Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Tax-chick
They’re asking private individuals to support a change in behavior.

I beleive you're right, it does not direct involve the first admendment. However, I don't see the word "behavior" being used anywhere. My point is simply no word should ever be striken by force, fiat, or given syntaxual change by a group.

Do your realize the abridgement of free speech already taking place in this country right now under the guise of Political Correctness? That's what I object too. There is no question people should not use this word because of it's offensive nature and disrepectful "side" meaning, but don't you dare try to take away my constitutional "right" to use it anytime or anywhere in this country I choose!

25 posted on 01/27/2008 5:22:17 AM PST by sirchtruth (No one has the RIGHT not to be offended...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: sirchtruth

Yeah it is a slow newz day...let’s ban/send to re-education; smokers, bad words, repubs, fattys, skanks and every thing that offends anyone.


26 posted on 01/27/2008 5:27:34 AM PST by iopscusa (El Vaquero. (SC Lowcountry Cowboy))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

To: sirchtruth

I think you’re massively overreacting. If you can point to some intention on the part of this group to limit speech by law, then I’ll change my mind. Otherwise, I think this is pointless moral grandstanding, but has nothing to do with anyone’s rights.

Run outside and shout “N*ggers!” if you think you have to, though.


30 posted on 01/27/2008 5:30:01 AM PST by Tax-chick ("Gently alluding to the indisputably obvious is not gloating." ~Richard John Neuhaus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson