E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSA Massachusetts town has instituted a new $20 fine for public cursing. WHDH-TV's Janet Wu reports.
MIDDLEBOROUGH, Mass. -- Residents in Middleborough have voted to make the foul-mouthed among them pay fines for swearing in public.
At a town meeting Monday night, residents voted 183-50 to approve a proposal from the police chief to impose a $20 fine on public profanity.
Officials insist the proposal was not intended to censor casual or private conversations, but instead to crack down on loud, profanity-laden language used by teens and other young people in the downtown area and public parks.
I'm really happy about it," Mimi Duphily, a store owner and former town selectwoman, said after the vote. "I'm sure there's going to be some fallout, but I think what we did was necessary."
The measure could raise questions about First Amendment rights, but state law does allow towns to enforce local laws that give police the power to arrest anyone who "addresses another person with profane or obscene language" in a public place.
Matthew Segal, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, said the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the government cannot prohibit public speech just because it contains profanity.
The ordinance gives police discretion over whether to ticket someone if they believe the cursing ban has been violated.
Duphily, who runs an auto parts store, is among the downtown merchants who wanted take a stand against the kind of swearing that can make customers uncomfortable.
"They'll sit on the bench and yell back and forth to each other with the foulest language. It's just so inappropriate," she said.
Fined for free speech?
Middleborough, a town of about 20,000 residents perhaps best known for its rich cranberry bogs, has had a bylaw against public profanity since 1968. But because that bylaw essentially makes cursing a crime, it has rarely if ever been enforced, officials said, because it simply would not merit the time and expense to pursue a case through the courts.
The ordinance would decriminalize public profanity, allowing police to write tickets as they would for a traffic violation. It would also decriminalize certain types of disorderly conduct, public drinking and marijuana use, and dumping snow on a roadway.
Segal praised Middleborough for reconsidering its bylaw against public profanity, but said fining people for it isn't much better.
"Police officers who never enforced the bylaw might be tempted to issue these fines, and people might end up getting fined for constitutionally protected speech," he said.
Another local merchant, Robert Saquet, described himself as "ambivalent" about the no-swearing proposal, likening it to try to enforce a ban on the seven dirty words of George Carlin, a nod to a famous sketch by the late comedian.
"In view of words commonly used in movies and cable TV, it's kind of hard to define exactly what is obscene," said Paquet, who owns a downtown furniture store.
But Duphily said, "I don't care what you do in private. It's in public what bothers me."
The Boston Globe reported that Middleborough voters also approved a $50 fine for littering; a $50 fine for shoveling snow into the street; and a $300 fine for smoking marijuana in public.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News:
- FBI: Violent crime rates in US approach historic lows
- Four Afghan women disappear during US study program
- Hitchhiker writing 'Kindness of America' memoir shot
- Sandusky child sex-abuse trial under way
- Video: Abandoned by parents, she finds home at Harvard
Follow US News on msnbc.com on Twitter and Facebook
Leave a Comment:
What year is this? 1812?
A majority of these " people" are most likely the same folks crying and whining about the Constitution this and freedoms that while in the same breath stomping American rights to death. It either is or it isn't. Rights are rights or they are not. ; ]
A shame some town folks are so pathetic and afraid that they can not let people be who they are. They choose instead to stomp on there neighbors rights because. Just because. I say get your nose out of other peoples business and rights socialist. ;]
Cheers
I disagree with the decision; however, when we live in a society that seems to use the 'f-word' almost as much as it uses the word 'the' I can see why people would suggest such an ordinance.
freedom of speech??
WTF??? Oh, Romney territory...........
So will there be exigent circumstances where you are not penalised - say some plonker rams into the back of your car and your eggs fall from the seat to make an omelet on the floorboard? Is it alright to swear in the heat of the moment due to an accident or an argument? What about re-occuring violations? Does the fine go up incrementally if I am a repeat offender - and would there be jail time for that if the 'fines' aren't working on me? Will there be a bench warrant for my arrest if I don't pay the damn fine? DID THEY THINK THIS THROUGH BEFORE MAKING THIS BLOODY DECISION? BLIMEY!!
Forget infringing on free speech - they should be arrested for disturbing the peace. Other people have the right to not have their lives degraded by noisy jerks.
NichiOfEarth - It seems in 1812 people were at least educated enough not to use this language.
Bloody Blimey!
In reading this story it reminded me of the struggle a nearby town is having with youth at thier local basketball court and park. Teens are cursing and acting vulger to the point that parents won't let their kids go play there anymore. The village finally closed down the park because of this type of behavior.
I agree we have the right to free speech however we can also abuse that right just as we can any other. Many of our youth today abuse the right of free speech to contol those less aggressive in our communities. Another example of minority groups taking over our country.We aren't teaching our kids common decency any more . No boundries are being enfoced so our kids are running wild doing and saying anythhing they want. At some point we will all have to address this and many other bad things that we allow in the name of our "rights" No one has the right to purposely offend me or intimidate my kids with words or any other action.
This town has taken some action to incourage thier parents to teach thier kids some manners and teach the kids they can't always say and do anything they want. It is a step to help keep some order in thier town.
If these foul mouthed thugs would have a little self respect and not us profanity as an everyday language without the slightest discretion, maybe they wouldn't have been pushed to enact this la
In my municipality there's been a law about this on the books since the late 1890's. It has never, to my knowledge, been enforced.
As much as I'm in the right to free speech camp, I do agree that there has to be some limits. Case in point--I was riding the bus home from work when two kids got on at a bus stop by forcing open the 'exit only' doors at the back of the bus so they could avoid going in the front door and having to pay fare. The driver saw them and called them to come up to the front to pay the fare before the bus got moving. The kids swore and cussed up a blue streak as they walked up to the front of the bus and when another older rider told the kid to pull his pants up because a good inch of 'Grand Canyon' (buttock crack) was showing, the kid turned around and cussed the rider out too. After about ten minutes of cussing and swearing at the driver because the driver refused to move until they got off or paid fare, both kids got off and I assume they decided to wait for the next bus to try it again.
That is the kind of person who deserves that fine. If they get hit right where it hurts most--the wallet--they'll think twice (hopefully) about doing something like that again. It takes a village to raise a child. If the parent(s) haven't taught them something about manners, common decency, politeness and courtesy (or the kid refuses to listen to siad parents), then we adults should try to do what we can to teach the lesson--for the good of all.
WTF? Oh, a blue state ...... might as well have blue laws.
Yea romney territory, only the most liberal state in the country, you know, those that will impose their desires on anyone at any time at any expense. Idiot.
What the F**K!!!! You gotta be SH!TING me! What Bag of D0UCHENOZZLES came up with this F**KED UP Idea???
Just my F**KIN' 2 cents............
We all have to live by the same basic laws to protect our country and our unity...just because certain words upset a small group of people you can't just blatantly disregard our right to the freedom of speech.
Little swaths of crazy conservatives of any religion don't get to pick and choose what they deem appropriate for the rest of us. For example ; muslims don't get to have sharia law in this country , they can't take over a city and require women to wear head scarves. To all the crazies: if you don't like our freedoms ( including speech), our open minds, our free discourse about politics, the idea that we are ALL created equal .......... then move to another country.
Agree with the poster who said arrest them for disturbing the peace, disorderly conduct, whatever is already on the books. This law will just make them push the limits more.
Listen, I'm an advocate for freedom of speech but there are laws that punish those that abuse it. Such as yelling fire in a theater. To some people foul language has been their everyday way of talking learned from their parents. To others it's considered "cool" to have a foul mouth.
I just wonder how long it's going to take the ACLU to contest this law in court. Oh wait...those that are criticizing this law are also those that criticize the ACLU. Wow! That's going to be awkward.
I hope that goes to the Supreme Court. Now they have to define all swear words, and they can make crap up as they go...pretty soon we turn into China. Who cares if people are offended...we are allowed to disagree in this country. We have the right to free speech.
TruettCollins -
It seems in 1812 people were at least educated enough not to use this language
Uhhhh, "inappropriate" language has always been around. It might have not been the "f" word, but it was some other word. Stop acting like it's this generation going to pot.
People need to learn that freedom isn't necessarily FREE. While you are certainly FREE to call your boss a D**khead, you most certainly be fired if you said it to his face. While you can yell "Fire" in a Theatre, you will be arrested for it.
While I am a firm supporter in freedom of speech, we must also respect the freedoms of those around us who may not appreciate our choice of words. Would the people using that language speak that way around their grandparents, or their parents? Would they speak that way around their own young children? I would guess not. So why then are they speaking that way around other people's young children, or grandparents?
It's called Respect People. Aretha said it Best back in the 60's. R-E-S-P-E-C-T. Being courteous to each other. Try it sometime. You might just shock some people.
It seems pretty essential to define which words are now illegal. I suggest a curse website setup by the town that lists every possible profane word that could incur a fine. Of course those not tech-savvy would be at a disadvantage. I suppose then there should be billboards listing the curses so that residents and passers-through know what they cannot say in public. I'm just spit-balling here, but a sort of Sh!t List.
It is hard to keep up with everything that offends someone else. At least publicize the current standard so we have a fighting chance to comply with your laws.
Until you have to remove your child from a public playground because some young boys were cussing a blue streak..... Those of us who are trying to raise children with some semblance of manners can understand why this law was passed. Raise your children better and we wouldn't have people reacting this way.
I can fully understand the desire on the part of the town to implement and ordinance like this. The language used in public today has gotten to the point of being extremely vulgar and parents have their children constantly bombarded by these foul mouthed people whenever they go out in public. And contrary to what the article implies, the problem is not just with teenagers, I have heard many adults using extremely foul language in public. That said, there is no way I can see this ordinance standing up to a legal challenge. As nice as it would be to put a stop to these foul mouthed individuals, it just will not pass a first amendment test. I can virtually guarantee that the ACLU will step in and provide the legal resources for the first person issued a ticket under this ordinance to challenge it in court.
dont like swear words- stop being offended by them
YAY, ya know... my family has a right also... Like not having to put up with those kids sitting behind us in the G rated movie dropping F bombs.
Is it ok to say 'niggah' in public?
This is absurd. They're just words. Making them illegal to say only gives them more power.
It wasnt too educated, it was because they werent all wusses, in 1812 if some kid swore in the shop, you slapped them across the face. Im game with that lifestyle coming back, it will work better than a fine, but our country is just a big ole liberal pussiville now.
How will this law change that? You gonna ticket kids so they can throw the ticket on the ground and laugh at you?
Yes there is freedom of speech, but not freedom from consequences. You can go up to a police officer and say you're going to kill them, but then you have to deal with the consequence of getting thrown in jail.
I'd like to have the freedom to not have my 5 year old ask me what a highly offensive word means, and the freedom from trying to keep my 2 year old from repeating something inappropriate he heard.
A $20 fine to discourage people from yelling obscenities for everyone to hear sounds quite reasonable to me.
Is there a list of prohibited words? Profanity is rather subjective. What is amusing is people are banning a random group of letters, not the meaning. You can say, fornicate, but not f**k. They both describe exactly the same thing. It is also a pointless exercise, as I will demonstrate.
Hey, Middleborough, go fornicate with yourselves. Pull your heads out of your rectums, stop pushing your perceived version of morality on others, and go choke on a large male member. Also, have a nice day.
How about a $20 fine discouraging people from quoting the bible for everyone to hear?
We are doomed.
@!$%# you and @!$%# your stupid bull@!$%# cliches. If some @!$%# is hassling me in public I have every goddamn right to tell the piece of @!$%# to go get @!$%#ed sideways with a jackhammer if I want.
hahahaha.................You got to f#cking love it. Good thing I don't live in Mass...
My nine-year-old is autistic. High functioning, but autistic. He repeats everything he hears right down to tone, inflection, dialect and accent. (I read Shakespeare in an English accent to get him to go to sleep and he will repeat that in class at random moments.)
He was suspended from school for using bad language and I had to go to the school and explain that he was repeating what he heard on the bus (we have a strict non-profanity rule in our house for just this reason) and to ask the teacher to use redirection--when he says something that common sense would find offensive, we choose another word and tell him to use that instead.
Jesus! used as swearword turns int 'Cheez-its'
'Son of a b***h' (that was what he got suspended for) turned into 'sunny beaches'
'Oh s**t' turns into 'Oh spit'
Like that. He's nine now--what happens when he gets older, fifteen, sixteen, and up and he says that to someone and gets in trouble because the other person doesn't know or realize he's different? By nipping it in the bud now while he's still developing his speech patterns and behavior.
This will become 1st amendment court battle that ultimately will be ruled unconstitutional.
Cull,
But the f-bomb has so many diverse uses!!! It truly is the universal exclamation! Kind of like Ranch Dressing is the universal condiment. The f-bomb just goes with everything.
About the law??? What a load of fu**ing bullsh**! Suck on that MA.
This will eventually be ruled an unconstitutional violation of free speech 1st Amendment rights once the first case that challenges it winds its way through the courts.
I was shaking my head when I heard about this on the news this morning, I can not believe how pathetic the people who voted for this were.
oh good, next we can fine people for talking about the bible too.
Isn't the F word actually an acronym? Fornication Under Consent..... Is using an acronym illegal? I work in government. Lotta acronyms here.
I bet you'd be screeching your head off if this were a law designed to restrict gun ownership. Tell you what, I'll support a law restricting my right to tell people to go get @!$%#ed when they pass laws restricting people's rights to wave the bible around in public. Deal?
Poor comparisonon. This is the equivalent of a law to restrict you from running around waving your gun in people's faces. You'd still be able to own a gun (use profanity in private), even carried concealed (use profanity in a private conversation at a reasonable volume in a public place). You just can't wave it around in order to intimidate others (screaming profanity in a public place).
Glad I don't live there. I would be f'ked.
Why is the volume relevant? If it's a matter of volume then just enact a noise ordinance instead of trying to restrict words you don't like. If you wanted to make an honest gun analogy fining people for open-carry would be more appropriate.
So how do they enforce it? Hire an army of cops?
@!$%# Massachusetts! Maybe they should wait for the Supreme Court ruling FCC vs. Fox Television Stations 10-1293. http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9S67JR00.htm
Even the Supreme Court Justices were releasing curse words and laughing and having fun with it.
And yes I know, I've been banned for the day, but one has to take a stand or be railroaded by everything in the name of morality and decency. Just because you don't like it, doesn't make it illegal or immoral. And that first word should be F-U-C-K! Which is a throwback to an old tax, Fornicate Under the Consent of the King. Now you've probably learned something new.
WTF.. I live near there
what all you aholes are missing is we are part of a society, not alone on an island, so when in public rules apply. now stfu
Alex the Blade- how is this a exigent circumstance?
I very very rarely swear and I really hate hearing it all the time. However, it really is against the First Amendment to say what people can and can't say. Yes, they can't yell fire in a crowded theater because it is dangerous. You can't threaten someone. But, if you allow laws that say you can't say certain words, the next thing that will happen will be to outlaw certain ideas, then religions, then free thought.
"What year is this? 1812?"
No in 1812 we had freedom of speech.
What the law will stand up to is "this is my place, get out"! If the state has a law, why do they need an have something that mimics a real law?
Sarah- I agree 100% besides, it just feels good sometimes. I dont agree that F--n kids should be allowed to yell that $hit in public, but I feel that is a parents job, not the government try to set these foul mouth little $hit$ straight!
"The ordinance gives police discretion" thats the biggest problem with the law..
Instead of $20 fine, how about three hours in the stocks, in the public square? Spectators would be free to throw eggs at the guilty.
@Katy M,
I could not have said it better myself
Is that like "In fear for your life!" That is the problem with "Stand Your Ground."
I don't recall this article having anything to do with intimidating kids. I am tired of all the recent talk of bullying, though. Stand up to the bullies, and they will leave you alone.
Anyway, you have no constitutional right to not be offended. Different people have different opinions, and different ways of life. We are all going to be offended by others, and we are all going to offend others. So give it a rest. Freedom of speech trumps your non-existent right to not be offended.
Damn! I agree with Sarah's posts again. What is this world coming to?
State laws can't give towns the right to override the US Constitution. You'd think that they'd know that.
All the commenters on here for or against it all seem to not understand this law. There is no conflict with free speech. If you want to walk down the public street talking foul-mouthed to your skanky date who likes that, more power to you. This law doesn't affect you. However, if you and your skanky significant other are in opposite ends of the mall's food court, and are yelling these obscenities across the room filled with parents with small children eating lunch, then this law DOES affect you. It is not meant to make you anymore civilized then you already aren't. Nobody cares if your ignorant or not. It just means that the rest of us shouldn't have to suffer that ignorance. It may not have been explained well enough for people who only read the headline and then pounce like they know what they're talking about. This is NOT regulating your speech, it's regulating your disturbance of everybody else around you. THEY have rights too.
PS> I live close enough that my local news station did an in-depth report on it last night. It was a little more informative.
Tabasco,
Even a blind squirrell finds a nut every now and then. Apparently you've found two!
Jungle,
I completely agree. I'm an adult, and if I want to swear like a trucker with Tourretts Syndrome, I'm more then allowed. After all, there is no substantive injury done to society by my numerous droppings of the word fu**.
Even if I am screaming it accross a crowded shopping mall.
" Much Ado About Nothing" Wise Shakespeare
When you call the police for the 4th time in 15 minutes and are wondering why they still haven't showed up its because they was all in the middle of handing out tickets because someone said @!$%#. They should take protect and serve off the side of the cars and replace it with Fine & Seize.
Now who is going to write the Police officers tickets for swearing? Go to youtube, almost every single youtube video of a police officer has them saying about 20 swear words per minute.
Your life is "degraded" because of a word that someone else uses? A collection of letters, put together, to form a mere word, has the power to "degrade" your life?
It is truly pathetic how weak-willed you are, that you allow a single word to have so much power over your life. No one can offend you... you only allow yourself to be offended. And if you allow yourself to be offended by simple words, you are one of the weakest people on this planet.
I feel sorry for the sad life you must live, that simple letters hold so much power over you.
Besides all of that, it has been proven that a string of four and six letter words linked together is a pain and stress reliever.
However, it really is against the First Amendment to say what people can and can't say. Yes, they can't yell fire in a crowded theater because it is dangerous.
OK, how about I get up on a soapbox in the middle of a crowded playground of 6-year-olds and start reading a pornographic novel at the top of my lungs? Or letters to Penthouse? That's not like yelling "Fire!" in a theater. That's freedom of speech, right Katy? Or not even that. I can just stand there and say "Hey, who wants to play on the f*cking swingset?" According to you, I'm well within my rights of free speech. Well, I say eff that. I think this new ordinance is great and I hope they fine all those idiots who think nothing of other people and what they're forcing on them. You can't take your kid anywhere these days without it being rated NC17.
steel toed boot
And what about these "children" you are so concerned about? Where are the laws regulating THEM from disturbing my peace? Where are the laws regulating a screaming brat that is disturbing my peaceful dinner? Where are the laws regulations a sick, coughing, disgusting child from sitting behind me on a plane, disturbing my flight?
If you want to start regulating "disturbance", then we need to take everything into consideration... including your spawn.
Tell it to the judge... let me know how that works out for ya.
Kat,
And all those little darlings are going to go home and turn on their music, loaded with expletives, and play video games about jacking people's cars, and yada, yada, yada.
If you want your children protected and sheltered, DO THE JOB YOURSELF. It's not my duty to watch my language, in order to protect YOUR child. Especially when there is no substantive harm done by my language.
too many laws are up for police discretion. That's basically saying (to most cops) do whatever you want and you can decide how to interpret the law at any given situation to serve any given goal or personal objective. Its a free license to abuse the law without any consequences and due to officer discretion you will lose any case unless you have proof that you were not breaking the law. Officers discretion weather you are breaking the law or not = Guilty until proven innocent.. That's the problem...
Kat
And what about the people who are disturbed by your kid? Can we fine you every time your brat screams or cries in public? That shrill sends shivers up my spine, disturbing my peace.
So if you support fining "idiots" for using language that you do not like, do you also support fining parents for forcing creatures on society that we do not like? Or are you a typical hypocrite, wanting society to bend to your will while refusing to acknowledge the disturbance you force on society?
Everybody seem to be overly focussed on making certain wors illegal, and wha would be an enforcable fine for them. The ACLU also seems to be made a major default player here. I have a suggestion, one that was alluded to, but largely ignored: corporal punishment. I remember a case that was reported in the Baltimore Sun some 50 years ago. It dealt with a Delaware kid who was , to use the terminology of the time, incorrigible. Nothing that anybody had tried had any beneficial effect on this kid's behavior - and language (probaby a normal kid nowadays). He (yes it was a male teen-ager.) simply failed/refused to bend his behavior/vocabulary to accomodate societal norms of the day. The Judge finally told him that he was an incorigible, and that there was only one course of action remaining available to the courts: the whipping post. Took the kid outside, stripped his shirt off, tied his hands around the post - which was directly outside the courthouse on courthouse square - and delivered twenty lashes with a cat-o-nine-tails in accordance with the requirements written into thre law. Rinised his back afterward with saturted brine solution, and escorted him back into the courtroom. The judge's comments were telling. He said that perhaps the kid wouild ignore everything else, but would/couild he forget the pain he had suffered that day because of his behavior?
WOW! Does this mean I can go to this Mass city and curse FIVE X for $100 bucks! What a deal!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It is a little humorous to see everyone freaking out about this and yet we are all freaking out on a forum that we cannot use the words we are defending and we all go along with "the rules" when we post. It is fun to see people use different combinations or symbols to convey a word they cannot use................it's just funny to think about.
@mowdy5gs
Please do share with us the sources you used to come to this conclusion. Unless of coure it was your ass, that you can keep to yourself.
@Sarah:
Touché!
Now isn't this a frickin' hoot? Growing up, I never heard my Dad use the f-word. That was until I was old enough to accompany him on a hunting trip at a camp that he belonged to. It was only for 2 or 3 days, but my virgin ears did catch some pretty swarthy language... Then, at 19 I joined the Navy. Well, every other word was f this, f that... The old joke was don't go home on leave and ask your mom to pass the f'ing potatoes... I always felt that if you can't get your point across without swearing, then it's not worth saying. We have much better words in our language to express ourselves. Now at 62, I still don't feel comfortable using the f-word in front of women, but some of these younger women tend to remind me of hunting camp at times... Now get your f'ing a$$ back to work!!!
I could use a few hundred thousand dollars. The town would get smacked with a first amendment lawsuit so hard it wouldn't know what hit it.
You're not thinking hard enough. MSNBC has auto-filters to edit out swear words, I doubt most people do it intentionally.
@Amanda-2017567
This is one of the primary problems with such laws, they can and will be selectively enforced. Anyone the authorities don't like will get a ticket, anyone they do like won't. This is as much a discriminatory issue as it is a free speech issue.
I am not above using a curse word now and again, especially if I banged my head, hit my hand with a hammer, etc, but I am also aware of my surroundings.
I wholeheartedly believe in free speech. But my right to free speech does not give me the right to impede on other peoples rights. There are people who are offended by offensive language. Good for them, they have a moral compass better than mine.
It is the people on here who are against this ordinance, (personally, I think the laws on the books should suffice), who are the biggest impeders of other peoples rights.
It is a shame, that a community has to come to this, it appears that there is a lack of parenting in this community, but wait, it's a liberal bastion.
@gtouch...funny..smfh
@gtouch
Apples and oranges. This forum is owened and operated by MSNBC, a private company. As such they can set any rules they want regarding it's usage. If we don't like their rules we can choose to not particiapate. If we want to use their service we agree to abide by their rules. The First Amendment does not protect speech in sucn an environment, in a public space it does.
That's some pretty hilariously tortured logic. Where do you draw the line at "offensive" speech? I find public preaching offensive, but I doubt you'd support a ban on that.
This does not affect freedom of speech. Yes, the Constitution gives us the right to express our thoughts and opinions, but not the absolute right to use profanity in public to do so. It wasn't written to protect swearing, but to protect speech concerning government, religion, etc. It doesn't cover threats or fighting words, and it doesn't always protect profanity.
Very little offends me, but I would prefer my children not be subjected to language like that in public areas. No one is being told to refrain from speaking opinions or anything else, just to make small verbal revisions to omit profanity. The right to religious, humane animal sacrifice is protected, but do you want to see (or want your kids to see) a goat being sacrificed in the park?
It took 5 posts to get the response MSNBC was looking for. Not a record, but right up there.
1.4
@tea1959
I must have missed the part of the Constitution where it says people have the right to not be offended. Let me check my copy of it quick...Nope, says nothing of the sort.
Honestly can you imagine what a messed up country we'd be living in if anything that could offend someone else was banned? Actually, I find it offensive that you would even suggest such a thing. Please remove your post so as to not offend anyone else. You do want to abide by your own rules now don't you?
I would prefer not to be subjected to your children in public areas.
Good luck trying to define profanity. That should be some great comedy.
How exactly does anyone expect teens not to curse when it's all around them in movies, video games and TV? Set a better example and your kids won't curse. The problem with young teens today is a sense of hopelessness which is why they have some of the highest suicide rates. Maybe, it's time to get back to the nitty gritty when kids, not McMansions, were most important. When kids activities required more than their fingers on a keyboard. Kids cannot learn survival skills when everything is pre-planned by the great parental Hawk Generation always hovering over every second of these kids lives. All life is a risk. You don't learn survival in a padded room.
Remember George Carlin's "7 words you can't say on TV"? Will that be the benchmark for police?
Zionists profited off of Hitler and the Holocaust. Look up the free documentary on topdocumentary(dot)com banking-with-hitler Check out the Haavara agreement and how Zionists profited from the Holocaust and have the gold teeth filling from the victims in their bank accounts to this day. They finance and sell weapons to both sides of every war and treat American soldiers like their stupid goyim chattel. Check out how the chosen people got together with emperor Constantine to combine religion, their monetary system and government to rule the world in their favor for 1687 years and counting. But by all means don't ever combine the term Zionist and Nazi anywhere on the Internet or you will be banned. Free speech yeah go suck a pitoot.
If we want to set the precedent of banning anything that anyone finds offensive... fine.
Let's consider religion next. I, and many others, find the obsessive focus on religion, and the subsequent forcing of this religion on society, to be extremely offensive.
Do we share the same right to not be offended by language we find disturbing? Or, will those supporting this law simply fall into the hypocritical rational that is so prevalent today?
Their is a difference between freedom of speech and a filthy mouth, if its offensive to some then it should not be used its like crapping in public there is no class in it, it shows a lack of intelligence, a lack of respect and its a degradation of our society when we cant show a little respect to one and other, personally I think its pathetic when a 6 year old flips off someone on the street and shouts @!$%# you, then he thinks its OK to @!$%# on your front steep and piss on your rose bushesthinking hes making a statement and has the right to do so, and where do they learn these things, where else but in public places the parent can't control the environment so society has to. its not a civil liberty to be rude, crude, obnoxious, offensive and disgusting. they should skip the fine and just publicly wash their mouth's out with soap. that'smaking a statement would that be legal with the civil liberties union? how about my liberties to not have to listen to their foul mouths. you want to cuss do it at home. a undisciplined society is a volatile and doomed society.
If you don't want to be offended, don't ever leave your mother's basement.
Replace "crapping" with "spreading religion" and I can make the same argument.
@ Mguy: "And what about these "children" you are so concerned about? Where are the laws regulating THEM from disturbing my peace? Where are the laws regulating a screaming brat that is disturbing my peaceful dinner? Where are the laws regulations a sick, coughing, disgusting child from sitting behind me on a plane, disturbing my flight?
If you want to start regulating "disturbance", then we need to take everything into consideration... including your spawn."
Besides the fact that you've apparently been missing all the stories about parents with troublemaking kids being kicked off of planes or out of movie theaters or restaurants, (which I wholeheartedly agree with, BTW, but the same people complaining about that are complaining about this) let's get this conversation back on topic. Supposing, when you're doing this (shouting obsenities across the food court to your skanky date) I stand up and yell "You and your whore STFU!" Would you like that or would that disturb you? If you say you'd like it, you're a liar. If it would piss you off, then we agree.
Look in the preamble under "domestic tranquility".
How do you define "the persuit of happiness". What if my happiness is making you miserable?
The most distressing part of this story is that 183 people out of a population of "about 20,000" had the power to enact this law.
And all those little darlings are going to go home and turn on their music, loaded with expletives, and play video games about jacking people's cars, and yada, yada, yada.
Be reasonable, Sarah. A six-year old isn't going to do that. I imagine that most of the people who will be receiving the fines for swearing in Middleborough are those "little darlings" you're referring to. I can get behind that.
And what about the people who are disturbed by your kid? Can we fine you every time your brat screams or cries in public? That shrill sends shivers up my spine, disturbing my peace.
mguy - that disturbs my peace, as well. My child is is now an adult but whenever she pulled a nutty as a child, I pulled her out of whatever public situation we happened to be in so other people didn't have to listen to her. Fortunately it didn't happen often. I don't like parents who don't their jobs and I think another part of their job is not exposing their children to jerks who spout obscenities like it's nothing. Once, when my daughter was little, my husband and I took her to a restaurant where there was a table of teenagers sitting nearby who were dropping f-bombs like it was their job. My daughter was about 5 at the time and knew instinctively that their behavior was objectionable. It made for a very uncomfortable meal for all of us. Most adults don't do this in public; it's teenagers.
Are you referring to a religion of God or the humanist religion of atheism? Either way, you would be spreading a religion... just as chosing not to decide is still making a choice.
There is no constitutional right to not be offended by what someone else says.
In fact, the opposite is true. The Constitution protects their right to say things that offend you and offers you no ability to stop the offensive speech.
No one has the right to stop someone from saying something simply because it offends them. Our forefathers saw to that.
Free speech stinks sometimes. It means the KKK can hold marches, the WBC can protest military funerals and yes, we all must hear things we do not like.
If the offenders are being loud, ticket them for disturbing the peace or violating a noise ordinance. But you cannot ticket them based on the content of what they say.
I think I see now why 6 year old kids are so street wise. McMommies who themselves never managed to make it to young womanhood. Anyone who expose children to adult language lacks sufficient class and decorum. Sorry Katy and Sarah and the rest of the "parents" who think you have your RIGHTS (in capital letters) It's obvious your parents never taught you an ounce of proper behavior around children. NO...you do not have the right to use adult language in front of children. Because other parents have the right to see to it you don't. If you want to turn your 4 year old into a sewer mouth, be our guest. Just don't you dare think you'll stand in a room full of 4 year old children and have at it with your rights.
Grow up lady. You didn't earn the right to make yourself look like a dockside harlot in front of our kids. I gather you also think you have the right to pull that with your kids' teachers too? Another "Not MY Child" parent whose sewer mouth kids abuse teachers?
@ Mguy; I feel I must apologize a little for post #1.96. Apparently you DO agree in principle.
And what about these "children" you are so concerned about? Where are the laws regulating THEM from disturbing my peace? Where are the laws regulating a screaming brat that is disturbing my peaceful dinner? Where are the laws regulations a sick, coughing, disgusting child from sitting behind me on a plane, disturbing my flight?
If you want to start regulating "disturbance", then we need to take everything into consideration... including your spawn."
Apparently, you DO want laws regulating disturances...but limited to only those things that disturb YOU. I understand you a little better now. Once again, sorry.
Not restoring one-line political derails, or these:
trudat6445, lolfattynerdswhoknew, you're each suspended for a day for violating #1 of the Code of Honor.
...
This seems like a good space to mention that you can curse using your Newsvine account. In fact, you should do so, rather than creative self-censoring with '!'s instead of 'i's and the like.
You can turn off - or on - your profanity filter here.
steel toed
You are trying to compare private industries refusing service to certain people (those with children), and the government passing laws against this group.
This story is in reference to more government intrusion, creating a law based on the "disturbance" that other people claim to feel.
I would neither like it, nor dislike it. I do not allow myself to become offended by the actions or language of people I do not know and deem as having no value.
So you have the right to say whatever you want, it would not bother me. You can not offend me because I do not allow myself to be offended. I am not so weak as to allow the words of another person... a mere collection of letters... to have any power over me and my life.
Those who do become offended so easily are weak individuals. They have little control over their emotions and allow the words of others to have control over their life. It's a rather pathetic existence.
You seem to have an issue with reading comprehension. Perhaps it stems from lack of education. Regardless, I do not want any laws regulating disturbances.
I was simply pointing out the precedent that is being set. If you begin to regulate any disturbance based on linguistics, then that will open the door for regulation all disturbances. Thus, I do not support any of those regulations.
The fact that you struggle to understand this basic concept tells me everything I need to know about you.
Actually, it absolutely is. Ever hear of Larry Flynt? Ever hear the quote, "I may not always defend what you have to say, but I will defend unto death your right to say it?"
Why is it only those who find cursing offensive, who get to pass laws like this. Why doesn't everyone get to pass an ordinance ticketing anything they find offensive? What's the difference?
Listen, finding something offensive does NOT constitute substantive harm to society. If you say cursing does that, then you better roll up your sleeves and get to work, banning books, censoring music, and assembling chastity belts. We don't legislate morality in this country.
In short, get over yourselves and your delicate sensibilities. If you don't like how someone is speaking in front of your child, take your child else where. That's YOUR job, not mine.
And, really, your name is TEA??? Please tell me, you aren't so hypocritical that you belong to the "so-called" movement for limited government, and yet support this ordinance???
Ewent,
You're confusing rights with moral obligation and/or professional ethics.
If I'm in some way employed or acting as a care taker, teacher, mentor, yada yada yada, that's one thing. If someone comes and asks me politely to not swear in front of their children that's one thing.
If I'm minding my own business, leading my life, I DO have the right to use whatever language I want. Because, AGAIN, there is no substantive harm in it. The government has no say in the language I use.
I can be as "whorish", "hoish", and "bitchess" as I want in front of your children. IT'S YOUR JOB TO TEACH THEM HOW TO ACT APPROPRIATELY, NOT MINE.
And, since you're so holier than thou, please answer my question...
Why is it only those who find cursing offensive, who get to pass laws like this. Why doesn't everyone get to pass an ordinance ticketing anything they find offensive? What's the difference?
I find your post offensive, as would my mother, seeing as contrary to what you might believe, she did an excellent job with me, potty mouth aside...
That'll be $20, please.
Another right for republicans to snuff out.
I'm always amazed at the way they can convince such a large amount of the population that squelching their rights is a good thing.
Right to choose- Check!
Collective Bargaining- Check!
Voting rights- Check!
Freedom of speech- Working on it! (Give us a few time slots on right wing media to spin it in a good light.)
You have the right to curse, I have the right to tell your mama.
Cursing is self-disciplined. People who excessively curse in public have low or no jobs, are not respected, and are already chastised in society.
Giving the government another way to interfere in your life not only promotes big government but demotes citizen's freedom.
For those that think you have the right to regulate speech, based on what you find disturbing... I suggest you look up the court decision regarding the Westboro Baptist Church.
"F" " CK YOU ! MIDDLEBOROUGH ! i give you my middlefinger you fckn asswipes,go eat a log of $hit with that $20.00 fine you commie swine
@ Mguy; I called you a liar. That word is not an obscenity, but it does not offend you??? I called your woman a whore, also not an obscenity. That does not offend you??? If I called you a moron or an imbecile, that would not offend you??? I yell all this out in a public crowd, but that doesn't bother you in the least???? Well, I have to say all of that would bother me (probably calling my wife a whore would offend me the most). I don't think I could call myself a man or honest if I said it didn't. That's what it should tell you about me, if you can comprehend.
I'm as much interested in the manner of the law passing as the law itself. I don't know the specifics, but I'm guessing they call a town meeting for a particular issue or they have a regular town meeting at which a variety of issues come up. This would imply that the only people who show up to vote are those that care about this particular issue or one of the other issues at hand. That would seem to lead to a very inaccurate voting pool. Most of the people who don't care or who don't agree with the law probably would not bother showing up. It seems like a good way for a small minority of people to have a law passed that would otherwise receive disdain if voted on in the way typically voted on (at a ballot box open from 7am to 8pm at night.
Kat,
There are already laws about porn and kids.
You can't protect your kids from hearing swear words. I really wish you could, but you can't. As soon as you start outlawing all the swear words, then you'll start outlawing anything deemed negative, like stupid, sucks, hate. Then, you'll start outlawing all the words that may offend someone, black, poor, retarded. Then you'll outlaw all the words that disagree with the current government's thinking.
It all comes down to this. Do you want someone telling you what to not say? If not then you have no right to do it to anybody else. If you don't care if you are censored, then I guess it's OK, but don't come crying to me later.
BTW, after having said all that, I will say I have no problem with public schools having rules about swearing on school grounds or at school functions, or government agencies having rules against its employees swearing while on the clock. Schools need to teach kids how to communicate effectively.
you are perfect example of why they have this new law...i applaud your ignorance, stupidity and disrespect for other people.
A question for those who find this law to be over-reaching, do you also feel the utterance of a racially derogatory word should not increase a crime to a hate crime? After all, it is just a word, and using it is nothing more than one exercising their first amendment right.
