‘gaysrok’

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



Tex
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8734642/



Can you believe that in 2005, a state actually fought, and may continue to fight, the removal of a 'GAYSROK' license plate?

Seeing as the statement is "offensive" and "indecent".

It's sickening.
A license plate that represents acceptance, understanding and compassion is deemed "distasteful" by the heavily Republican/Mormon Utah government.

The only distasteful, indecent and offensive thing I see is the outrageous prejudice and hate spewed by the Utah government.

They are such hateful and close minded people that would forcefully prevent you from expressing beliefs they deem "obscene". In other words, compassion, respect, understanding and equality have no place in Utah.

Repulsive!

Darth Nauj
rememeber utah is the home of Mormons messed

Fire
Have to agree with you there Tex.

botankus
One of my best friend's ex-wife is from Utah. I've never met her, but from how much he despises her, she's got to be one of the biggest skanks alive.

PVS
Utah's tax dollars at work

Fishy
Not like they have anything better to spend it on. People that accept gays must be made to feel miserable by any means necessary.

Cinemaddiction
...think the reaction is a little over the top, frankly. The plates don't need to be censored, though.

debbiejo
Your gonna find that kind of stuff in Utah....It's totally all Mormon......Though they might be OK with...IHV7WIV...I have 7 wives. .

Cinemaddiction
laughing

Darth_Janus
If they're going to censor license plates, why not censor tv, movies, newspapers, articles, the internet, and bumper stickers? I mean, if you are going to be against some kind of material, don't limit yourself in your crusade, right?

From my personal opinion, I can't see why a person NEEDS to have that kind of license plate, same as I can't figure out the "My kid is an honor student at such-n-such school". Both are pointless. I believe that people can and should have their own opinions, but when you flaunt them, prepare to take flak. It's just like Tom Cruise flaunting his beliefs and (In this case, directly) attacking others'. It's the same concept, only it's indirectly attacking other peoples' beliefs (That gay's are NOT okay) whether or not such ideas are right or wrong.

I mean, this isn't as simple as tv censorship by adults or simply changing the channel if it offends you; it's right in your face on the road. If I had a license plate that read something like Bestiality is Okay, or Rape is Okay, or something along those lines, (With the justification that it is natural, rooted in my genetic code and how I feel) and it -wasn't- challenged by a court, I would question the morality of the country I was living in.

But then again, what do I know?

Cinemaddiction
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
If they're going to censor license plates, why not censor tv, movies, newspapers, articles, the internet, and bumper stickers? I mean, if you are going to be against some kind of material, don't limit yourself in your crusade, right?

From my personal opinion, I can't see why a person NEEDS to have that kind of license plate, same as I can't figure out the "My kid is an honor student at such-n-such school". Both are pointless. I believe that people can and should have their own opinions, but when you flaunt them, prepare to take flak. It's just like Tom Cruise flaunting his beliefs and (In this case, directly) attacking others'. It's the same concept, only it's indirectly attacking other peoples' beliefs (That gay's are NOT okay) whether or not such ideas are right or wrong.

I mean, this isn't as simple as tv censorship by adults or simply changing the channel if it offends you; it's right in your face on the road. If I had a license plate that read something like Bestiality is Okay, or Rape is Okay, or something along those lines, (With the justification that it is natural, rooted in my genetic code and how I feel) and it -wasn't- challenged by a court, I would question the morality of the country I was living in.

But then again, what do I know?

They've been censoring vanity plates since their inception, namely for offensive material. It was probably one of the few times they were faced with something as bold as this instance, and didn't know if it was in good taste or not, and that doesn't even matter because it's just the opinions of people in power. They can't impose their views on people's license plates, and now they know. I sort of understand their hesitance, suggesting the plates contents, with the state seal and name, is representitive of the whole, when it's not. But, it is backwards Utah.

People don't necessarily need things like this, but it sure gets their stance/feelings/messages across a lot stronger, especially by way of license plates. More power to 'em, though. Better than those tacky rainbow stickers. laughing

BackFire
Only in Utah would saying something positive about a group of people be seen as "offensive".

Fishy
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
If they're going to censor license plates, why not censor tv, movies, newspapers, articles, the internet, and bumper stickers? I mean, if you are going to be against some kind of material, don't limit yourself in your crusade, right?

From my personal opinion, I can't see why a person NEEDS to have that kind of license plate, same as I can't figure out the "My kid is an honor student at such-n-such school". Both are pointless. I believe that people can and should have their own opinions, but when you flaunt them, prepare to take flak. It's just like Tom Cruise flaunting his beliefs and (In this case, directly) attacking others'. It's the same concept, only it's indirectly attacking other peoples' beliefs (That gay's are NOT okay) whether or not such ideas are right or wrong.

