It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

University’s Student Government Bans Offensive Speech

page: 3
20
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 06:55 PM
link   
Well, according to DHS, this is acceptable speech.

The employee who runs this website currently works for our government and has not been fired. In order to run this website, he had to notify his superiors and get approval.



But Kimathi has a side job. His own website is called “War on the Horizon.” There, he preaches hatred against homosexuals and whites and is literally preparing for what he believes to be the coming race war in America. Because he works for the federal government as he does with ICE (which focuses on law enforcement activities), in order to have an extra curricular activity like he does, he needs to obtain permission from his superiors. This he did by telling them that “his anti-white, anti-homosexual site, ‘War is on the Horizon,’ was just an entertainment site that sells concert and lecture videos.”


So, what's better? Do we let people like Kimathi be perfectly open about what they're doing so that we all know what kind of creeps they are, or do we try to force them to hide their ugliness under PC speech codes in order to preserve everyone's feelings? Me? I like to let people talk so I know precisely where I stand with them.




posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 06:56 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 

You...you...thought criminal!



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 07:00 PM
link   

tothetenthpower
reply to post by badgerprints
 



But unlike the evil "man", the kids are doing it for a good cause.


Perceived as a good cause, which is no different than how "The Man" sees it.

~Tenth


Yeah,
I should have put quotes around the "good cause" part.


It's funny how people don't see that the weakness they hate in others is usually their greatest weakness too.



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 07:03 PM
link   

kaylaluv

buster2010

kaylaluv

beezzer

kaylaluv

beezzer

kaylaluv
Gee, I wonder why ATS doesn't allow "offensive" language? Why do they remove posts that talk about how Hitler was a hero, and was right to do what he did? Why do they remove posts that bash the victims of Sandy Hook, etc.? Oppressing our freedom of speech, Shame on you, ATS!!!!!!!!!


Private club vs state university.

You're FOR this?


Look at the reasons behind it, Beezer. WHY does ATS not allow certain language? What is their reasoning behind their rules? What if I wanted to call you a certain name for someone who is not totally white? Do you think ATS would ding me for that? Why would they do that? Maybe because it would be ..... offensive?? What if you wanted to call me a certain 4-letter word reserved for females, starting with the letter C, and ending in the letters NT?

I think the student government has the same reasonings for their rule as ATS has for theirs. There is no reason to say hurtful, nasty things to each other when discussing ideas, issues, events, etc.


You should be free to say anything you wanted about me.

I don't have an obligation to listen or respond.


That's not what ATS thinks. If you are that mad about them restricting our speech, I'm surprised you haven't left the site in a huff.


What makes you think you have freedom of speech on this forum? You agreed to a set of rules when you joined this site and those rules state what you can or cannot say. I know I have been busted enough for breaking that rule.


I am very aware that we don't have freedom of speech on this forum. All those in favor of freedom of speech should leave this site in protest! Those who don't leave, really don't have as much problem with restricting speech as they claim to.


...and some of us respect the person's house we are in.. particularly when that person has been gracious enough to let us know what he or she expects while we are visiting.



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 07:17 PM
link   

kaylaluv
I am very aware that we don't have freedom of speech on this forum. All those in favor of freedom of speech should leave this site in protest! Those who don't leave, really don't have as much problem with restricting speech as they claim to.


No, I would say all those in favor of freedom of speech should stay here and discuss it. Protests, while they raise awareness, never really solve anything. It the discussions and negotiations that solve problems.



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Advantage

...and some of us respect the person's house we are in.. particularly when that person has been gracious enough to let us know what he or she expects while we are visiting.


I think this actually gets close to the root of the problem.
Simple courtesy isn't seen as a basic part of society any more.

People like to be perfect jackasses and then arrogantly proclaim their right to free speech as if that were an acceptable reason for treating another poorly.

Political correctness has absolutely no correlation with courtesy.

Seems like a little less nanny state and a little more personal accountability would go a long way.



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 07:30 PM
link   

badgerprints

Political correctness has absolutely no correlation with courtesy.



For that sentence alone, I wish I could star you 1000 times.
A lot of people today equate being polite with weakness, etc. I am unfailingly polite in real life. It seems as if the interpretation of civilized behavior and common courtesy has gotten skewed along the way.

Then again Im a Southern raised old woman. I likely could slit your throat and be polite about it.



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 07:31 PM
link   

badgerprints


Political correctness has absolutely no correlation with courtesy.



That. Right there. You've just hit the bulleye!

PC is in no way courteous or respectful.

