We are being censored!! Right now!!

[piece-it pete]

Funny, that jerk Howard is crying about being thrown off the air (but he really doesn't MIND, he's just working for the civic good :), and good riddance, I say, and that really bugs the heck out of the left wing, but when adults talk privately it's obviously OK to sceen out politically incorrect statements at will.

I noticed in answer to a previous post that this 'puter x's out certain words. Some, like **** (making love), **** (feces) and ***** (female dog) I have no problem with and believe are a good thing.

But when I tried to spoof Al Qiada as Al *****da (rhymes with Beerda and is slang for gay) as you can see it x'd that out too.

Right now someone is thinking, "that's what happens with censorship". I disagree. The Supreme Court a number of years ago ruled that certain words (there's a d_nm list somewhere, maybe George Carlins' came from it, but I don't have the time) were unsuitable for public airwaves, and that protecting kids was constitutionally permissable.

So apparently the politically correct people have been busy as bees, even though the word "*****" comes up here:

Entry: gay
Function: adjective
Definition: homosexual
Synonyms: homoerotic, homophile, inverted, lesbian, *****
Concept: sexuality
Source: Roget's Interactive Thesaurus, First Edition (v 1.0.0)
Copyright © 2004 by Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. All rights reserved.

And here (same source, but dictionary):

***** ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kwîr)
adj. *****·er, *****·est
Deviating from the expected or normal; strange: a ***** situation.
Odd or unconventional, as in behavior; eccentric. See Synonyms at strange.
Of a questionable nature or character; suspicious.
Slang. Fake; counterfeit.
Feeling slightly ill; queasy.
Offensive Slang. Homosexual.
Usage Problem. Of or relating to lesbians, gay men, bisexuals, or transgendered people.

Usage Note: A reclaimed word is a word that was formerly used solely as a slur but that has been semantically overturned by members of the maligned group, who use it as a term of defiant pride. ***** is an example of a word undergoing this process. For decades ***** was used solely as a derogatory adjective for gays and lesbians, but in the 1980s the term began to be used by gay and lesbian activists as a term of self-identification. Eventually, it came to be used as an umbrella term that included gay men, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgendered people. Nevertheless, a sizable percentage of people to whom this term might apply still hold ***** to be a hateful insult, and its use by heterosexuals is often considered offensive. Similarly, other reclaimed words are usually offensive to the in-group when used by outsiders, so extreme caution must be taken concerning their use when one is not a member of the group.
__________________________________________________ _______

Nice of them to give us the warning.

Not blaming you, Chris. I'm blaming the very tolerant people who are very intolerant of others' freedom of speech.

Pete

PS What other words are effected? Polack? Nope, and now, I'M offended!! Should I be? What about you?

[jeskibuff]

Not blaming you, Chris. I'm blaming the very tolerant people who are very intolerant of others' freedom of speech.

I really don't consider it a "freedom of speech" issue, Pete. I think it's establishing a standard and I think higher standards are good. If someone can only communicate with gutter language, they need to work on their skills. Yeah, when a silly word like q-u-e-e-r gets asterisked out, it's inconvenient and your Al-quee-rda joke flops, but I think that's a minor issue.

You're still able to express your views in a manner that's respectful of others, so I don't believe there's any impingement on your freedom to speak your mind or air your rant. We Americans are free to say "Bush is a liar" or "Clinton is a scumbag" without fear that we'll be tracked down and hauled to a prison or shot. Try calling Kim Jong Il a liar while visiting his country...see what happens. To me, that's what freedom of speech is all about.

[piece-it pete]

I really don't consider it a "freedom of speech" issue, Pete. I think it's establishing a standard and I think higher standards are good. If someone can only communicate with gutter language, they need to work on their skills. Yeah, when a silly word like q-u-e-e-r gets asterisked out, it's inconvenient and your Al-quee-rda joke flops, but I think that's a minor issue.

You're still able to express your views in a manner that's respectful of others, so I don't believe there's any impingement on your freedom to speak your mind or air your rant. We Americans are free to say "Bush is a liar" or "Clinton is a scumbag" without fear that we'll be tracked down and hauled to a prison or shot. Try calling Kim Jong Il a liar while visiting his country...see what happens. To me, that's what freedom of speech is all about.

I understand where you're coming from, and absolutely agree 100% that we can regulate public airwaves for decency, and should.

However some groups here want to go beyond that and tell us what qualifies as hate speech based on what we think - regulating the freedom of ideas, what freedom of speech is supposed to protect.

The problem they have with the word q_ueer is that it implies the user does not like gays. They don't agree, so use the word to censure the speaker. Whoops, there goes freedom of speech.

An excellent example: Up in Canada recently, a hate speech bill almost passed making most negative comments about gays illegal. This would have make the Bible hate speech, and owning one a crime!

Once the public buys this or allows it to happen (really doesn't matter) it's only a matter of time before "Clinton is a scumbag" or "Bush is a liar" goes the same way.

BTW, I never did tell you how much I enjoyed your post likening Bush's job as akin to redoing a car. Very apt, IMO. Also, I don't know if you've seen it yet but Breathed is writing "Opus" for the sunday comics:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...45450-2003Sep8

No old characters except the Penguin, and truth be told I'm still waiting for him to hit his stride. Hopefully he will - I've been missing that strip since it died. Have you seen the strip "Fraz"? It's pretty good.

Pete

[Chris]

Hey Pete - you're absolutely right. We here at ConsumerReview do censor some words. The reason being that many people don't use common sense, and we have to compensate for that. Unfortunately, we have people that will visit our site and say things that they shouldn't say. Racial slurs, vulgarities, and even words that have a non-hateful meanings are apart of our censor list because they're used in hateful ways. This list was put together a while back and is usually copied from our other sites - meaning, we remain fairly consistent on what we allow to be posted on all of our sites. I believe I just copied the censored word list over from the last forums software. I didn't make it up myself. If a word is abused often and people complain, then there's a good possibility that it could be added to the list.

This is how it is in most online forums - especially since they're all mostly privately owned. You gotta at least attempt to make up for the inconsiderate few. Not my rules... but I do agree with them for the most part. If the word you mentioned has been abused, I'd consider adding it to the list.

[bturk667]

Walk up to President Bush and call him a vulger word. See if anything happens. I would wager something does.

[bturk667]

One question: Who defines what common sense is?

[Chris]

One question: Who defines what common sense is?

No one person in particular - usually a combination of community feedback, my own opinion and the opinion of the other site managers, as well as our executive staff here at our company.

[bturk667]

Good to know!