I very rarely swear, as I choose to not sound like an ignorant fool, and my children (8 and 10) still consider "stupid" "shut-up" and "dork" to be bad words, but I find this law to be absurd. How do you regulate what is or isn't offensive? I personally believe people who feel the need to insert the f-word into every other sentence to be offensive; I find those who use derogatory slurs to be offensive; I find those who want to force their biblical phrases on the general public to be offensive; and I find people who allow their children to throw tantrums or screech at the top of their lungs to be offensive. However, I don't think these are things that should be regulated. If you have a group of young people hanging out on main street or at the local playground yelling profanities back and forth, tell them they need to leave or they will be fined for disturbing the peace. If you feel that random strangers on the street have a greater influence over your children than you do, then you need to review your parenting skills. Yes, my children have heard this type of language on the school bus and at the playground; no, I don't like that they hear it, but I realize there will always be ignorant people in this world and trying to regulate ignorance makes as much sense as trying to regulate how much sugar one can buy.
@Bosslimo
Did I miss the part of the article that said it was republicans in the bluest state in the Union who are responsible for this? Maybe if you weren't so partisan you'd see that democrats are equally capable of snuffing out peoples rights. In fact when it comes to snuffing out free speech it is liberals who are the masters or have you not heard of the "free speech zones" many liberal colleges have set up limiting free speech to tiny little secluded corners of their campus?
Nate,
It's the motivation behind a crime which decides whether or not it constitutes a hate crime. If a group of men all of the same race, are beating another man of a different race and screaming a racial slur, the slur can be used as evidence of the motivation behind the crime. It isn't the slur, per se, that makes a hate crime.
Your analogy would only be on point, if those of us who oppose the ordinance, WANTED an ordinance outlawing the simple usage of racial slurs.
I don't want that, and I don't believe anyone else does either.
Ewent and Sophi,
I swear maybe once every couple of years and then not in front of children. This isn't about MY rights. This is about the rights of everyone in general. What gives you the right to tell other people what they can and can not say. I think it would be great if nobody ever swore. I really do. I also think it would be great if there were no pornography. I think it would be great if nobody ever drank and nobody smoked. I think it would be great if everybody went to church. I think it would be great if there were no violence on TV. As soon as I mention something you don't want to be forced into, let me know.
steel toed
No, none of that would bother me. I do not allow other people to have power over my emotional state. It is an indication of a very weak mind to give other people control over your life, in such a way.
In fact, nothing will anger an offending party more than non-reaction. People like you, who say those things, are looking for a reaction. You are trying to control my emotions by triggering an anger response. Ignoring you... not providing the reaction you seek... actually transitions the power to me. People like you will typically get more angry, giving me power over your emotional state... controlling your emotional level based on the extent of my reaction, or non-reaction.
That is because you are weak-willed and allow other people to control your emotional state.
I'll make a deal with you (Society), I'll quit cussing if you allow me to beat the crap out of people that offend me with their actions or inaction's. It's a trade off I am willing to accept, until then take your holier than thou, or god hate's fag rhetoric and shove it up your collective asses!
so many ignorant posts here.
seems that many people define freedom of speech as "free to say things that i agree with". freedom of speech is the defending language that we disagree with most.
we don't have a right to NOT be offended.
1812 people had more respect for each other. Things like Manners, accountability were not as absent as they are today.
I'll take dealing with the "unmannerly" over lacking all independance and rights, any day. I mean, would you really want to live in 1812, simply to escape hearing someone curse?
In 1812, I could legally shoot you, stab you or beat you with fists. It was called Honor Laws, now there is no honor. You bought into the we are a more civilized nation. Bull@!$%#, we just have fancier toys and gadgets, and pretend to be civil. You cannot force a change on human nature, and human nature is when you are attacked, fight back. So if I cannot use words instead of fists, what is a civil person too do?
Wow. a lot of you really have your panties in a twist over this. The local news reported that the people in town are sick and tired of teenagers swearing up a storm in public and this ordinance was passed to act as a deterrent. I think it just might work.
For all of you who are so upset that swearing loudly in public in Middleborough, MA now carries a $20 fine... Does this really cramp your style that much? Sarah and Katy and mguy... Is it imperative that you run down the street yelling @!$%#! at the top of your lungs (or in Sarah's case, a crowded shopping mall)? Also Sarah, why is it ok for you to stop only if you're asked politely to not swear in front of someone's children? Why can't you have enough class to just not swear in front of children in the first place? Why do people like you insist on making it harder for people trying to raise their kids?
Look, I'm far from being a prude. In fact, I swear a lot more than I should but I certainly understand that there's a time and place for everything. This sense of entitlement that a lot of you seem to have is just beyond me. I believe in freedom of speech but not when that freedom interferes with someone else's right to live in peace.
Just another aside here. Nobody swears worse than I do, so no, nothing 'offends' me with regards to obscenities. Some time ago, I sat in a crowded food court eating. A group of four boys and two girls, around fifteen to sixteen, sat three tables away. They all spoke loudly, but that was no problem, the place was packed and noisy. One of the girls, however, used language that would make a sailor blush. Judging from their actions and the context of her conversation (too long to tell here) she was obviously trying to impress the boys. Can't say if she actually DID impress them, but she obviously thought she was. Nobody told her to quiet down, but I could see that the parents with little kids weren't too happy with her. But my point with this story is not what should or shouldn't have been done. I had no small kids with me, and I am not offended. But I was thinking "Doesn't she realize what people think of her?" It was obvious why she was doing it, just to look big. That's why everybody really does it, after all, nobody HAS to be profane when they converse to get their point across (with the exception of losing your temper, maybe). Why does a six year old say "f*ck" when they don't even know yet what it means? Attention, of course! But why would a girl want that kind of attention from the public around her? I can understand from the boys she was with, they probably realized she just wanted to be the center of their attention. But why would she want people around her who don't know her to think of her as a slutty bitch? I would be embarrassed if I was a young girl and everybody thought I was a slut. I would actually be less worried about offending people than worried that people around me were thinking I was trash. I guess that's why I self regulate when I'm out in public. And, to be honest, if you're the low class type who has no pride in who you are, I'm pretty sure a 'law' like this one isn't going to stop you from disgracing yourself in public anyway.
Kat,
Once more, this would not cramp my style at all. They could make this a nationwide law and not even publish it beforehand and I could guarantee you I would not be paying a fine.
Kat,
It is imperative that I protect free speech with my dying breath, whether or not you agree with the speech, is moot. The law is reason free of passion. Meaning, whether or not you agree with something morally, is beside the point. Free speech, is free speech, is free speech. End of story.
Who says I don't? The point is, it's the parent's job, to tell me to watch my language, and in the case that I won't, it's the parent's job to remove their children. It is NOT the government's job to force me to speak in a way that other's find less offensive.
Do you really not see the difference there?
Because they aren't my kids to raise. That was YOUR choice to have them, not mine.
Holy hypocrit!!! YOU are the one telling US what we have to/can't do, without any evidence of substantive harm, because something merely offends you, and you call US entitled??? We haven't told you, you have to do a damn thing, except leave us alone. Lady, you ain't entitled to "freedom from offense". We ARE Constitutionally entitled to freedom of speech.
There is no such thing as the "right to live in peace".
Kat
You miss the point, or you do not have the reading comprehension skills to understand the point. Either way, I will reiterate.
This is not about "running down the street yelling @!$%#!"... this is about creating laws and regulations based on what someone finds disturbing or offensive. With this precedent, we can create a similar law for religious speech... or perhaps we can start burning books that contain words that "disturb" you.
I am almost certain that you would be up in arms if someone passed a similar law regarding religious speech. But what is the difference? Both result in offending and disturbing large groups of people. If you support laws based on what is perceived as "offensive", then where does it stop?
Awww you fkn mean to fkn tell me I can't fkn cuss in motherfkn public? Sht, just when I was fkn starting to fkn enjoy myself when some motherfkr comes along along and shts on my fkn parade!!! What the fk is this fkn world fkn coming to when I fkn can't fkn cuss in fkn public. Well fkn boo fkn hoo they can fkn kiss my free fkn a$$. I fkn guess my fkn life is fkn over now.
The above comment is the attitude of you people that make such a big deal of profanity, like it is going to kill you to be just a little polite to others that don't like to hear it. Just a little common courtesy never hurt anyone and it WON"T kill you to show just a LITTLE respect to others. I mean I wouldn't use that kind of language around my mom and dad or grand parents (or ANYONE else that doesn't use profanity) because I love, admire and respect them. And guess what I'm STILL alive, I'm not crippled or have any kind of disease or deformity for showing a little RESPECT. It's called being a MATURE ADULT. Why wouldn't you want to show a little respect for others unless you completely and totally lack SELF RESPECT!!!!!! Grow up, it really won't hurt or kill you to show a little RESPECT to others!!!!!!
@ Mguy: "No, none of that would bother me. I do not allow other people to have power over my emotional state. It is an indication of a very weak mind to give other people control over your life, in such a way."
OR.....it could be the indication of a wimp who can't defend his wife's (or his own) honor. But call it whatever you like, you wouldn't be answering my posts and trying to insult me if it REALLY wasn't bothering you.
PS. I understand and agree with your point about "where does regulation stop?"
Doobie,
Nor does it kill people to hear it. You wanna know what HAS killed people? Over reaching governments with no respect for free speech.
This isn't about common courtesy, respect, or even profanity. It's about the government trying to pass ordinances based on subjective opinions, without any evidence of a societal harm being committed.
Yes, but that's your personal decision, based on your personal morals, that are subjective to your life and experiences. It ISN'T the government imposing and enforcing an ordinance, mandating you do that and punishing you if you don't.
Do you not see the difference?
Take a look at your moniker, champ. I'm sure there are plenty of people offended by it. Does that mean the government has a right to fine you for it? Even though it hasn't hurt anyone?
An antiquated notion popular with the uneducated masses. Why you associate your "honor", or the "honor" of your wife, with the opinion of strangers is beyond logical rationale.
I answer your posts to show your weakness... displaying to everyone here how easily someone else can control your emotional state with a simple collection of letters.
How have I insulted you? I have not made any baseless claims that society would deem insulting. I merely point out the underlying message that you communicate to everyone around you... that you lack control over your own emotions and allow other people, strangers even, to have power over your life. I'm sorry if the truth is painful, and thus you categorize it as insulting.
Sarah what would you do if your young child told you to F-off when you scolded them?
roc
I'm guessing she would handle that herself and not petition the government to create a law regulating her household.
Translation - I am a FIRM supporter of 'free speech' ... (you can say what you want to say) so long as the Government or the Locals (i.e. the majority) approve. It's no longer about your right as an individual to speak your mind, in whatever way you wish - it's about whether enough people get together and decide to prevent you from doing that, by force .. of law.
For example, in 1950.. the Majority ... thought that Black People should sit at the back of the bus... see where this is headed?
Once you establish that it's about majority rule, rather than the right of the individual to express themselves.. it's just one more nail in the coffin.
Roc,
It doesn't matter. I would do my best to teach them right from wrong. I would also do my best to teach them to mind their own business, and make choices based on their brains, and not what others are doing or saying. As should all parents.
But you don't get to legislate based on what you find offensive. You deal with the behaviors in your children as they arise, and you teach them not to be a follower or a potty mouth or a whore, or whatever. You DON'T control the legal, free, adults in society. You DO teach your kids.
If that's such a concern or trial for some, I suggest you move to a NOT free country.
@Doobie McStoned
Yeah, that's exactly what it @!$%#in' means, but only in this one ass backwards town.
Good post, Doobie. RESPECT is a word I haven't seen in this thread, along with MATURE ADULT. That's what it SHOULD boil down to after all.
Something else you said got me thinking. One time when I was alone with a coworker and good friend (who could say anything to each other) we got talking about a few other lazy coworkers (a passionate subject among the good workers who have to pick up the slack). After my tirade about them, my friend laughed and shook his head and said "Do you realize how many times you just used the word 'f*cking'?" I thought about what I'd said and it was at least every third word. It seems when I'm around people who don't swear, I don't swear. When everybody is swearing, I'm the worst.
The point is going back to respect. When I'm in a polite and respectful society, I find I'm polite and respectful. When society has no respect for me, I have no respect for them. We need a society with more respect, or self-respect, and maybe more of us would have respect or self-respect. We could need no laws at all if that was possible.
The ACLU won't touch because they are too liberal. They only fight for things that do damage to our traditions and beliefs. If the trend toward absolutely no discipline at home or in school and making everyone feel good, there would not be this kind of problem of out of control language and behavior. We have made particular groups of people "special" so they think they can do as they wish. This law is unconstitutional and as stupid as the hate crime laws. Who ever killed someone they liked?
roc1960
What I would have done if mine had dared say such a thing to me when they were growing up. Slap them in that offending mouth and tell them to take another look and see who they were talking to!