I mean, this isn't as simple as tv censorship by adults or simply changing the channel if it offends you; it's right in your face on the road. If I had a license plate that read something like Bestiality is Okay, or Rape is Okay, or something along those lines, (With the justification that it is natural, rooted in my genetic code and how I feel) and it -wasn't- challenged by a court, I would question the morality of the country I was living in.

But then again, what do I know?

There is a bia difference between those two things however. Because the gays themselves agree with it, the animal does not and neither does the one that gets raped. That makes it not okay when looking at the law. Two people of the same sex having sex is not illegal, if it was then I would agree censorship would be right but seeing as its not they can't really stop the woman.

PVS
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
I mean, this isn't as simple as tv censorship by adults or simply changing the channel if it offends you; it's right in your face on the road. If I had a license plate that read something like Bestiality is Okay, or Rape is Okay, or something along those lines, (With the justification that it is natural, rooted in my genetic code and how I feel) and it -wasn't- challenged by a court, I would question the morality of the country I was living in.

But then again, what do I know?

not much it seems

Darth_Janus
So if the animal agrees, it's okay?

And what about another disturbing act... torture or murder? Is that okay so long as the other agrees? Or if someone likes to eat excrement? If the sole basis of something being acceptible is whether or not there was consent, then everything becomes absolutely relative.

But torture and murder ARE considered offensive acts, to condone or commit, regardless of consent, as is eating feces or whatnot.

Now... seeing as the lisence plate is issued and is technically property of the state of Utah or whatever, it should be by their descretion and standards that it be judged, not the individual's. The big trouble with America now is this rabid defense of individual's rights at the expense of the group as a whole. It's okay to be gay and do this and do that, but if a child and her friend holds hands to pray over their meal in school, they can be thrown out. Whose ideals are we championing here?

Darth_Janus
Originally posted by PVS
not much it seems

Thanks for your imput. You must know more. Please, enlighten us.

PVS
oh, but i have nothing to add.
when someone parallels two consenting adults having sex to the rape
of an animal, what more is there to add?

Darth_Janus
Read closer next time.

PVS
i did. and i know you'll say you didnt intend to make such an ignorant connection, and maybe you didnt mean to, but you did. the next proper step would be to acknowledge that and make an effort to erase such prejudice from your mind, be it conscious or subconscious. wink

it wasnt just some random example. and you know it

Darth_Janus
It's not prejudice. It's a black and white view of what is acceptable and what isn't, according to society standards. Things are either right or wrong, acceptable or not when it comes to law and doctrine. Now, what Fishy said was that the BIG difference was consent. If that was the only difference, it would not be enough to sepearate them.

Now, as for the liscense plate reading Bestiality is OKay or rape is okay, well... It's an extreme example, fair enough. But what would equate with homosexuality that would be offensive to some? If you can find me a better equal, I'd gladly replace the example. But anyways, the point was... It's in-your-face bias for something and in this case, it isn't neccessary. So why should it be defended? Especially since the state itself makes and distributes those plates? If every person (Or the grand majority) of the people in that state voted "Yes, that's okay" it would be the end of the problem.

It's a matter of consideration. I'm not saying that it's good or bad that people express their beliefs, but I AM saying it is bad when it extends to their lisence plates which are displayed for all to see. Unles you're saying you find that perfectly acceptable. If you do, I would hope you wouldn't get upset over your child coming home some day, asking all sorts of questions about other lifestyles (And that can be heterosexual deviance or otherwise... including your favorite barnyard animals) because it's not kept from public view.

And another thing, if that license plate read OSAMARULEZ or something people would be all over it like bees on a honey-dipped dog. Even though the same people who would argue gays and pro-gays should be allowed their public self-expression would bomb that car and you know it.

PVS
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
It's a matter of consideration. I'm not saying that it's good or bad that people express their beliefs, but I AM saying it is bad when it extends to their lisence plates which are displayed for all to see.

so i guess you would be offended is i had an "ILOVEJESUS" license plate?
oh no wait, that would be acceptable by society, correct? well i have news for you, outside of white trash bible beating redneck america, it IS socially acceptable.

Darth_Janus
So now that you've apparently made such a strong case for yourself, and is is socially acceptable... outside of this "white trash bible beating redneck america", perhaps you'd like to make a case as to why it's ethical?

Or will that require more than two sentences on your part?

PVS
im not writing a book here...dont care enough.
but i see you're proud of your little novel there. let me
know ehen it comes out on paperback.

anyway, i meant exactly what i said. if you wish to read more text,
just review my post about 50 times.

PVS
anyway, so long as they dont hurt anyone, why is it not ethical?
because your 3000 year old story book says so?

Darth_Janus
You're assuming I'm a Christian.

You of course, in your wisdom, know what they say about assumption, don't you?

Or do us redneck bible beating trash Americans know that alone?