PC is dishonest.

But honesty can probably be considered as vile hate speech nowadays.



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by badgerprints
 



What you've said is so simple and so true, it's down right shocking. I think that's what ATS is at least trying to accomplish. You can say pretty much what you like here, as long as it's within the bounds of decency and done intelligently. That philosophy could be extrapolated to the public as a whole, the only problem is there would need to be some open-mindedness and tolerance for those whose ideas do not agree and conform with those one holds. A lot of us feel convinced we're correct on everything- I include myself on some issues.



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Advantage

kaylaluv

buster2010

kaylaluv

beezzer

kaylaluv

beezzer

kaylaluv
Gee, I wonder why ATS doesn't allow "offensive" language? Why do they remove posts that talk about how Hitler was a hero, and was right to do what he did? Why do they remove posts that bash the victims of Sandy Hook, etc.? Oppressing our freedom of speech, Shame on you, ATS!!!!!!!!!


Private club vs state university.

You're FOR this?


Look at the reasons behind it, Beezer. WHY does ATS not allow certain language? What is their reasoning behind their rules? What if I wanted to call you a certain name for someone who is not totally white? Do you think ATS would ding me for that? Why would they do that? Maybe because it would be ..... offensive?? What if you wanted to call me a certain 4-letter word reserved for females, starting with the letter C, and ending in the letters NT?

I think the student government has the same reasonings for their rule as ATS has for theirs. There is no reason to say hurtful, nasty things to each other when discussing ideas, issues, events, etc.


You should be free to say anything you wanted about me.

I don't have an obligation to listen or respond.


That's not what ATS thinks. If you are that mad about them restricting our speech, I'm surprised you haven't left the site in a huff.


What makes you think you have freedom of speech on this forum? You agreed to a set of rules when you joined this site and those rules state what you can or cannot say. I know I have been busted enough for breaking that rule.


I am very aware that we don't have freedom of speech on this forum. All those in favor of freedom of speech should leave this site in protest! Those who don't leave, really don't have as much problem with restricting speech as they claim to.


...and some of us respect the person's house we are in.. particularly when that person has been gracious enough to let us know what he or she expects while we are visiting.


This isn't a house. This is the internet. People from all over the world can view what we have written here. This isn't some private home, where it's just a couple of people and the owner.



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 07:37 PM
link   

badgerprints

Advantage

...and some of us respect the person's house we are in.. particularly when that person has been gracious enough to let us know what he or she expects while we are visiting.


I think this actually gets close to the root of the problem.
Simple courtesy isn't seen as a basic part of society any more.

People like to be perfect jackasses and then arrogantly proclaim their right to free speech as if that were an acceptable reason for treating another poorly.

Political correctness has absolutely no correlation with courtesy.

Seems like a little less nanny state and a little more personal accountability would go a long way.

Bingo!

You have hit the proverbial nail on the head, and I would give you applause for this post, if I could.

It is not the person speaking from honest compassion, but those that hide behind false pretenses and use words to hurt, that offend.

These types are as clear as glass when observed, wrapping themselves in rules as excuses to defend their intent. The intent is the truth of the matter, and no amount of pretending to be a "free speech advocate" will disguise this fact.

Language is only that, language. But, when used with intent, especially intent to harm, it becomes a weapon. As someone in the thread stated, you are free to say what you want, and I am not obligated to listen, however, words as weapons are used with that design in mind.

Not everyone is able to turn away, hence, the offense. People that hide behind free speech as an excuse to use words as weapons are more offensive to me than any words they could ever speak. It's that whole "I see what you just did there" thing. That angers me more than anything, and makes honest, compassionate discussion on any level less credible, because it causes people to be more wary, more critical, of every other persons' words.

That, in summation, is the true intent. It is yet another way to cause divide, but this time using language.



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 07:39 PM
link   
This is double plus ungood.


I bet it won't be long before "God" "Jesus" "Christmas" "Love" among other things are banned.

What can be done? This madness has got to stop, our first amendment right allows us the freedom to say whatever the damn well we please.



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Let's face it - just because you're using the PC term for something doesn't change the intent you're putting behind it. You can us the PC term for something and make it sound just as ugly. The only possible difference is that PC terms haven't yet grown the negative connotations that some of their less PC counterparts have.

I find PC to be horribly condescending for the most part because the terms are put together in such a way as to try to make the person using them sound so super educated. Think about it - all of them use multiple words to replace terms that are often short and sweet, simple and uncomplicated. Why make the simple act of speaking about something so horribly complex if you aren't trying to make yourself sound smarter than anyone else in the room?