Mr. Miller - 447368
I agree, it seems the more liberal an area is the more they want rights protected as long as it is their rights. If there is something they don't like, then they want to throw out everyone else's rights. This law is completely unconstitutional. The town fathers must be Obama supporters or just plain violators of our constituition.
No its not 1812, back then you could own slaves and quote the Bible to justify it. No words today can ever be THAT profane.
@ Sarah; It doesn't matter. I would do my best to teach them right from wrong. I would also do my best to teach them to mind their own business, and make choices based on their brains, and not what others are doing or saying. As should all parents.
I admire that you do that, and I agree. I've done the same, and it works! Gave you a thumbs up for that.
But you don't get to legislate based on what you find offensive. You deal with the behaviors in your children as they arise, and you teach them not to be a follower or a potty mouth or a whore, or whatever. You DON'T control the legal, free, adults in society. You DO teach your kids.
Unfortunately, there are many parents who DON'T. Then you end up with more adults (when they grow up) who ARE followers, potty mouths, whores or whatever. So then what do the ones who were raised right do about them?
If that's such a concern or trial for some, I suggest you move to a NOT free country.
I don't think I should be forced to leave my country because people who weren't raised properly can't be controlled somehow. I had no rights to raise or teach them, so how do we control them?
Who says I don't? The point is, it's the parent's job, to tell me to watch my language, and in the case that I won't, it's the parent's job to remove their children.
Oh, I see. It's the parent's job to parent you also because yours may have failed miserably as far as teaching you how to behave in public. (I'm using the word "you" here generically speaking) And it's also their job to remove their own children from a place they're at because some cretin with no sense of decency but with a huge sense of entitlement thinks it's alright to sit there and swear up a storm disturbing others. I have to leave? What if I was there first with my kids and you came in and started annoying us? Do I have to leave in the middle of a meal? Your freedom of speech does have its limits, Sarah. I do see your point about free speech is free speech is free speech (yada, yada, yada, to use your words) but there are people out there who push the envelope so far that they become public nuisances. And I also fail to see how being a parent and not wanting people to verbally act out an R rated movie in front of my child in public makes me a hypocrite.
It's even a greater shame when some city folk who are so pathetic, like mowday5gs, walk around with such hypocritical views and beliefs. Let people be who they are? What about the decent people who have a little self control and respect those around them enough to just not "be who they are" even if they felt like it and offend others? You sound like a typical lib; "do as I say, not as I do."
I agree I don't like laws taking away certain little freedoms to do this or say that (especially in this free country), but you DO have to respect others who are offended by your actions. Especially something as vile and unnecessary as swearing in public. Come on, control yourself. Are you that much of a lowlife swine that you have to yell out f**k or s**t? Grow up, show some class...if you can.
I see a lot of you are offended by having to act like human beings instead of animals that do whatever they want whenever they want to do it. Pathetic.
Kat,
Public nuicanse ordinances are ALREADY ON THE BOOKS, and based on behavior much bigger then simple speech. THIS ordinance, is about simple speech. The simple act of using the word.
You've ceased to make sense. This is the complete opposite of what my position has been. THIS IS WHAT YOU WANT THE GOVERNMENT TO DO. Punish people who don't behave, to your standards, in public. My parents are more then welcome to do this, my government IS NOT!
It is when I have a Constitutionally protected right to free speech. Or they could have a talk with their kids, explaining why they shouldn't use that word.
But, again, the government doesn't get to nanny me, when technically, my language hurts no one, but your delicate sensibilities. YOU ARE THE ONE WITH THE ISSUE, YOU ARE THE ONE WHO NEEDS TO FIX THE ISSUE. Not me.
That would be like me saying I'm offended by blue shirts, so the government should be allowed to fine anyone wearing one. Now, wearing a blue shirt, doesn't technically hurt anyone, so why should they be responsible for my issues?
Jesus H, M.F. Christ! Hypersensitive lot they are, aren't they?
All kidding aside, this is nothing new. There were several towns in the old west that put language laws on the books. Mainly because the townspeople were trying to bring in families, but were overrun with "desperadoes, gamblers, drunkards and harlots". (BTW - Prostitution was completely acceptable in the majority of the country when it was founded. Crazy, but true. {look it up.}) The biggest problem for all of the swearing today is that we've all lost a basic sense of decorum and respect for others.
It's better to police ourselves that to have "Big Brudda" do it for us.
Well Sarah-3043284, if you can't control yourself and act like a human being instead of a monkey in the zoo, it's up to you. I guess you'll be raising your kids to be monkey's too.
Sarah actually you are wrong about some things on the 1st ammendment.
Ever actually read it? Or just one of those, i have the right to say what i want types?
The Freedom of Speech is not absolute and the SUPREME COURT has recognized that Government may enact resonable - time - place - or MANNER RESTRICTIONS on speech.
Unpopular ideas have almost always been protected, and there is a right for that, ie speaking for/against religion, wars, government itself etc.
But guess what, Obscenity is not one of them, and there is an actual TEST that the COURTS - Supreme included, have. Miller Test or Three Prong Test. Google it. Its a test to measure if something can be considered Obscene. And if it is, guess what IT IS NOT, NOT, NOT PROTECTED BY FREEDOM OF SPEECH CLAUSE.
What is this test? Well look it up. It seems that this town and judges could argue, that this type of behavior meets all three tests. Miller v. California
1. "the average person, apply contemporary community standards" would find it offensive...seems like the community thinks so
2. work depicts or describes, in this case speech, patently offensive (community defined), sexual conduct defined by law. Obscene words in a offensive unwanted manner could/would meet this criteria.
3. Whether what they are talking about lacks, literary, artistic, political or scientific value. This it meets clearly.
This miller test is highly community based, and is upheld by the laws of the land, Supreme Court Style.
And what it allows is for a community within the USA to define what is accetable behavior. Considering people on the west coast and east coast and mid-west, all have different standards of what is acceptable.
Just as people are in here saying, its my life deal with it, the community is saying this is our community deal with it. And just like they have the option to not be offended, you have the option to LEAVE, and LIVE somwhere else, somewhere with similar values.
Kat
As opposed to your huge sense of entitlement that requires the entire world bend to the needs of your children... all because you feel that the ability to procreate gives you a special privileged to regulate the actions of other people.
I guess your sense of entitlement supersedes those of others, simply because you were able to procreate and produce offspring.
Sarah,
I'm NOT talking about over reaching governments a-n-d IF you READ my post you'll see that NOT once did mention ANYTHING about government. And besides it is not like it is the federal government or even the state government but it is just some little podunk town. Now if it were the feds I would be all up in arms upset and in agreement with you and actually I do somewhat agree with you. As you said my moniker says a lot about my political views. I believe in SMALLER and way less federal government and States having a hell of a lot more say and authority than they do and MORE INDIVIDUAL and PERSONAL FREEDOM!!!!!! I think that little small towns should be able to have crazy laws for people of like minds so that they can live FREE in their own little world and those of us that have a differing opinions can live together in ours. Because I think it would create a more peaceful environment than if we were not so very blended together, I think that too much blending together causes chaos. For example, what I am saying is that if I think everybody should drive fords and the next person thinks everybody should be able to drive whatever they want then the beauty of having individual local laws is that we can live where the particular local laws suit us, if I believe everybody should be able to drive whatever they want then I should live in a town where the law says I can drive what I want. Now that is not to say that we could visit commute or even work there but the local laws are for the local RESIDENTS and for the any one within the borders but if a person doesn't like the local laws just don't go there or if a person does just abide by the law until you leave and/or just go where you like it. It's not that difficult.
Michael Gibson
So according to you... "acting like a human being" entails an overly emotional response associated with a collection of letters that form specific words. And allowing ourselves to become overly emotional, in regards to these simple words, while ignoring the logical fact that they are still only a collection of letters, is characterized as "acting like a human being."
Furthermore, if we were to ignore this emotional, knee-jerk reaction, and view these words for what they are, a collection of letters... that is akin to acting like "animals that do whatever they want, whenever they want".
So in your mind, letting our emotions take full control of our actions is "human"... but being logical and viewing these words as simple linguistics makes us "animals"? You may want to reevaluate which species you consider "pathetic".
Doesn't surprise me, it would be a New England town pushing this crapola... My mother grew up in Ocean Park, Maine, in the 1940s-50s. In those days a family couldn't even buy a house or move into town, unless the church approved them for "becomming a part of the community". Without the church's approval, they were denied the right to buy, well until the Supreme Court saw seperation of church and state issues with that. She also wasn't allowed to have any fun on Sundays (the sabbath and all of that).
All I can say is I'm glad I didn't grow up there. And as to this town, well it just doesn't seem to be tops on my list of places I would want to visit or see.... When it comes to my vacation dollars, my wallet can walk ;) Even if one doesn't use profanity every other word, it still doesn't mean one would want to stay in an area where people are too controlled by those who want to dictate everything for everyone else. For similar reason, Bloomberg doesn't leave me wanting to spend all my time in NYC, until that control freak (of which the soda ban was only the lattest move) is out of office, and his rather dictatorial policies are gone.
mguy-478, I guess you'd be one of those monkey's too. Just say and do whatever you want no matter what the situation. I feel sorry for your kind.
I'm just asking here.. this made me think of another point:
Would this then mean... that if community standards in my home town were such, and it were NOT considered offensive on the whole.... that they could continue to offer a prayer before Friday Night high school football games?
Again - have no idea.. but it seems pretty consistent.
mguy
As opposed to your huge sense of entitlement that requires the entire world bend to the needs of your children... all because you feel that the ability to procreate gives you a special privileged to regulate the actions of other people.
Um, no. I'm simply asking to be left alone in peace and quiet. I'm not asking the world to bend. Just asking the loudmouths of the world to show a little class and refrain from swearing loudly in public whether or not I have children. Someone else might. If that's a huge sense of entitlement, well, so be it. I'm a hypocrite then. Fine me twenty bucks.
Sarah,
You've ceased to make sense. This is the complete opposite of what my position has been. THIS IS WHAT YOU WANT THE GOVERNMENT TO DO. Punish people who don't behave, to your standards, in public. My parents are more then welcome to do this, my government IS NOT!
Oh, my. What is so difficult to understand about me not wanting to have to tell another adult to behave properly in public? I want to be out enjoying myself and not telling some jerk to please stop swearing. I shouldn't have to do that. Stuff like that can cause serious altercations that I don't care to be a part of. Why don't you understand that IT"S NOT MY JOB. It's not my fault if your parents have raised you to be inconsiderate of others in public but yet I have to bear the brunt of it? No. I refuse to accept that. It's my belief that nobody should have the right to come into a public place where others are enjoying themselves and sit there spouting off obscenities with no regard to the people around them.
Its not Okay to say at home with some but Okay to say in Public, I dont get it. The first Amendment Does Not Guarantee the right to say what you wish in public. Do I a person who has to sit and listen to this in public have rights? As by reading some of these past posts here things like manners and respect have been eliminated from societies norm? Maybe if there is better parenting by some there would be no need for more Government?
Why do we then have laws that cover Disorderly conduct, Disturbing the Peace, Public Nuisance, do we get rid of those laws so everyone can express themselves the way they wish?
Roc 1960,
No. That's the point. You have those laws so you don't need laws banning certain words. if someone dropped a hammer on their foot and said a bad word, that probably wouldn't be breaking any of those three laws. it would be breaking this new one. However, if you were running around shouting at the top of your lungs--shouting anything, including profanities, that would probably be disorderly conduct and/or disturbing the peace. if you are going up to individual people and swearing at them, getting in their faces, that's going to be public nuisance.
You have the right to say whatever you want. I have the right to not listen to you. As soon as you do anything to impede my right to avoid listening to you, you've most likely broken one of those laws that you mentioned. Notice I said that I have the right to avoid listening to you, not that I have the right to never hear you just because I happen to be there.
I find it interesting that the thrust of the article and the content of the Newsvine are in sharp agreement on this issue: there is a very real and entitled attitude in America that demonstrates a complete and utter disregard for neighbors and countrymen.
To those who say you should not have to alter your words in public just because someone's child might hear, how is this an edifying response? Where is the sense of pride in America and her people? The community.
For those who claim freedom of speech and profess profanity loudly in defense of their rights, is this all your freedoms mean to you? As a protection to be rude to others? Wars fought, lives lost and nightmares lived out so you can bash others with mere words. Should not these words be a trivial matter to you when compared to the dignity and respect of your fellow American?
Make no mistake. I am not in support of the measures taken for it only further entrenches vile behavior and incites the offended to even worse means of social disruption. I am, though, calling out fellow Americans and asking, "What are the purposes of your rights?" Is it so that you can exist in a society where you have broad lateral movement to effect change and support each other cohesively? Or so that you can bring to yourself whatever pleasures the law will not withhold even if it means the loss of dignity for others or common merit for the group.
Soldiers give up their freewill and in some cases lives as a result of their living in a free society; is it too much to ask ordinary citizens to willfully give up their raucous behavior when in public as means to be good examples to the younger less discerning among us? The fact that it is too much to ask is what really divides America and contributes to the downfall of a once great society.
Here's why all those crying "free speech" are wrong. First, free speech clause applies to political or artistic expression. It does not apply to your desire to show yourself as a uneducated cretin. Second, throughout US Constitutional Law, the courts have recognized that not ALL speech is protected. Repeatedly, they have sited standards of community morality - especially if children are involved. Therefore, your right to create a public disturbance by spewing obscenities is protected IF it is political or artistic. However, if you are violating community standards without a purpose to your speech, then you can be fined. Feel free to be as foul mouthed as you want in private and among you friends, who are like minded. However, your right ends where other people's rights begin.
Backcountry164
I gave a list of rights known to be under attack by republicans and you found a corner in some liberal college promoting free speech.
Police chief middleborough Bruce D. Gates proposed this constitutional violation. Wonder what the usual police chiefs' political party is.
Say, could you come up with a list of right supression championed by democrats?
Jonathan,
I actually totally agree with you. One of my favorite things to say is "Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should." The best way to protect your rights is not to abuse them. I have absolutely no idea why people feel the need to swear so much. I just can't get behind laws banning words. It's too much of a slippery slope. It should be common sense to be respectful to those around you and treat others as you would be treated yourself. Unfortunately, this world seems to be filled mostly with people who are all about me, me, me. I have this right, therefore I am going to exercise it with no regards to anyone. It makes me sad. It really does.
Doobie,
But this ordinance is talking about the government punishing us for words we use. Follow the bouncing ball.
You must have missed the memo. We live in a Constitutional Republic.
Elite,
You're wrong.
The three tests the SCOTUS uses to infringe on free speech are the Bad Tendency Test, the Incitement Test, and the Clear and Present Danger Test.
The Miller Test, or obsenity test, isn't used on pure speech, it's used on expression or cumulative works. Movies, music, magazines, pornography.
The Miller Test would be used, if say I was writing a book with a whole lot of f-bombs in it, not if I was merely using the f-bomb on the sidewalk one day.
Kat,
What is so difficult to understand that you don't own "the public" nor do you have a protected right to that?
Actually it is, because you're the one with the issue with something as mundane as language. The world doesn't have to fit to bend your personal standards of acceptablity. Sorry.
That can be your belief, but IT IS NOT YOUR RIGHT.
Michael,
You have nothing of value to add?
Sarah -
Hate crimes are based on presumed motivation, unless someone admits they committed a crime against someone based on their race, sexual orientation, or what not, you can only presume they did it based on that. Using your example, if a group of one race is beating on a single guy of another race while yelling racial slurs, you can presume the motivation is hate of the race, however, you cannot really prove that to be the motivation. The motivation behind the beating could be that the guy just raped the sister of one of the group, but because a racial slur is used, it can be ramped up to a hate crime. Just look at the Zimmerman/Martin case, it has become a federal case (hate crime) based on the assumption that Zimmerman followed and killed Martin because of his race, all because a newscaster claimed the 911 recording had a racial slur in it.
Kat -
If you really honestly believe that your job as a parent is made more difficult by your children being subjected to profanity, you need to re-evaluate your parenting skills. My children have been told, since they were old enough to start talking, that we don't use profanity and that people who regularly use profanity aren't smart enough to figure out how to express themselves any other way. When we go out in public and they hear others using that kind of language they ignore them. I have asked groups of teens to watch what they were saying as there were a lot of young kids around, and never have I been concerned that it would lead to a confrontation. I have asked adults if it was possible for them to speak a coherent sentence without swearing when there were no children around, simply because I don't care to listen to it, again, I have never been concerned about it leading to a confrontation. But then again, I generally don't go places where that would be a concern.
This isn't about beliefs and what you think should be said or how you feel people should behave in public. This is about a government over-stepping it's bounds and trying to regulate specific things that are completely subjective.
Sarah,
It is you that completely and totally doesn't get it. If a MAJORITY if the populous in a town VOTES for and is in FAVOR of something then due process HAS been served and the spirit of the constitution has been followed. And if you are in the MINORITY then tough luck, MOVE or OBEY and THAT is America, you are FREE to choose. When in Rome do as the Romans do, a person CANNOT be some SPOILED BRAT that whenever they move into a town expect that town to conform to their little BRATTY whim just because they don't agree with how things are run. That is sooo arrogant, bratty, immature and PATHETIC. Especially if YOU don't live there it is NONE of your or my business the entire town just might really LOVE things just the way they ARE and you just might get burnt for meddling. I don't think you understand America and FREEDOM I think you just might be a passive aggressive TYRANT communist that wants to ROB and strip America of our RIGHTS and personal liberties and freedoms. A town has the RIGHT to do what it wants as long as the MAJORITY wants it WITHIN the CONSTITUTION. So some petty a$$ ordinance like one for profanity is NOT infringing on anybodies RIGHTS!!!
Doobie,
You took my breath away.
So, in say 1965, if the majority of people had voted in say, Montgomery Alabama to keep segregation in place, that would be Constitutional?
Oh my God, so completely wrong. Our society, as a Constitutional Republic, is set up to PROTECT THE MINORITY FROM THE TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY.
You're right, so stop trying to tell people they have to conform to your standards of acceptablity, and allowing the government to punish them if they don't. I'm not telling you, you HAVE to do anything, except deal with your own self, and I'm certainly not advocating the government punishes you for your ignorance.
I'm sorry, last I checked this was MY country and MY Constitution too.
WTF? Hypocritical much? You're the one telling me I have to conform to the majority and that the government can punish me for my words. Breath takingingly ridiculous.
I'm sorry, that's $20, you just cursed.
Didn't you ever have to take civics???
Sarah,
First of all you are confusing the federal government with a LOCAL municipality and acting like this is some massive federal government conspiracy. And if I understand correctly it is an ORDINANCE and NOT a law.
Second, why the fk are you getting your panties in a wad over some podunk town (I don't know where you live, and frankly it doesn't matter unless it is in the town where this is happening) waaaaay on the other side of the continent. I live in the Orlando, FL area and even if this happened in some little hicl a$$ town around here why should I give a @!$%#? It doesn't bother me none, and if they want to pass an ordinance that it is iilegal to spit on the sidewalk (which, by the way it is in some places) so fkn what.
Oh, and by the way I see that YOU are just an argumentative trouble maker and that YOU have absolutely ZERO, nada, NONE, no, valid points but that of a COMMUNIST trying to start trouble. I also noticed that you do NOT read my entire post, if you do you totally ignore the parts that don't fit your COMMUNIST agenda and pick out little bits and pieces so that you can spin it into your COMMUNIST point of view. I also noticed that the COMMUNITY doesn't agree with and or like you as much as me, which also is the American way, (THE MAJORITY RULES). I am through with trying to be Dr. Doolittle and talking with an A$$. Have a nice day and go eat some hay.
Doobie,
Ever hear of the Supremacy Clause??? That's the part in the Constitution that says, if a local or state law is in conflict with a federal law, the federal law trumps it.
That's another $20.
And another $40.
Yeah, you called me that before. Communisim is actually an ECONOMIC system. I think that you're thinking of Socialism. But let's break this down...
The government, at any level, being allowed to punish us for words = Not oppressive, or Socialistic in your mind.
Not allowing the government, at any level, to punish us for words = Socialism.
Again, we aren't discussing economics, so I'm not sure why you're talking about Communism. I don't think you even really know the definition. Here...
Take a look at number two. Social activity controlled by the state. Oh, and what was that you were saying about the Majority always having controll??? That sounds awfully similar to the "totalitarian state" mentioned above.
Shucks. And here I thought I was gonna make a bunch of friends.
Wrong again. Constitutional Republic, remember?
Most notable example of a constitutional republic: The United States of America.
Read more: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_a_constitutional_republic#ixzz1xt1utZoj
We see, that you sure can call names. But you really can't support your position, can you? And that will be another $20.
The term "box of rocks" comes to mind.
Brought to you by the same state that tied women to a post and burned them alive to eliminate the "witch problem".
No women were burned alive in Salem or anywhere else in Massachusetts. They were hanged by the neck until dead. That's much more humane.
Correct, burning at the stake was used by Roman Catholics in Europe. Protestants primarily used hangings.
Oh, then that made it okay.
Um. That was four hundred years ago. What does that even have to do with the swearing ordinance? Just asking.
Not all of the witch trial victims were hanged. Poor Giles Corey was pressed to death under an enormous pile of rocks.
Carolyn, four hundred years ago they were progressive enough not to have a cursing fine.
Carolyn, they bring up ancient history when their cause is so weak they can't come up with anything else.
@ sadmoron; You've got to be kidding me! If you swore in public, you were put in the pillory on the public square so that people could pelt you with rotten tomatoes for a few hours. Hey, maybe they should do that instead of a $20 fine! That might work better.
The act of swearing hundreds of years ago had a very different connotation than it does today. Today, when you say "I swear to God", it's a casual phrase. Say that in public a few hundred years ago and your Quaker proctor and your community understood that swearing to mean an "oath" you intended to carry out upon the word of God. The same is true of the word "damn". If you "damned" anyone in those times, it was understood literally, not just figuratively. You'd end up in a community as a person unworthy of contact with your neighbors and wouldn't be allowed to even be buried in a religious cemetery.
The "eff" word actually is a slang derivative of the German slang for "intercourse".
Put them in a pillory and let everyone that passes by wash the filth out of their mouths, or better yet while they are their let the LGBT-Q around behind them so they can grasp the meaning of what they are saying, once you understand what you are talking about you have a tendency to choose your words wisely, thus avoiding the possibility of offending others with foul commentary. just 30 years ago people didn't talk near as bad as they do today, it seems the more liberal our society gets the more disgusting it gets, every generation is more degraded then the one before it, we are not becoming more civilized we are becoming less civilized. freedom and behavior are two different things, but some people cant tell the difference. when I was a kid back in the 50's we never heard such language and no one suffered because of its lack of use, even in the sixties you rarely herd cussing then the 70's it started to enter the private settings the 80's it was showing up in public places but still looked down on, the 90's its more commonplace, now its everywhere I guess we are just getting stupider as time goes on. its a sign of lack of intelligence.
@Ewent, try the English version after the plague in Europe and the population almost dying off king of England needed the country to repopulate, at least he thought so , he came up with Fornicate Under the Consent of the King.
LOL, you must not have read so many history records, swearing do exist in the past. It is more common than you think and it is used differently, but swearing nonetheless.
Witch burning and hanging still occur 100 years ago, not just stop at 400 years ago. The Catholic still have some case dating back to around 105 to 110 years ago.
Really? You're bringing that up? Why not go off on how the white man stole this land or how Caligula threw outrageous parties? Yeah, just jump back as many centuries as you want to make your lame point. Wake up, it's 2012, quit using old dates to make your point. It's getting old.
Sarah,
It is you that completely and totally doesn't get it. If a MAJORITY if the populous in a town VOTES for and is in FAVOR of something then due process HAS been served and the spirit af the constitution has been followed. And if you are in the MINORITY then tough luck, MOVE or OBEY and THAT is America, you are FREE to choose. When in Rome do as the Romans do, a person CANNOT be some SPOILED BRAT that whenever they move into a town expect that town to conform to their little BRATTY whim just because they don't agree with how things are run. That is sooo arrogant, bratty, immature and PATHETIC. Especially if YOU don't live there it is NONE of your or my business the entire town just might really LOVE things just the way they ARE and you just might get burnt for meddling. I don't think you understand America and FREEDOM I think you just might be a passive aggressive TYRANT communist that wants to ROB and strip America of our RIGHTS and personal liberties and freedoms. A town has the RIGHT to do what it wants as long as the MAJORITY wants it WITHIN the CONSTITUTION. So some petty a$$ ordinance like one for profanity is NOT infringing on anybody's RIGHTS!!!
Enjoy having your law shot down in superior court, you haphazard idiots.
You realize swearing on the phone is a misdemeanor, federal law I believe. While im against this, I have to ask whats the difference between the two?
I agree with Ranman87. Not a bad concept, but it will be shot down in court. There's no really big 'if's, ands or but's' arguements that can be made. Some other town or state will ban these along with some other words...and then other words, that someone doesn't like. Sooner or later, the $20 law, will be overturned.
Sounds like they are targeting people by age group.
Wake...how many 80year old couples you see walking the public parks saying "Get your F**king hand off my butt you F**king A**hole?
My guess is not many.
Kind of a no brainer here.
It will get attacked by certain groups when the fines are primarily levied against a specific demographic. And I'm not talking about age.
The law is clearly aimed at kids, but kids adapt much faster than laws. They will be screaming 'see you next thursday' just out of spite. Good luck making that stick in court.
Clarification for the older crowd.... C U Next Thursday.
I take it you've never worked retail before.
Tazer..I live in MA, and in the school I went to one of the teachers commented on whether we could come up with a better word that began with an F and ended with a K. We decided on Firetruck, and you would be amazed how many of us continued using Firetruck as a curse even into adulthood.
Things you learn as a kid rarely completely leave you.
Yea Just what we need, more stupid laws to jam up our courts. I can just see the judge siting an wondering the first time he has to decide if the cussing was a tirad or just casual conversation. What a bunch of C$%P
Last time I checked there was nothing about 'freedom of filth' in the bill of rights. Try cursing in a judge's courtroom and see what happens. :)
ℱμςÄ· ℸℎίş şℎίℸ
I suppose this is supposed to be amusing. It just shows how poorly you were brought up. Sad that you had such bad parents.....
A good parent would have beat the @!$%# out of you until your vocabulary precluded obscenities. Is that what you think, yank?
Ron a good parent would teach you respect for others.
Good parents would teach you not to assume things about other people.
Man, some people need to get a sense of humor. Too many tight douche bags in this country.
I thought it was funny.
That will be $20 please...
I love this post....... and agree totally! I wish my keyboard could do the same.
Cursing is no big deal. There are many words I heard used in Europe--i had NO idea they were even cuss words---I hardly care. Its funny when you hear a Frenchman use the F word in English---lol !
My children live in the city where we commute and live with a multitude of personality types. They hear bad language all the time, I just remind them that when you use language like that it makes one seem stupid. I have not had a problem with cursing with any of them even our oldest who is a teenager ( of course they all try it when they are little and I just remind them how silly they sound) Get over it people, not worth writing laws about!
Swearing doesn't have a damn thing to do with respect. If you want to show me respect don't lie to my face and don't act all chummy when we've never met before.
I must have too many grey hairs under my L'Oreal. What's with the nitpicking these days? I realize money is in short supply and everyone is having a difficult time adjusting to life at the bottom. But come on, is that all Middle Aged Americans do with their free time? Pick each other apart and zero in on their faults? If you can't find one good thing about your fellow Americans, you live in the wrong country.
Does this apply to musicians and comedians and actors?? how about non-English swear words?? Massachusetts should be ashamed, I would expect this of California or New York City...But the home state of the Boston Tea Party....embarrassing
I guess the more things change, they really do change...from this day forward Mass will be known in American History as the birth place of the Government Mandate
Ouch floyd...no freedom of speech on the internet either
I always thought a "mandate" was what Richard Simmons looked for on Saturday night.
Where is Lenny Bruce when you need him. Seriously, alot of people are blaming kids. I can't tell you how many times I have heard adults tell their kids "Stop it or I'm going to bea t the f%#k out of you". I'm talking parents in their 30's.
Robert, Just this morning at the gas station I was waiting in line and a young parent was standing in line screaming at their 2-3 year old calling her a effin a hole and a piece of chit among other things. The manager asked very politely if she would tone it down she told him to "F off and I can say what I want". Then we sit and wonder why????????????
Incredible. This country is in serious trouble if we can't even say damn on the street anymore. Way to piss all over the first amendment. We're getting close to becoming a full police state, and this just solidifies it.
Feel free to mail me a bill for $20 for swearing on the internet. Doesn't sound so far-fetched now, does it.
"What's the big deal? It doesn't hurt anybody. @!$%#, @!$%#ity, @!$%# @!$%# @!$%#." - Eric Cartman
Kenny I doubt very seriously if damn was the word being used that caused this action would to have taken place, Many kids today use many more foul words than that and often an entire sentence filled with them. Somewhere a line needs to be drawn in the sand. We are after all a land governed by laws and it has been said a land without laws is a land filled with caos. It would be great if this and other towns weren't forced to take some kind of action like this but no action will only allow more less acceptable actions from these youth. we have to teach them that some things are not acceptable.
So what happens when the kids start using swear words in other languages. Are the police gonna have to learn several languages?
Remember a while back when kids were saying "shiznit"? Is that a swear word? It's not even a word. How do we know what is or isn't obscene? Who decides? A police officer?
It wont take long, the kids will get around it by either slightly changing words or just creating new ones. More than anything, it sounds like the older generation doesn't like the way that most kids communicate these days and are butthurt over it. All I say is "@!$%# em".
I wonder if this is gonna apply to the cops too. They're among the worst offenders.
Now seriously. This has 0.000% chance of surviving its first legal challenge. You'd have to be a real moron to waste your time enacting an ordinance like this.
Makes me want to buy a plane ticket so I can go on a swearing spree. So I wonder if they will end up fining people with disabilities like Tourette syndrome? I can only hope some lawyer ties up a bunch of their money with litigation.
Do they fine per word, or per incident. Want to get my monies worth.
And the list of things we can't do in the land of the free continues to grow!
Dave, they aren't stopping you from doing it. Do it all you like. I'm sure the town would love to have the additonal revenue. But just like anything else, actions have consequences.
And why should it have a consequence just because you don't like it? Hey Janine, I find your outfit offensive! Please hand over $20!
Have a nice day.
This is just about the stupidest law i've ever heard of.
Mass also has a law that goatees need to be registered and their owners are required to carry a permit. But it is never enforced and town clerks will look at you funny if you ask for an application.
I kind of applaud the goal, here. But man, I too am tired of a group of people pushing a gov't to pass a law to save them. Personally I think using seat belts, wearing a helmet, and not driving drunk....should just be common sense. Why the heck are small groups making the gov't relive us from using common sense? Obviously we need laws, but important ones....not stupid piddly ones.
Pragmatic - ???
It's beginning to sound like, if you live in Mass, then then being awake is not a desirable state....
Alex,
Every state has rather stupid laws. Mississippi has a state law that says profane language is subject to a $100 fine. In addition, they have a law that it is illegal to teach what polygamy is. Taking another random example, in Texas it is illegal to sell your own eye. It is also illegal to shoot a buffalo from a second story hotel window (a rather specific law if you ask me.)
Hey it's me,
I would agree with you on everything but the drinking and driving. When you can kill someone by your actions, it's quite alright to have it outlawed.
In Kansas it is illegal to have a cow in a hot air ballon above a city's main street... Bet there's a great story behind that.
Hey it's meee I agree with you on the common sense Idea. But this is the public we are talking about here. This is the same people that sues McDonalds when they burn themselves by sticking a hot cup of coffee between their legs..and they WIN.
I remember a comedy skit from Jeff Foxworthy. Of how a guy opens up a new stereo and finds a pkg. of that drying agent they put in there. "Ohhh wow, I got a new stereo and a pkg. of chicklets"
Give that man a sign.
In Oklahoma and Nebraska, whaling is illegal.
As someone who has lived in both of those landlocked states, I have always wondered what in the world happened that would require such a law to be passed.
This is on the same level of stupidity as trying to enact and enforce laws prohibiting blasphemy and heresy.
Wrong. This is on the same level of stupidity as trying to enact and enforce laws prohibiting blasphemy and heresy all while creating an ice sculpture and trying to light yourself on fire....
It's about time someone did something about listening to the youth of America swear publicly! From what I've read it's the youth hanging around the sidewalks and streets that use foul language to just say hi to friends or whoever....it gets old. No parent wants their kids ' talking' that way but hey, it's normal with their friends. It just doesn't mean the general public HAS to put up with it. Good for Middleborough!! They're taking matters into their own hands. First amendment rights are one thing......being civil is another.
I've never considered moving to Mass., and if it didn't snow there, this could convince me! I miss the days when parents tried to instill some values into their kids...like how their language reflects on them, their pride, and their self-respect...not to mention their intelligence level. If the only words they can use to communicate are these tired, overused profanities that many people (and not just older people, like me) would rather not hear, then their vocabulary is sorely lacking. I won't say that this type of language offends me, but it does sadden me that there are so many people, young and old alike, who must use those words in their everyday language...and I've heard it from so-called "professionals", too.
Sufferagette no more - I'm with you on this one. Too many people use "free speech" as a license for rudeness. Just because a person is okay with profanity doesn't mean everyone around them wants to hear it. Most of the time when folks are cussing around us, they are polite when I ask them to stop - they learn that they really can talk without using it! Occasionally we've had people be very rude, quoting "free speech." They think their "rights" trump common courtesy and consideration for others. Freedom to curse was not what the founders were trying to protect, anyway.
Actually, their rights do trump common courtesy, hands down. And the founding fathers wanted to protect any expression which the majority felt was unpleasant or out of favor. So, your points are moot.
Anyone up for a little shuffle board after the Bible study class?
hey, that sounds like a sexual proposition, $20 buddy
I can handle that. :)
lol, very funny
Leave it to the right wing nuts!
Middle Class American... I'm an atheist, far from a right wing nut, believe in free speech, but I also believe in this ordinance. I live in Boston and I'm sick to death of low class idiots with no regard for other life forms spouting off whatever they want to in public. And around here, regardless of how nicely you may do so, if you ask someone to cut it out, you risk losing your teeth or some other valued body part. The only problem I see with this ordinance is that it won't stick. I can almost guarantee nothing will come of it and nobody will get fined. Ah, to dream.
Total stereotyping! Just because someone says F... , does not mean you will end up with bodily harm.
I got just 3 words for those 180 people, GO F*CK YOURSELVES.
Language! Stop the profanity.
Instead, try...
Go fornicate yourselves.
Hey this town must be a HOOT on a Saturday Nite!! What better waste of time for these people who must not have MORE important issues for their hamlet. Get a life...........but not near me...........
Don't ya just love the freedoms we used to have! A new saying for the times in America. "Land of the once-free, home of the future enslaved."
I dont know about all that. There was a time when you wouldnt have been fined.....but they would have taken you out behind the wood shed to adjust your behavior.
Using the F-bomb is NOT a freedom ! A common "word" used, to make up for lack of imagination, instead of replacing it with another explative, that shows you're upset.
There are a number of laws like this on the books all over the country. I remember about 15 years ago there was a days long trial over a canoer who uttered a single frustrated curse. I believe it was Minnesota.
mainemavin: if the word you are on about isn't a word, how come it is in the dictionary then? And it isn't just defined by.... that: there is the verb slang: to meddle (usually followed by around or with ). AND the interjection slang: used to express anger, disgust, peremptory rejection, etc., often followed by a pronoun, as you or it. There is the noun slang: a person, especially one who is annoying or contemptible. [which I usually precede with 'dumb' or 'stupid']. There is even an idiom: to 'give a F___', which is to care or be concerned (though mostly used in the negative). There are MANY more entries to this word. WORD. Whether you choose to use it or not should be a matter of choice.
Alex, do you disagree that the word is vulgar and offensive to many individuals?
Regardless of your personal beliefs, majority rules. Now, I don't necessarily agree with fines or the methods of enforcement, but it's disappointing that this is enough of a problem to warrant such action. It's a complicated social issue with no real top-down solution.
So it's vulgar or offensive to many individuals, Ed. So what? Poor grammar and cliches are offensive to me. Should I propose legislation that would penalize those miscreants who misuse the language in non-profane ways?
Must we hold a referendum on every item/phrase in the lexicon to purge the undesirables? Or should we simply allow the Grammar/Style Police to dictate how we speak? And if majority truly rules, as you say, enough people 'swearing' would eventually remove the stigma of the swear words, and render them as harmless as all but the most self-righteous currently view them. . .
Paul, now everyone carries a gun ( including me) Go ahead and take me out behind the woodshed, last thing anyone would ever do.
Offense shouldn't matter.
I'm offended when I'm told I'm going to Hell for being atheist/female/having a tattoo/liking metal/wearing shorts/etc.
I'm offended when I can't hear professors in my class over the booming voice of a guy shouting about the Bible on campus.
I'm offended when I hear people from out of state pretending like they know more about where I live than a native.
I'm offended when I hear people make derogatory statements about certain groups (without swearing).
I'm offended when people make racist comments about my ancestors being worthless drunken casino owners.
Does this mean that telling someone they are going to Hell, talking about the Bible, being pompous and arrogant, and saying racist/derogatory things (not necessarily in a context that could be construed a hate crime) should also be fined? I'm certain that most people are probably as offended as I am about these things as well.
I'm also certain that people are offended when I say that I preferred our old national motto ("e plurbus unum" over "In God we trust"; I think the sentiment is more American), I think some people find my bit of extra weight offense, some people probably find me having a tattoo offensive. Should expressing an opinion, having extra weight, or having a visible tattoo be worthy of a fine as well?
People are offended by everything under the sun, it's not a good basis for laws. Communities are generally self-regulating when enough people are offended by the same thing. I think that this town just needs to take a good look at their social structures and parenting.
I don't think this should be an actual law, but when kids are raised around today's media,movies,video games and especially certain kinds of music, is it ANY surprise they are foul mouthed brats? And I have heard many younger parents just cuss up a storm in front of their kids! Kids learn by example! I heard this woman call her young daughter a B Y O itch when at the store! How crazy is that? It IS annoying to hear the F-bomb ALL the time! I say it once in a great while, when it really means something! Teach your kids manners,respect for others and to treat others as they would want to be treated and this thing wouldn't have to happen! Punish them for using foul words! BUT as a parent, you gotta watch your mouth,too!
I didn't know Minnesota was a frustrated curse. Ya learn something new every day!
How the feck am I going to understand what other people are saying now?
You might have to resort back to basic english sentence structure and grammar. I think they even teach it in public school now.
You'll have to resort to sayings that include "By the great leader!" And "leader be praised!"
It is actually incorrect to say "resort back" ....poor grammar..I'm just saying..they DO teach THAT in public schools as well..
Period key stuck or just practicing run-on sentences?
@Villain157
Lol. Please don't be mad. I was really just trying to help :(. See you even remembered run-on sentences. Additionally, I am sure you will never "resort back" to using "resort back" in sentences after this. Afterall, this entire post is about using "correct" words. Right? Take care and have a woderful day.
Remember back in the day, as all boreing stories begin. The concept of live album's was meet with a 'bleep' if even the word damn would have been heard. Oh how we all jumped on that freedom of whatever to change sensored ideal's. Looking back, having been able to look forward, to what now come's out of the recording industry, I would gladly keep the bleep's! Not once has anyone been offended by repeated bleep's at a stop light.
Mass. it seem's feel's a bit the same, because who knew, if the sensor's were changed. That an instruction manual would be needed for the proper use of freedom of speech and plain old common courtesy. Mass. a little extreme, but I see where they are coming from. Someone need's to draw the line between the freedom to say it and the freedom to not have to hear it. To bad common sense alway's seem's to elude personal freedom's that restriction's must be imposed and alway's resulting in to much or to little for someone.
Just because a word ends with the letter S, doesn't mean it gets and apostrophe.
Hey Maddy! Put some clothes on and learn English grammar, syntax, and punctuation before posting on a public forum again. Your shambling drivel offends me more than a $20 swear word. Citizen's arrest!
I find the correction of internet grammar offensive to my sensibilities. In fact, it is so much more offensive than any curse word, I think it should be a $30 fine.
Duphily should find Nancy Pelosi and do their part to help clean up America. Both move to Russia.
What a bunch of Fragin NUTS
dumbass yankees
boston redsocks if they are from mass :P
Stupid law... but... the MORONS with NO CLASS who swear in public around children really piss me off too.
Maybe if we increase education? I know... horrible idea. Who wants that?
Maybe if we increase parenting classes? I am no prude, and can probably use words most teenagers haven't even learned yet, but I do have a smattering of public manners too. Learned those at home a long time ago, through the "I'll mash your mouth" method.
That said, that town obviously did not think this thru very hard. The "law" will cause a lot of bad PR and headaches before it is finally struck down by an American legal process. Glad they don't need tourism in their economy, cause other than a few senior buses full of people that are really tight with their money, not too many people will be ready to visit a town where a simple "oh S#it" will get them a $20 souvenir.
The other day at my office one of our new interns 'blew up' the bathroom and didn't spray with freshener before they left, and our HR director walked in afterward--and walked right back out. As we have new interns working with us, I went down to inform them that they were shortly going to receive a vitriolic email informing them of the proper proceedures for restroom use in our office, and one of the interns looked up at me blankly and said 'what's vitriolic?'
I just stared at him for a moment. Graduated Virginia Tech, job all ready for him at Northrup Grumman after his internship is over with us, and he didn't know what 'vitriolic' meant--I have a high school diploma and no college!
I'm sure glad I don't work with Amanda-2017567, she sounds like the office gossiper who thinks her S— — — doesn't stink.
What point are you trying to make?
That you run around telling people they are going to get into trouble? Maybe it's that someone doesn't know a word that bears any relevance to their employment, but you saw an opportunity to mock them for it?
Either way, your post reeks of arrogance and immaturity.
What kind of company reprimands someone through an email for going to the bathroom? Where in the employee handbook does it state that air freshener must be deployed by an employee? Why isn't there an automatic air freshener in use?
Does your Human Resources department have so little to do that they can send meaningless emails to the employees? Did you get your kicks making fun of a new employee? Sounds like the HR department needs to be focusing on how employees should be treating each other instead of sending out ignorant emails about proper potty procedures.
Bill, NY Mike said:
Whoa......
The post was meant to illustrate the problem between a high school grad knowing words that today's college grads don't.
When I went down to talk to the interns it was to warn them they were about to get an email, and to let them know I'd talk to HR and let HR know that they weren't aware of the rules!
I'm the receptionist, biometrics technician, technical writer, and facilities administrator. I answer phones, serve coffee, take fingerprints, write business letters, press releases, company award nominations, as well as change lightbulbs, order supplies, order water, sweep, vacuum, etc. Incidents involving cleaning the restrooms if someone messes it up is my responsibility since we don't have a building janitor, and I currently have a broken arm, which makes cleaning anything, from bathrooms to the dishes people leave in the sink, difficult and time consuming.
So HR letting everyone know about the rules and encouraging people to clean up after themselves makes my job a little easier--I don't like scraping someone else's s**t off the side of the bowl, and it's bloody difficult with one arm in a brace but I accept it's part of my job, so I deal. It doesn't mean HR can't make it a little easier by making sure people know about the upstairs/downstairs rule, and it doesn't make me the office gossip if I let them know that they are getting the email because HR doesn't know they haven't been informed of the rules yet!!
The interns weren't offended--we actually had an interesting chat about language, words, and meanings and it was an ice-breaker and away to get them to relax a little.
So I'm sorry if my first post wasn't fully detailed enough to give everyone the wrong impression. I never meant to offend. No one here at the office was offended; the people I spoke to actually found it funny that I knew words they didn't when they all have letters after their name and I don't.
Maybe if parents pulled the stick out of their ass and stopped trying to shelter their children there wouldn't even be an argument to be had here?
To MSN:
PLEASE delete posts 23.2 and 23.5.
I apologize profusely for causing discontent or bringing negativity to an open honest discussion--my intent was to highlight an amusing (I thought) story about semantics and a subtle critique of the gap in educational quality between the time I went to school and our interns.
I apologize for any divisiveness and hope that you will delete the above-mentioned posts.
Shame on the above commentors, who think using the F-bomb in public by a bunch of spoiled brat kids as folks walk past them, is "free speech". This is more than likely, the scenario of the vote. It's not the 2 guys who are having a conversation and D**** gets spoken about the_______. It's the kids, from grade school to teen, who use the word constantly, in places where other people are. People who have more intelligence than to just use the word for wow factor.
Wish my landlord lived there. He can't speak a sentence without inserting the F-bomb into each sentence.
What gen of kids hasn't done this? It used to be 'shyte' then it was 'damn' then it was 'this word'.... You know - MOST adults won't use it if you mention that the word upsets you. Why don't ask your landlord to obstain from using it when he speaks with you? He doesn't know what your experiences have been: perhaps you were raped by someone repeating it - how does HE know? Have you even asked? Or are you sulking in silence because the world isn't the way that you would ideally want it?
What generation of kids used to stand around and scream these words at the top of their lungs every time they opened their mouths?
One evening on the subway, 3 teens were screaming the N word and F word at each for 20 minutes straight. Those two choices were used almost every other word. For some reason they felt the need to bellow it so they could be heard from the opposite end of the car.
Guess what... According to the Supreme Court, it IS protected "free speech". Just like flipping off a police officer is protected speech. While you may not like it you cannot start down the road of allowing any government, local, state, or Federal, to begin to tell us what we can and cannot say in public.
Next thing they'll do is tell you that you can't wear a Star of David in public, or your wife (or you for that matter) can't wear a skirt above the knee in public. If you relent and allow the Government to take away one right, you'll have a much harder time preventing them from taking away the next one. Just review the Patriot Act sometime.
Two points:
1) Stay away from slippery slope fallacies.
2) No, the Supreme Court has NOT protected profanity. Obscenities are an exception to free speech protections especially if the following conditions are met: appeals to the prurient interest, depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way, and lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
And good luck proving any of those conditions are met (may be discussing the latest moronic d***head running for office, but you didn't hear the first part of the discussion Mr. Officer before you walked by)... Review the case law regarding the famous photo of a young man in the sixties flipping off the police during a protest....
And you still miss the salient point about using legal wrangling in one application for removing civil liberties as justification for removing other liberties in other settings.
To Alex the Blade. I have been know to use the F-bomb on many occasions - generally when I am extremely mad.
What you and many others that have posted their opinions is they want to be able to say whatever they want, wherever they want, disregarding who's ears hear it. So you are saying that is would be ok for a group of people who are just "chillin' to have a "conversation" full of offensive words in front of your Mother and Grandmother ???
As I said, I have been known to use those words, but I have the brains not to use them in front of people that might be offended. In other words, the intelligence to think before I speak and to have a big enough vocabulary to think of another word.
And BTW Alex.... I should not have "to ask my landlord not to speak like" that around me. This is a business arrangement. He does not have the right to talk like that to anyone in a professional business dealing. That might not make any sense if you are an ignorant F^%#.
I ONLY HAVE 6 WORDS FOR THIS...@!$%# U...@!$%# U....@!$%# U
THIS IS FANTASIC.
But it will not be long before some as#hole will get a lawyer and claim about his freedom of speech. The same Jerk$off that never ever served his country in any way and thinks free is TO DO AS THEY LIKE. . They should move to dictatorship and then complain. What Dumb $ases .
I have children and these young people car nothing about dropping the F bomb in front of a child.. I told my son people that curse are unintelligent and can’t express themselves otherwise. Look at RAP music and what dumb $ss fool listen to that $@!$%#. So I said to a co worker in the lunch room if I have a dollar every time I heard the F boob dropped I be rich. In my 30 minute lunch I made 30 Buck in less then 10 minutes. Most those stupid $hits them were under 35 and all color and girls too. Know wonder other nationalities that come here to visit think American are Crude. PS By the way I own someone hundred 120 bucks.
Why am I thinking you never served your country? I know I did and say FUK you you Nazi Republican turd bucket.....
Much like Demolition Man (1993), I now know where to reside if there becomes a toilet paper shortage!
Ha! I was hoping someone would make that reference: "John Spartan, you have been fined 1 credit for violating the Verbal Morality Code..."
In other news, what's really disappointing about this whole exercise is that the town has brought the police into a matter that is really as easy as walking over to the speakers in question and asking "Can you please tone down the language, my mother/grandmother/kid is in earshot." They may rebuff you, but at least you acted like a responsible adult instead of handing your problem off to other people (police).
If I were an enterprising teenager (those years are far, far behind me), I would simply replace the offending words with like-sounding ones (suck, fit, etc.), just to be a jerk. Who knows? Maybe Middleborough will be ground-zero for an entirely new swearword lexicon.
Oh, and if this was an effort by the town to raise funds because times are tough, the $50/fine will look like navel lint next to the legal fees they will incur when faced with a lawsuit over it.
Cytastic, what amazes me about this whole exercise is that in a town of about 20,000 residents, only 233 people cast a vote on this cockamamie - excuse me, malememberamamie - proposition. The rest of the town either didn't give a flaming flick or knew that such an ordinance, if passed, would never be enforced. Let the holier-than-thou crowd censor themselves and leave the rest of us doomed heathen souls to eternal perdition. But even Hell - oops, I mean Gehenna - must have a silver lining, if it means that I won't have to abide their puritanical pronouncements.
Mark Twain said it best: "Nothing needs improvement so much as other people's habits".
Damn it joey you beat me to it! @!$%#!
For those who cry: Freedom of Speech, the freedom is not absolute. This law would only be opposed by lesbians!
Society is too vulgar, and total losers in the world try to make an impact by uttering profanity.
Eric the Well-Read,
You quote supports the proposed law.