PVS
you ARE a christian.
please dont try to BS me with PC.

and btw, i am also a christian. im sure you dont see
me as a "real" christian considering such a liberal view, but oh well.
point is, please dont pull the christian persecution routine

Darth_Janus
Actually, I'm done trading jabs with you. You're unreasonable and you came off as immediately antagonistic. If you lucky maybe someone else will come along for you to fight with.

PVS
sure, i take away your tried and true ammo, and off you run.
oh well laughing out loud


btw, dont worry about 'assumption' since far worse concequences will come judging and persecuting others, im sure gays are included. 'let he who is without sin'.....you know

GCG
Originally posted by Darth Nauj
rememeber utah is the home of Mormons messed

so does that mean that if i get a number plate 'ILUVCAFF' will i be getting the same treatment ?

debbiejo
Originally posted by GCG
so does that mean that if i get a number plate 'ILUVCAFF' will i be getting the same treatment ?

Does that mean I love caffeine?...or I love Calves..

GCG
caffeine ...yes yes

Tex
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
It's okay to be gay and do this and do that, but if a child and her friend holds hands to pray over their meal in school, they can be thrown out. Whose ideals are we championing here?

Ugh! How disgusting! How dare you say something that obscene and distasteful! If I want to hear about little children holding hands and praying I'll find the appropriate fetish web site on the internet!

You sir disgust me, and your statement should be censored.

GCG
Originally posted by Tex
Ugh! How disgusting! How dare you say something that obscene and distasteful! If I want to hear about little children holding hands and praying I'll find the appropriate fetish web site on the internet!

You sir disgust me, and your statement should be censored.

laughing out loud

silver_tears
Originally posted by Tex
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8734642/



Can you believe that in 2005, a state actually fought, and may continue to fight, the removal of a 'GAYSROK' license plate?

Seeing as the statement is "offensive" and "indecent".

It's sickening.
A license plate that represents acceptance, understanding and compassion is deemed "distasteful" by the heavily Republican/Mormon Utah government.

The only distasteful, indecent and offensive thing I see is the outrageous prejudice and hate spewed by the Utah government.

They are such hateful and close minded people that would forcefully prevent you from expressing beliefs they deem "obscene". In other words, compassion, respect, understanding and equality have no place in Utah.

Repulsive!


If you think about it, if she has the plate GAYSROK, then by the same law, someone can have a plate slandering gay people and such. Not to mention who knows her motives, it may be a joke and such, and if she's not really gay, it might be offensive to gay people, so they do have a point erm

MC Mike
It's quite sickening how hateful some people still are. messed

PVS
whats more sickening is how they lie about it and claim to be protecting rights and liberties and blah blah blah. i hate liars. may as well just scream "god hates f@gs" because thats what they're thinking.

at least an open loudmouth bigot holds true to one virtue: honesty

Capt_Fantastic
Originally posted by silver_tears
If you think about it, if she has the plate GAYSROK, then by the same law, someone can have a plate slandering gay people and such. Not to mention who knows her motives, it may be a joke and such, and if she's not really gay, it might be offensive to gay people, so they do have a point erm

Absolutely! Those people who drive around with the bumper sticker that says "man + woman = marriage" are totally free to express that belief. That doesn't mean I don't want to ram them from behind. (no pun intended) But I also appreciate the fact that they have the right to express that belief.

Regardless of the womans sexuality, it's sad that Utah actually wasted tax dollars on deciding if it was okay. Whats more sad is that some one feels the need to support the gay community and has to do so by plastering it on their liscense plate.

I appreciate the sentiment, but a more effective way of supporting gays is to change peoples feelings about it. That simply isn't going to happen because of a liscense plate. I've never been riding down the street and seen a Bush sticker on a bumper and thought..."you know...he IS a good guy!" I can assure you, a well placed sentiment in a conversation with your friends is much more valuable to acceptance, than is a bumper sticker.


However, to put a positive spin on this situation, at least it happened in Utah and the outcome supported acceptance.

FeceMan
Originally posted by Tex
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8734642/



Can you believe that in 2005, a state actually fought, and may continue to fight, the removal of a 'GAYSROK' license plate?

Seeing as the statement is "offensive" and "indecent".

It's sickening.
A license plate that represents acceptance, understanding and compassion is deemed "distasteful" by the heavily Republican/Mormon Utah government.

The only distasteful, indecent and offensive thing I see is the outrageous prejudice and hate spewed by the Utah government.

They are such hateful and close minded people that would forcefully prevent you from expressing beliefs they deem "obscene". In other words, compassion, respect, understanding and equality have no place in Utah.

Repulsive!
You know, if I had a license plate that said GAYZSUK or something, the situation would be flipped around.

Darth Janus has pretty much extended my feelings through numerous paragraphs.

