It's possible that Obama has some dirt or something on Roberts.

Again, Roberts voted against Obergefell.

...and three justices are in their 80s or late 70s.

Also, can we take a moment to revel in the absurdity of the Godwin's Law shit being flung at brainbomb. Apparently not putting up with harassment is exactly the same as not putting up with the existence of Jews.

@lethologica i didn't see that stupdity, perhaps if you muted certain idiots you could live in this wonderful world too.

@lethologica

the reason Hitler gets brought up is because he's such a common medium for fascism.

this is most notable with his burning of books.

My problem is with people not accepting certain words such as Fag. While it's true that it's a slur, if you completely BAN it, then that sets a precedent to ban OTHER words.

Is this a slippery slope?

Today on college campuses people are banning words such as:

Lame
Stupid
Master
Homeless
Obese
Healthy

But it's not simply people saying "these words are harmful, let's be more respectful" it's an attack on anyone who disagrees. It's people who are completely smug and self assured in their ideology. Respect for others means allowing unpopular opinions to persist.

thus it is a slippery slope. It has already begun. I'm proposing we stop this. The setting of the precedent I disagree with. I support the entirety of the first amendment.

I believe Life=Liberty=Pursuit of Happiness

none are greater than the others. Pursuit of Happiness does not justify degrading Liberty. The Pursuit of Happiness is meant to be people working to make their lives better, not the banning of words so they don't have to deal with obstacles or opposing ideologies.

@Lethologica

actually I'm going to call YOU out on your bullshit. I never said it was "EXACTLY THE SAME"

so stop misquoting me.

And if you don't think analogies aren't a good tool, then I will kindly refer you to my friend Hegel.

Source, James?

here's a few colleges

http://ijr.com/2015/07/379988-saying-youre-american-university-new-hampshire-can-now-get-trouble/
http://heatst.com/culture-wars/uw-milwaukee-posters-warn-students-not-to-say-politically-correct-or-use-words-like-lame-crazy-and-trash/
http://watchdog.org/245557/banned-words/

Um... source for Hegel maybe?

http://www.academia.edu/18825080/Dialectical_Analogy_and_Analogical_Dialectics_Przywara_and_Hegel_on_the_Analogy_of_Being

Other than that, I don't know what you want.

James...
"the reason Hitler gets brought up is because he's such a common medium for fascism."

No it isn't. The reason Hitler gets brought up is because he's the worst example of oppression anyone can think of, so it's easy for wannabe contrarians to start calling their opponents Hitler any time they feel the least bit inconvenienced by disagreement, or any time they see anyone proposing to censure anything.

"actually I'm going to call YOU out on your bullshit. I never said it was "EXACTLY THE SAME""

That's right, you just took bb's position and juxtaposed it with a completely irrelevant Nazi position from 1930s Germany as if you thought that would make a point. Is that difference the hill you want to die on?

Note: I am not a proxy for bb in this argument. I have my own separate views about whether, when, and how language should be policed.

Stop mothering me you Obese Oriental. Ill send your homeless ass back to Freshman year; you white skinned poor person caucasian.

Oriental is the only derogatory term on that list. Calling homeless people ; homeless is not a slang... lol

Also, none of those links are about words being banned. Come on, James.

Yanik makes argument banning words could create a slippery slope argument.
-creates his own skippery slope argument.

James, I have never heard of anything like that and I don't think such campaigns actually carry any weight. People are making a mockery out of themselves over all sorts of things. A publicly funded university cannot make any drastic judgment on free speech lest they face a serious lawsuit, so they never will. It's a joke.

I'm not sure what you are on about in terms of banning words in the first place. Are you talking about zultar's post?

Let's ban words and then we can ban books and then we can ban speech, etc. Let's ban everything we don't agree with!

hmm which other political movement banned and burned books?

HMMMMMM?

I need to think about that.

money.cnn.com/2016/06/14/media/donald-trump-media-blacklist/

Were you talking about Trump? I can't think of any reason why you would ignore Donald Trump banning journalists from his events. /s

@Lethologica

"Also, none of those links are about words being banned. Come on, James."