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 07:48 PM
link   
reply to post by brandiwine14
 



This is double plus ungood.

Someone has either read the book, or seen the old version of the movie. :-)

I think our society would do well to go back to the etiquette of about 100 years ago. Politeness and respect was more of a given in our society back then. That's not to say no one ever argued, or said something they shouldn't have, but speech was more tempered, and respectful interaction was more prevalent. PC wasn't even a thought.



Political correctness has absolutely no correlation with courtesy.

This should be a bumper sticker. Though I wonder how many would get it.


edit on 12/7/2013 by Klassified because: eta



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 07:51 PM
link   

ketsuko
reply to post by beezzer
 


Let's face it - just because you're using the PC term for something doesn't change the intent you're putting behind it. You can us the PC term for something and make it sound just as ugly. The only possible difference is that PC terms haven't yet grown the negative connotations that some of their less PC counterparts have.

I find PC to be horribly condescending for the most part because the terms are put together in such a way as to try to make the person using them sound so super educated. Think about it - all of them use multiple words to replace terms that are often short and sweet, simple and uncomplicated. Why make the simple act of speaking about something so horribly complex if you aren't trying to make yourself sound smarter than anyone else in the room?



Which is better? To say "there is a problem with obesity in this country", or to say "there is a problem with all the lazy fat slugs in this country"? They both get the point across, but isn't one just a little less offensive than the other? Is it really so awful to use the word "obese", as opposed to "lazy fat slugs"? I'm not saying we should have laws against being rude, but we certainly shouldn't condone it.



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 07:56 PM
link   

kaylaluv
This isn't a house. This is the internet. People from all over the world can view what we have written here. This isn't some private home, where it's just a couple of people and the owner.


A "house" is an apt analogy for the home or meeting place of a specific group with specific membership.

The content of this site is accessible to anybody but participation is not.

There are rules that must be agreed to in order to join and participate.



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 08:01 PM
link   

kaylaluv


Which is better? To say "there is a problem with obesity in this country", or to say "there is a problem with all the lazy fat slugs in this country"? They both get the point across, but isn't one just a little less offensive than the other? Is it really so awful to use the word "obese", as opposed to "lazy fat slugs"? I'm not saying we should have laws against being rude, but we certainly shouldn't condone it.


Why say anything?

It's really none of anyone's business.



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 08:03 PM
link   

kaylaluv


This isn't a house. This is the internet. People from all over the world can view what we have written here. This isn't some private home, where it's just a couple of people and the owner.


ATS provides a forum for us to speak as long as we pay attention to the rules that the owner of the forum provide.
edit on 7-12-2013 by beezzer because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 08:03 PM
link   
reply to post by kaylaluv
 


Obese is not the PC term. That is horizontally-challenged. Obese can still hurt someone's feelings because it is still a way to straight up call someone fat.



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 08:05 PM
link   

Advantage
**EPIPHANY**
Now I know why God disturbed the languages at the tower of Babel. Oh what Id give to have that particular power.


Let the fools do this. I have a 7 yr old, 15 yr old and 20 yr old. I work with teens and 20 somethings at times. One thing I know without a doubt, you tell them they cant SAY something and theyll break their necks to say the very thing you have banned. My oldest said the dreaded F word when she was younger.. I gasped in motherly horror.. she said "no mom, the one spelled FUQ". People WILL find a way.Its just more fun when you put an obstacle in front of them.
Offensive speech is in the eye of the beholder and up to interpretation.. by whomever has the power ( or the paddle). Sometimes its worth the punishment to be your individual little self and not engage in group think... or endeavor to be a professionally offended whiner. Dangerous speech is a whole 'nother animal which is not even related to Offensive SPeech.. regardless of those certain people tryng to link the two. Let the fools legislate words themselves and not intent.. and get some popcorn to watch the chaos at university level. These young adults will be experiencing mob rule.. the mob tells them what they can say.. and they WILL rebel. Its just human nature to pull at the leash.


Similar - Advantage. While there is no bible preaching in my household (4 children 11 to 17) I will not tolerate offensive language towards anyone or anything. Choose another adjective. Later when they decide to leave home I sincerely hope they will respect teachers/supervisors and such and not swear at them or use offensive language towards any person, Whats next??? Violence??? People should get over their need to use offensive/expletive language.

Am I old fashioned to like listening to a descriptive speech without the use of offensive language to get a point across>




top topics



 
20
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join