PVS, you chided me and called me 'arrogant' for allegedly assuming your beliefs, and yet you did the exact same thing here (whereas I made a legitimate mistake and admitted it). And you go off and insult Janus when you entered into an argument you know you cannot win... I will give you the benefit of the doubt and say that you couldn't see the forest through the trees of Darth Janus' post.

*Sighs.*

And, please, let's keep religion out of this as much as possible. Most of all, let's not argue liberal beliefs of some "Christians" against what the Bible says, as I am afraid I'll have to begin a tirade.

PVS
Originally posted by FeceMan
You know, if I had a license plate that said GAYZSUK or something, the situation would be flipped around.

Darth Janus has pretty much extended my feelings through numerous paragraphs.

PVS, you chided me and called me 'arrogant' for allegedly assuming your beliefs, and yet you did the exact same thing here (whereas I made a legitimate mistake and admitted it). And you go off and insult Janus when you entered into an argument you know you cannot win... I will give you the benefit of the doubt and say that you couldn't see the forest through the trees of Darth Janus' post.

*Sighs.*

And, please, let's keep religion out of this as much as possible. Most of all, let's not argue liberal beliefs of some "Christians" against what the Bible says, as I am afraid I'll have to begin a tirade.

no, i just refuse to accept a kernal of true belief buried under a pile of PC excrement.
if a post reeks of the classic "if we tolerate gays as well allow a man to screw his dog" arguement, then i will call it out. dont like it? well im not here to please you, so whatever smile

Ushgarak
This is remarkably simple.

If Utah produces the plates, then it is doing so in the name of a public service.

A public service has absolutely no place taking a stand against any LEGAL practice or system. The right of gays to assert their pride is in law; the defamatory nature of attacking gays is also in law.

Therefore the Utah state had no business in challening this plate and would also have no business allowing one that sais Gays suck.

And twisting what Fishy said was a totally irrelevant red herring. Consent is a relevant issue when it comes to things sexual. It is NOT a relevant issue when it comes to murder. The comparison was poor.

mechmoggy
I'd be more offended if it said "TEXROKS".

*shudders*

FeceMan
Originally posted by PVS
no, i just refuse to accept a kernal of true belief buried under a pile of PC excrement.
if a post reeks of the classic "if we tolerate gays as well allow a man to screw his dog" arguement, then i will call it out. dont like it? well im not here to please you, so whatever smile
PVS, you're missing the point of Darth Janus' posts...and I fail to see how there is much politically correct with DJ's posts.

What I don't like is your hypocrisy in criticizing me for 'assuming' your beliefs and then turning around and doing the same thing to him.

PVS
i have the ability to put 2 and 2 together.
as do most including yourself, i hope.
i also have the ability to blurt out my own prejudice and
then backpedal to cover it up, i just choose not to. i even
have the ability to forsake the blatent truth simply to defend someone
with like views and to take a jab at another member who i just dont like,
but i choose not to smile

i know what i read, and you know it too. crying about it wont change that.

if the assumption is correct, i will state it.
and it is correct. you know it.
and before you post more BS, just take a moment,
put that big heavy ego away for a second, and privately acklowledge that.
no need to admit to me, just to yourself smile

alcoholicpoet
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
I mean, this isn't as simple as tv censorship by adults or simply changing the channel if it offends you; it's right in your face on the road. If I had a license plate that read something like Bestiality is Okay, or Rape is Okay, or something along those lines, (With the justification that it is natural, rooted in my genetic code and how I feel) and it -wasn't- challenged by a court, I would question the morality of the country I was living in.

But then again, what do I know?

*cough*freedomofspeech*cough*

FeceMan
Originally posted by PVS
i have the ability to put 2 and 2 together.
as do most including yourself, i hope.
i also have the ability to blurt out my own prejudice and
then backpedal to cover it up, i just choose not to. i even
have the ability to forsake the blatent truth simply to defend someone
with like views and to take a jab at another member who i just dont like,
but i choose not to smile

i know what i read, and you know it too. crying about it wont change that.

if the assumption is correct, i will state it.
and it is correct. you know it.
and before you post more BS, just take a moment,
put that big heavy ego away for a second, and privately acklowledge that.
no need to admit to me, just to yourself smile
I'm sorry, PVS, but this isn't a matter of the ego.

But you know what really pisses me off? You know what really pushes my buttons (per se)?

If the situation was the exact opposite and the license plate said 'GAYZSUX', people here would most certainly not be defending Kthe individual's right to express him or herself. They wouldn't be talking about how the court had no right to intervene or pass judgment.

If the court were to deem the license plate inappropriate and make the person who had it change it, everyone on KMC would be happy and cheerful that some bastard got what he deserved, that 'justice' was done.

If the court were to come to the decision they did in this case, everyone on KMC would start ranting about homophobia, bigotry, prejudice, and, in the words of the king of Siam, etc., etc., etc.

Capt_Fantastic
Originally posted by FeceMan


If the situation was the exact opposite and the license plate said 'GAYZSUX', people here would most certainly not be defending Kthe individual's right to express him or herself. They wouldn't be talking about how the court had no right to intervene or pass judgment.



Um...I believe that I did just that, and I'm on the other side of the fence here.

FeceMan
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Um...I believe that I did just that, and I'm on the other side of the fence here.
Fine, 'most people here'.

EsteemedLeader
censorship is wrong

PVS
Originally posted by FeceMan
I'm sorry, PVS, but this isn't a matter of the ego.

But you know what really pisses me off? You know what really pushes my buttons (per se)?

If the situation was the exact opposite and the license plate said 'GAYZSUX', people here would most certainly not be defending Kthe individual's right to express him or herself. They wouldn't be talking about how the court had no right to intervene or pass judgment.

If the court were to deem the license plate inappropriate and make the person who had it change it, everyone on KMC would be happy and cheerful that some bastard got what he deserved, that 'justice' was done.

If the court were to come to the decision they did in this case, everyone on KMC would start ranting about homophobia, bigotry, prejudice, and, in the words of the king of Siam, etc., etc., etc.

what ticks me off is how people are so ready to defend hate speach,
but cant stand the idea of tolerance. erm

why is it that the idea of tolerance of those who hurt nobody is paralleled to hate crimes, rape, etc.? is that the only way people can rest assured in that they somehow re-rationalised their hatred of gays, so that it seems kinder and gentler? as if its somehow an upholding of decency to prevent the support of those they find to be disgraceful, rather than directly attack those they hate for no good reason?

i guess its a better alternative to violence and harrassment, but its still very shitty

Afro Cheese
Originally posted by Ushgarak
This is remarkably simple.

If Utah produces the plates, then it is doing so in the name of a public service.

A public service has absolutely no place taking a stand against any LEGAL practice or system. The right of gays to assert their pride is in law; the defamatory nature of attacking gays is also in law.

Therefore the Utah state had no business in challening this plate and would also have no business allowing one that sais Gays suck.
I agree. I have nothing against voicing you opinion and I think you should be allowed to put bumper stickers on your car that support a certain cause you believe in, but the state has every right to refuse to make "gay pride" liscence plates. It wouldn't necessarily be them being bigots they are just trying to avoid controversy.

alcoholicpoet
Originally posted by Afro Cheese
I agree. I have nothing against voicing you opinion and I think you should be allowed to put bumper stickers on your car that support a certain cause you believe in, but the state has every right to refuse to make "gay pride" liscence plates. It wouldn't necessarily be them being bigots they are just trying to avoid controversy.

Again.

Freedom of ****in' speech. no expression

debbiejo
But where do you draw the line of Freedom of Speach and Hate Speach?

Darth_Janus
Well, I suppose my words didn't help mny viewpoint much, and coming under fire from someone else who seemed to only focus on certain sentences... well... What should I expect? This is the internet. Everyone's a logician/bully/smartass.

My comparisons were poor, I admit it. I was multitasking at the time, at work, and I wasn't thinking on all four or six cylinders. Take that for what you will. But my poor reasoning at the moment shouldn't undermine my entire take on the situation, nor anyone else who agrees with me.

I think I'll die if someone actually reads that and comments on it. Seems most people just browse, find something they disagree with, and quote it with some one liner... like "freedom of speech", as if that were the answer to this entire problem.

Now...

By allowing a plate that says GAYSROK, they're allowing freedom of speech, to say it's okay. But since not every thinks that that is okay... It should be EQUALLY acceptable to have, for instance GAYSRWRONG or something like that. (Read this: I'm not arguing about that from personal viewpoint... Read carefully as I try to make a point). That, however, seems to follow under narrow-mindedness and hatred. So it can't be legally and morally acceptable, correct?

So why the hell can you say something is right with a state issued license plate and that's acceptable, while at the same time having your own opinion and saying it's wrong is not? Listen folks, if you preach equality you have to be equal on both sides. If you cannot have a license plate displaying a message that is negative, why have one that is positive? That's taking sides, and it's not equal protection under the freedom of speech that people champion so much.

And it's not just the issue of gays, (Which would best be described as a view on a lifestyle in this case) it's in the issue of anything... If one person can have a JESUS LUVS U plate or whatever, there should also be one that says the opposite. But then, that would offend some too, wouldn't it?

The right thing to do (for society) would be to oppose it on ground of maintaining neutrality... It's not about my views on gays or yours... This isn't an issue of hatred (Although some will say it is)... It's an issue of free speech, its limitations, and equality (the latter which is paramount in this country from its creation.)

There, I hope that was better said then my earlier ramblings.

Capt_Fantastic
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
Well, I suppose my words didn't help mny viewpoint much, and coming under fire from someone else who seemed to only focus on certain sentences... well... What should I expect? This is the internet. Everyone's a logician/bully/smartass.

My comparisons were poor, I admit it. I was multitasking at the time, at work, and I wasn't thinking on all four or six cylinders. Take that for what you will. But my poor reasoning at the moment shouldn't undermine my entire take on the situation, nor anyone else who agrees with me.

I think I'll die if someone actually reads that and comments on it. Seems most people just browse, find something they disagree with, and quote it with some one liner... like "freedom of speech", as if that were the answer to this entire problem.

Now...

By allowing a plate that says GAYSROK, they're allowing freedom of speech, to say it's okay. But since not every thinks that that is okay... It should be EQUALLY acceptable to have, for instance GAYSRWRONG or something like that. (Read this: I'm not arguing about that from personal viewpoint... Read carefully as I try to make a point). That, however, seems to follow under narrow-mindedness and hatred. So it can't be legally and morally acceptable, correct?

So why the hell can you say something is right with a state issued license plate and that's acceptable, while at the same time having your own opinion and saying it's wrong is not? Listen folks, if you preach equality you have to be equal on both sides. If you cannot have a license plate displaying a message that is negative, why have one that is positive? That's taking sides, and it's not equal protection under the freedom of speech that people champion so much.

And it's not just the issue of gays, (Which would best be described as a view on a lifestyle in this case) it's in the issue of anything... If one person can have a JESUS LUVS U plate or whatever, there should also be one that says the opposite. But then, that would offend some too, wouldn't it?

The right thing to do (for society) would be to oppose it on ground of maintaining neutrality... It's not about my views on gays or yours... This isn't an issue of hatred (Although some will say it is)... It's an issue of free speech, its limitations, and equality (the latter which is paramount in this country from its creation.)

There, I hope that was better said then my earlier ramblings.


This isn't Buddhism. The middle path isn't the most enlightened.

Darth_Janus
You're kidding me. You read everything I had to say and that's all you could come up with? Could you at least elaborate so I don't think you're missing the point?

FeceMan
Originally posted by PVS
what ticks me off is how people are so ready to defend hate speach,
but cant stand the idea of tolerance. erm

why is it that the idea of tolerance of those who hurt nobody is paralleled to hate crimes, rape, etc.? is that the only way people can rest assured in that they somehow re-rationalised their hatred of gays, so that it seems kinder and gentler? as if its somehow an upholding of decency to prevent the support of those they find to be disgraceful, rather than directly attack those they hate for no good reason?

i guess its a better alternative to violence and harrassment, but its still very shitty
"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

That's why I despise the ultra-tolerance pushed on us.

Hate speech? Is it not hate speech to speak hatreds towards racists? Or people who hate homosexuals? To insult them is the same as insulting blacks or Jews or gays.

But it is considered okay if they don't fit in with what the general public believe. The intolerance towards people who are intolerant is a-OK.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
This isn't Buddhism. The middle path isn't the most enlightened.
How would you define enlightened in this case?

alcoholicpoet
Originally posted by debbiejo
But where do you draw the line of Freedom of Speach and Hate Speach?

IMO they can say whatever the hell they want as long as no one gets hurt or killed.

Afro Cheese
Well the state still has the right to censor liscence plates.. why wouldn't they, it's their product isn't it? I don't see why you people think that it's absolutely necessary for people to be able to have whatever they want written on their vanity plates. It's not telling people they can't put gay's rights stuff on their cars, it's just saying that they aren't going to write it on liscence plates.

alcoholicpoet
Originally posted by Afro Cheese
Well the state still has the right to censor liscence plates.. why wouldn't they, it's their product isn't it? I don't see why you people think that it's absolutely necessary for people to be able to have whatever they want written on their vanity plates. It's not telling people they can't put gay's rights stuff on their cars, it's just saying that they aren't going to write it on liscence plates.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH!!!

Afro Cheese
Let me know when you learn your 4th word..

alcoholicpoet
Originally posted by Afro Cheese
Let me know when you learn your 4th word..

Freedom of f.uckin' speech. big grin

Afro Cheese
lol.

FeceMan
Also, I think that people take the term 'hate speech' too far. Oh, noes, someone has a bumper sticker that says, "CHRISTIANS SUCK, GOD ISN'T REAL".

I'm so terribly offended by that.

Is saying that a certain group of people suck really hate speech? I don't know. I think there's a line that we draw for ourselves between freedom of expression and 'hate speech'. Some people have a line that is drawn too close to one extreme or another, it seems.

Afro Cheese
Well when it comes to hate speech certain groups get offended easier than other groups.

Capt_Fantastic
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
You're kidding me. You read everything I had to say and that's all you could come up with? Could you at least elaborate so I don't think you're missing the point?


First of all, you can stop speaking down to me. There's little you've said thus far that I haven't been able to comprehend.

You wanna saythatif it's okayto say gaysrok, then it should be okay to say gayswrong. And I do believe I addressed that in my first post. It IS a right enjoyed by people in this country. A right I defended, despite my feelings on this matter.

So, you wanna say what's good for the goose is good for the gander. But people in this country aren't content to simply say "gayswrong". It's one thing to support an issue, publically, by saying that gaysrok. It's a totally different to say something like all **** will die of aids and burn in hell. That's disgusting. And you're saying that those extremes are justified. That simply isn't true.

botankus
There is a big difference between freedom of speech promoting a certain belief, lifestyle, and support and freedom of speech consisting of straight-out slander.

While they are both indeed examples of freedom of speech, one shouldn't be at fault if someone is offended, while the other should be.

Bardock42
I totally agree with that Court.....ITs disgusting how society nowadays accepts the weirdest and most disgusting things.....stupid ******* and their rights......

Capt_Fantastic
Originally posted by botankus
There is a big difference between freedom of speech promoting a certain belief, lifestyle, and support and freedom of speech consisting of straight-out slander.

While they are both indeed examples of freedom of speech, one shouldn't be at fault if someone is offended, while the other should be.

I think that was what I was trying to say. I'm not sure. I want to get my point across without sounding like an overly PC, tree hugging type, which I totally am not.

Capt_Fantastic
Originally posted by Bardock42
I totally agree with that Court.....ITs disgusting how society nowadays accepts the weirdest and most disgusting things.....stupid ******* and their rights......

Exactly. Whatkind of backlash wold there be if someone had a liscense plate that said "Kaffirs suck!" Well, one of two things would happen, 1) In this under-educated country, people would be wondering whatthe hell a Kaffir was. and 2) the guy would get dragged from his car and beaten to death. But, if I had a plate that said FAGSDIE, then what would happen? Not a damn thing. And if some well meaning, tired of the hypocrisy, gay guy beat the hell out of the guy at a stop light, then gays would be beaten in the streets, as a form of backlash.

Afro Cheese
I think that history is going to repeat itself, and just like it was ok to hate blacks 50 years ago and now it's not(by most people's standards), it won't be ok to hate gays in a couple decades.

mechmoggy
Originally posted by Bardock42
.....stupid ******* and their rights......


Dude, that is such an uncool thing to say. no

Alpha Centauri
People who discriminate are just saa-aaa-aaaaaad.

-AC

FeceMan
Originally posted by mechmoggy
Dude, that is such an uncool thing to say. no
Dude, like, can't you detect the sarcasm?

lil bitchiness
Please do not use word fagot.

FeceMan
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Exactly. Whatkind of backlash wold there be if someone had a liscense plate that said "Kaffirs suck!" Well, one of two things would happen, 1) In this under-educated country, people would be wondering whatthe hell a Kaffir was. and 2) the guy would get dragged from his car and beaten to death. But, if I had a plate that said FAGSDIE, then what would happen? Not a damn thing. And if some well meaning, tired of the hypocrisy, gay guy beat the hell out of the guy at a stop light, then gays would be beaten in the streets, as a form of backlash.
Double-post apology.

What version of 'kaffir' do you mean? (I would assume the racial slur one, but one never knows...)

alcoholicpoet
If someones offended by a liscence plate or bumper sticker, then I guess they should move to another lane, it's not like the driver of the car is getting out with a bat and beating the shit of everyone.

Darth_Janus
Originally posted by alcoholicpoet
If someones offended by a liscence plate or bumper sticker, then I guess they should move to another lane, it's not like the driver of the car is getting out with a bat and beating the shit of everyone.

The idea of having a bumper sticker or shit, etc. saying Gays rule or gays suck or whatever is another issue. That's freedom of expression.

A state-issued license plate is clearly promoting one kind of view or another is simply ridiculous. I don't even think they should have those license plates with universities and love your children mottos on them. It's a form of regulation and identification. If you absolutely HAVE to express yourself, go buy a damn shirt from Hot Topic.

Captain Fantastic... I apologize if I seemed offensive. I didn't mean to insinuate that you didn't understand anything I had to say. It was poor judgment and poor thinking.

Capt_Fantastic
Originally posted by FeceMan
Double-post apology.

What version of 'kaffir' do you mean? (I would assume the racial slur one, but one never knows...)

As in the only version one could assume. Second-class, coloured citizens. Are there any other kind?

alcoholicpoet
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
The idea of having a bumper sticker or shit, etc. saying Gays rule or gays suck or whatever is another issue. That's freedom of expression.

A state-issued license plate is clearly promoting one kind of view or another is simply ridiculous. I don't even think they should have those license plates with universities and love your children mottos on them. It's a form of regulation and identification. If you absolutely HAVE to express yourself, go buy a damn shirt from Hot Topic.