1.some of those links are concerning people on college campuses trying to words, for there own reasons. This is either an outright lie or you didn't read all of the links.

2. Mussolini created Fascism, and Hitler took the idea too. He is a GREAT example of fascism. Maybe some people use that argument out of context, but mine was not nearly out of context.

I talked about his burning books and his oppression. I'm talking about OUR banning words on college campuses. No the parallel is NOT PERFECT, but it certainly for me shows the kind of people who want to censor ideas, generally are along the ideas of fascism.

@bo_sox48

really quick on the WebDip banning of words: I left the site for a little while, an I have NO IDEA what new policies were added. I dunno if they decided to make the forum stricter or not, but I said: if they do that's fine.

I don't think there are any illegal words or not. That's why I posted that last part in the parenthesis (correct me if I'm wrong)

AND THE COLLEGES!!!

yeah this has been going over for a little while but has gotten a Lot of heat in the last year. Even though i'm going to a private college in a Red State I still had a kid in my Honor's class tell me that I shouldn't use the phrase "illegal aliens"

thankfully it's not a prominent here, but on some other campuses i toured over the summer, it was a LOT more obvious.

"I have never heard of anything like that and I don't think such campaigns actually carry any weight."

well... at Princeton which is Private, they released guidelines for their HR preventing the use of the word "man" in various context's. Washington State has a professor expressly banning words from his classroom

The most important thing of what you said is that these people don't have much support, which is true in some cases, while others have backing from faculty and staff. It's obnoxious, but very much happening on colleges today.

@brainbomb

I did not CREATE slippery slope. Let me elaborate.

If a Slippery Slope WERE to occur from people not wanting others to use the word "fag" or other such words, what would it look like?

I proposed that one such slippery slope would be: banning other words. Not too revolutionary for you??? No, that's a natural progression of such actions.

Also: that is happening. Perhaps I'm too liberal of my usage of the word "ban" rather that's their intention. Just as... in my example... you are against Homophobic slurs.

thus my "slippery slope" is essentially done. We're at the bottom. We hated one word, and now we have many kids who wait a whole plethora of words.

It's not a theory, it's an observation. So no @brainbomb I didn't myself use a slippery slope. I'm just looking at one.



An edit on an early post: the intention is to ban words, it is currently still legal to say certain words - unless you're a person who is WORKING for a university, in which case there are codes of conduct, and you can be fired for saying things. And if you got to a private University they can't take away scholarships. And if you go to a Public university you can be fined with harassment.

But thankfully, many of these are still in the minority for now.

So there are different things that happen to you, based on: if you're a student, staff, or go to: a public/private university

You *shouldn't* use the phrase "illegal alien" because someone who entered the country illegally and someone who is lacking proper documentation are not necessarily the same thing. Children are born in the United States to parents who entered the country illegally all the time. Those children aren't "illegal aliens"; they're children. They're no different than you except that their parents have no way of getting them a birth certificate. Regardless, nobody is banning you from saying what you want, but you also can't prevent people from forming their own ideologies and expecting you to respect them while you are around them.

That sort of thing may be happening on college campuses. On my campus, at Northwestern and the College of Lake County, both of which I have attended, and at the University of Chicago, where I'll be attending soon, that sort of thing does not exist. At the University of Southeast Alaska, I recall them attempting to ban the word "eskimo" for some time, and it worked, primarily because just about everyone has a friend up there or knows someone who is a real, practicing Inuit, not just one from the movies, and know the history of that term and that it is not history worth celebrating. When I was in Germany, they warned us that promoting Naziism - not as if we would have - was very illegal and not a joke. They explained that they made it that way because they now understand what caused the rise of the Nazis and that they could prevent it from ever happening again by inflicting their own moral judgment into the law. In this instance, I think that is good.

As someone whose favorite poet is Allen Ginsberg, I will never be able to blanketly support really any form of censorship, but dismissing all of these people's concerns about "illegal aliens" and whatever else out of hand is reckless. Most of these issues of sensitivity and political correctness are probably ridiculous on some level, some more than others, but not all of them are.

@bo_sox
I was referring to immediate border crossings and the first 72 hours after they cross, so illegal aliens was fine.

Also i know the problem that children face with the threat of their parent's being deported: my little brother plays on a soccer team with a kid who's family came here under questionable circumstance
(they give us food whenever they have fiestas, so TeChNiCaLlY I may have been bribed. But don't quote me on that)

Yeah I have no idea about SouthEast Alaska man, that's a little out of my knowledge.

And in Germany I can definitely understand them creating those laws. I feel like very specific laws targeting groups that have openly killed people are fine. But, the KKK is still around, and that's really pretty sad.

The two main argument I'd have to say are:
1. Naziism is a very violent ideology, that directly supports genocide. You can't go out in public in the USA and say "kill this guy". Nazis do still exist in the US though in very small number. (this moment is an observation, not an argument)

2. (the argument) America is founded on different principles, than those that Germany adopted after World War II. I don't like the precedent being set, although I can definitely understand it in this case,

It's a difficult subject in some areas, whereas other areas are painfully obnoxious.

so i guess it was one main argument.

and it wasn't really an argument.

@James:
"some of those links are concerning people on college campuses trying to words, for there own reasons. This is either an outright lie or you didn't read all of the links."

Oh, for fuck's sake. I read the articles, AND I read the things the articles were about. Did you?

UNH's bias-free language guide didn't ban words, it raised awareness about the possible issues with some words and suggested alternatives. UW-Milwaukee's poster campaign didn't ban words, it raised awareness about the possible issues with some words and phrases. U-Nebraska-Lincoln's T-shirt campaign isn't banning words (fucking OBVIOUSLY, since they're printing T-shirts WITH THE WORDS ON THEM), they're...raising awareness about the possible issues with some words. See the pattern?

Seems to me like you're happy to dismiss *any* objection to insults and harassment as fascist censorship, even if there's no fucking fascism and no fucking censorship. Seems to me like you aren't actually promoting the freedom to say these words, you're fighting against the freedom to object to them. Please feel free to explain how you're not actually doing that.

'Cause, y'know, I'm *pretty much with you* on universities not banning words, and I know that shit does sometimes happen, but you are just going waaaay too fucking far in the other direction by shouting "censorship!" at anything that even discusses those words.

"2. Mussolini created Fascism, and Hitler took the idea too. He is a GREAT example of fascism. Maybe some people use that argument out of context, but mine was not nearly out of context.

I talked about his burning books and his oppression. I'm talking about OUR banning words on college campuses. No the parallel is NOT PERFECT, but it certainly for me shows the kind of people who want to censor ideas, generally are along the ideas of fascism."

I know, and then you went on to talk about how objecting to insults and harassment was like objecting to the Jewish race. The fact that you made one version of the analogy that's slightly less stupid doesn't erase the more stupid version. ("His oppression"--what a fucking weasel phrase that is. Go on, tell us what you think brainbomb wants to do to people who oppose gay rights or use the word "faggot" to insult gay people. Tell us which of Hitler's many oppressive acts in addition to book-burning compares to brainbomb's nefarious agenda.)

The founding fathers did in fact state "Life, Liberty, The Pursuit of happiness, and the right to call people homophobic slurs". That part got cut, madison was gay

@Lethologica

Ok I see you have my problem with the use of the word "ban"

but I corrected that:
"An edit on an early post: the intention is to ban words, it is currently still legal to say certain words - unless you're a person who is WORKING for a university, in which case there are codes of conduct, and you can be fired for saying things."

and for your other comment...

*face palms*

I wasn't comparing Brainbomb's actions to Hitler's actions, AND THEN CLAIMING that made them the same

I was saying, that telling people what the can and cannot say, is a commonality for fascists. I used Hitler as an example: he told people the Jews were bad, and even speaking out in favor of Jews was met with vehement protest.

Though the moral aspects of Hitler and Brainbomb's argument differ, the idea that some things are offensive and should not be said is a universal theme of Fascist ideology.

@brainbomb

and then it got added back in the first Amendment.

Because they gave zero shits about your feelings

My poor feelz

you own poor people? sweeeeet

Ive got a basement full of obese homeless caucasian freshman.