race with their supposed stereotype, then you might get into some difficulty.

Originally posted by Dark Ghost
That is true and I think most people are guilty of doing this from time to time. But isn't this simply human nature? We prefer to be amongst those we like and those who like us. We tend to get on better with people that have been exposed to similar life experiences and social-economic upbringings that we have.

I think it is human nature, and there does appear to be an evolutionary advantage in ''looking after your own'' and being weary of outsiders.

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 11:36 AM
reply to post by masqua

(Second line wipes his hands off)


posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 12:46 PM
Yep.. Whats so freaking funny about this is it is many of the dark skinned peoples fault!

They throw those words around themselves so often, they have taken the sting out of them and they have become common place.

They did the very thing whites could not do. They made calling them the N word acceptable in society.

This is Really too Funny.. I hope I am not the only one who sees the irony in this.

If the dark skinned people who made these words popular would not have been this stupid this guy might have lost his case. He can thank an N word for that.

But now in music and culture we see these words being used all the time by both whites and blacks as if this is normal.. so the judge recognized it.

I am not racist, I know lots of whites who are just as stupid and lots of dark skinned people who are kind, proper, intelligent human beings. They agree with me. I say, if the shoe fits...

I think i'm going to print this thread out and frame it.

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 02:09 PM
reply to post by masqua

I understand your concern. However the Holocaust came about as the result of the desire of a group of men running a very powerful snd controlling government. So if you fear another Holocaust the the last thing you should want is to give the government more power over your feelings and words. If you can't see that, then you are blind. The Third Reich got so much power because the people refused to stick up for themselves and instead let the government take charge

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 02:17 PM
Words should not be illegal. As nasty as the "N" word is, outlawing it has not made much real difference to its use. Obviously this is kind of tongue-in-cheek, but you'd think that for most of us living in "Free Democracy" TM, that life would be about less rules, not more... perhaps we should educate our children not to say "N" because it's wrong, not because they'll get arrested?

In the words of Lenny Bruce, via Dustin Hoffman...

WARNING PROFANITY!!! (sorry, kinda)

"It's the suppression of the word that gives it the power, the violence, the viciousness" Lenny Bruce.

Edit: forgot quote, oops.

[edit on 10/8/1010 by jokei]

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 02:33 PM
"it's the suppression of the word that gives it the power, the violence, the viciousness" - Lenny Bruce

When we allow words to have power over us, we've already lost the battle. Call me a bitch, and I'll probably agree. Call me the "c" word and I'll ask for an explanation. Call me what ever you want, I'm not going to respond emotionally. Why? Because that's what you want me to do! You call me a name to get a rise out of me, a one up so to speak. Why should I give you that kind of power? I can tell someone that I don't like them without ever having to call them stupid names.

If everyone would just understand that calling a person a name doesn't actually make any difference, then maybe we could get past the grade school mentality.

Jokei that is one of my favorite Lenny Bruce quotes.

[edit on 8/10/2010 by darkelf]

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:18 PM
As much as this word is truly hateful and offensive to any reasonable person, making it and words like it illegal would not be in the best interest of society.

If we arrested everybody in the United States that said it, we'd have to lock up most of the African-American Community along with the rest of the folks who still utter this "monster."

As dangerous and obnoxious this word really is to most people, it would be far more dangerous to outlaw it. What word would we outlaw next? Cracker? Homo? Retard?........... Then when all of the words that are offensive to people have been eliminated, we would revert back to our Neanderthal roots, and become mute like, not even able to utter a mere sound other than an occasional grunt or groan.

Where would it end? As it was stated earlier, who draws the line? Our best defense against these kinds of words is making the people who use them pariahs in our society. Shun them, until they have seen the error of their ways, ....................then they can be welcomed back into society.

[edit on 10-8-2010 by MY2Commoncentsworth]

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 05:58 PM
reply to post by tezzajw

Which words are offensive is strictly opinion. Therefore it is illegal, under the constitution which grants the freedom of expression, for a judge to punish someone for using any specific word.

The judge is clearly a complete idiot to think the n-word isn't offensive. He made the correct ruling but for the wrong reasons.

[edit on 10-8-2010 by truthquest]

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 06:01 PM
reply to post by truthquest

This is a different country tq. Where they believe that controlling free speech is a good thing.

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 07:28 PM
reply to post by Tyrannyispeace

As opposed to a country that believes being a foul mouthed abusive fool is a good thing... ??

[edit on 10-8-2010 by alien]

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 08:27 PM
reply to post by alien

Well, never said that anywhere is perfect, at least the US does not attempt to circumnavigate free speech.

Except of course, our free speech zones.

Gotta love them!

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 09:17 PM

Originally posted by masqua

Originally posted by tezzajw
Another case of 'sticks and stones will break my bones, but names can never hurt me.'

Perhaps, although I'd bet many broken noses and black eyes hurt quite a bit after someone gets punched in the face for using them against someone else. Use those words against myself or any other member of my family and I'd likely be up on assault charges.

Although, in this instance, I am a little surprised that the Judge took a common sense approach to how the word was used.

Yeah... and I sure hope I'd get a different judge than that robed racist when my assault case comes up for trial.

Common sense: read lowest common denominator. No intelligence rqd.

As we all know from reading lots of ATS news articles, free speech isn't always free.

Yeah. Yelling 'FIRE' in a crowded theatre, joking about bombs in a suitcase at the airport or even picking on redheads are rights too, as much as making racially disparaging comments in an ethnic community should be, correct? Go ahead and try to use those rights. It might be enlightening.

Unbelievable. That retiree needs his meds boosted a bit and that judge needs a refresher in civil law.

Spot on, spot on, I agree with you. People always say it's just words and sticks and stones yada yada yada, but how would they like it if everyday day in day out that persons mother or sister was being called a defamatory name sexually and said judge said that's not illegal. Or that judge or retiree going to the grocery store and coming to the counter is referred to as Spud N****r (I knew this from my family history of how the irish was treated in america) this or that, and everywhere they went they where always called an ethnic slur. The judge is a closet racists thinking he can be cute and use the law to protect the racism. He thinks it's okay since he's in the majority, but lets see him having to deal with racism on whites if he was in another country populated by another people, he would be screaming racism.

There's a movie that people should see called White Man's Burden, it has John Travolta and Harry Belafonte in it. The movie was a good movie and it came out back in 1995, but it did poorly in the movie theater. When you see the first 10 minutes of the movie you will get the hint. Many of us whites aren't understanding the world is changing, from my family prospective they know but don't like it. And what I keep hearing from others boiling it down is that we should be the ones on top and everybody else on the bottom, thats it. That judge did a disservice to not only society but to "our" people, because not enough individuals who can are saying that your behaviour is not to be tolerated. Many of these fools do this because they feel that they will be protected by their own for doing things like this and more. If they knew that there was no safe place, they would change their behaviour and act nice.

Some may say that well this judge was following the law, well slavery was law too, women couldn't vote by law too, just following orders that where set down and not using your damn head can get a whole society in trouble. I wonder who else said that they where just following orders or following the rule of law set by the govt.. It's people like this retiree and this judge who make it difficult for everybody to have peace and get along. And for the person who was saying ooh the N word this or that, here's a little history leason. How would you feel if you and your family or just your family was taken as slaves to be property all over the new world. And when you get here, your mom or wife or sister is raped by the owner anytime he wants and there was nothing you can do about it. Then your females look as you as being unable to protect them so they become more of a leader of the family since you are unable to protect them. Then when slavery is ended your considered 2nd class citizens and are hunted by the klan and mobs of people to get rid of you, while as before as slaves, your wife or mom or sister is getting raped and the perpetrator not only isn't getting arrested but is telling what he did.

This keeps going on until the 1950's and 1960's until laws start to be enforced and such to enable you to be a man and woman just like the majority in this country. And even back then to now, we still have racism but not as outward as it was back then. What would that do to your sense of worth or well being or even what you think about this country. As I stated before, that judge didn't do us or our society any favors. All he did was to make our trip into minority status more bumpy than before.

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 09:33 PM
Wow, what about the "F" word - everyone has wore that one out!

I take more offense to people who call others retard, idiot, jerk, etc than I do actual cuss words. I've seen that right here on ATS - yep. Not nice, not nice at all.

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 10:26 PM

Originally posted by masqua
Perhaps, although I'd bet many broken noses and black eyes hurt quite a bit after someone gets punched in the face for using them against someone else. Use those words against myself or any other member of my family and I'd likely be up on assault charges.

I would hope you are above doing something like that over a word. It is something to be just walked away from. Especially that word.

From Wikipedia:

The variants neger and negar, derive from the Spanish and Portuguese word negro (black), and from the pejorative French nègre (n-word). Etymologically, negro, noir, nègre, and n-word ultimately derive from nigrum, the stem of the Latin niger (black) (pronounced [ˈniɡer] which in every other grammatical case, grammatical gender, and grammatical number besides nominative masculine singular is nigr-; the r is trilled).

I personally edited out the n-word and replaced it with the n-word if you get my drift.

So this word is very misunderstood. I remember I had my first male teacher in the sixth grade and what made it really cool was that he was black after a lifetime of hwite female teachers. I remember one time he went off on a rant about the n-word meaning "not good" or one time he said "less than" even then I sensed something was wrong and that this was an urban legend.

Anyway sticks and stones...

[edit on 10-8-2010 by LoneGunMan]

posted on Aug, 10 2010 @ 10:48 PM
It seems to me it is clearly a matter of good or bad manners.

I've been called whitey, honky, the B word and it does not bother me. I just consider the source.

I do reserve the right to use and say any word I so desire. However, my parents instilled in me good manners and taught me not to be offensive.

No one has the right to tell us what words to use...ever.

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in