It's not a state issued liscence plate, it's a liscence plate code, 'GAYRYTS' and 'GAYSROK' are personall descisions on your plate, not a special liscence plate made by the state.

FeceMan
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
As in the only version one could assume. Second-class, coloured citizens. Are there any other kind?
Well, its other meaning could apply to a number of people.

mechmoggy
Originally posted by FeceMan
Dude, like, can't you detect the sarcasm?

It's not always easy when reading something as apposed to hearing it. But you should understand my concern. erm

Darth_Janus
Originally posted by alcoholicpoet
It's not a state issued liscence plate, it's a liscence plate code, 'GAYRYTS' and 'GAYSROK' are personall descisions on your plate, not a special liscence plate made by the state.

Personal decisions meaning they are what? The alphanumerical on the back that IDs the car? A little sign one top? Whatever it is, if it's on a license plate, it shouldn't be there. Period.

Syren
I read the entire thread and there's not a lot I can say that hasn't already been said, but I do have a genuine question. Why is a positive expression seen as Freedom of Speech and a negative expression seen as Hate Speech?

Surely both positive and negative should be simply seen as Freedom of expression, and isn't this the issue? That society should be allowed to express its views freely and comfortably, whether positive or negative, without being praised or condemned respectively?

Alpha Centauri
Al Qaida believe in freedom of speech and free expression of views.

See where I'm going?

-AC

Syren
I'm doing the Utopia thing again aren't I? roll eyes (sarcastic)

But, for the record, the above post wasn't my personal belief of how things should be, I was just wondering why there was such an issue with the number plate reading 'GAYSROK', if we live in a society where there are boundaries. These limitations are invoked for reasons so why should some be flexible whilst others aren't?

Capt_Fantastic
Originally posted by Syren
I read the entire thread and there's not a lot I can say that hasn't already been said, but I do have a genuine question. Why is a positive expression seen as Freedom of Speech and a negative expression seen as Hate Speech?

Surely both positive and negative should be simply seen as Freedom of expression, and isn't this the issue? That society should be allowed to express its views freely and comfortably, whether positive or negative, without being praised or condemned respectively?

You're right. In a perfect society, I could drive down the street with a plate that read "KKKroks" and not get beaten. However, this isn't a perfect society where the opinions of other members are respected. In this society, it is a matter of saying what you have to say and dealing with the consequences of free speech, which often are not quiet nods of agreement or disagreement.

Now, the real problem in this situation isn't freedom of speech, but the consequences of that freedom. I can have a vanity plate that says "I am so gay!", but I'd better be willing to get my ass kicked for it.

As for the matter of a hearing to find out if the individual can have a personalized plate, then you have to consider the part of the country in which the hearing takes place. Utah is a less progressive part of the country. So, you can expect there to be some do-gooder looking for loop holes to prevent the plate from being issued.

Syren
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
You're right. In a perfect society, I could drive down the street with a plate that read "KKKroks" and not get beaten. However, this isn't a perfect society where the opinions of other members are respected. In this society, it is a matter of saying what you have to say and dealing with the consequences of free speech, which often are not quiet nods of agreement or disagreement.

Now, the real problem in this situation isn't freedom of speech, but the consequences of that freedom. I can have a vanity plate that says "I am so gay!", but I'd better be willing to get my ass kicked for it.

As for the matter of a hearing to find out if the individual can have a personalized plate, then you have to consider the part of the country in which the hearing takes place. Utah is a less progressive part of the country. So, you can expect there to be some do-gooder looking for loop holes to prevent the plate from being issued.

I understand that yes

It's unfortunate, I suppose, that we live in a society where acceptance of all cultures and beliefs is something that may never happen sad

Alpha Centauri
You're of such utopian mind it's depressing.

It's unfortunate that all beliefs won't be accepted?

I'll be standing at the next Al Qaida bomb site then, I hope you show up and say "Why can't we just accept what they are doing and what they believe?"

-AC

Syren
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
You're of such utopian mind it's depressing.

It's unfortunate that all beliefs won't be accepted?

I'll be standing at the next Al Qaida bomb site then, I hope you show up and say "Why can't we just accept what they are doing and what they believe?"

-AC

Don't be so f.ucking ridiculous... roll eyes (sarcastic)

Alpha Centauri
Originally posted by Syren
It's unfortunate, I suppose, that we live in a society where acceptance of all cultures and beliefs is something that may never happen sad

^ Your quote.

To quote you again "Don't be so f.ucking ridiculous".

You said it's unfortunate that all beliefs might not be accepted. So that includes the beliefs of terrorists and all that malarky.

"...acceptance of all cultures and beliefs".

See? Right there.

-AC

Syren
Aha... my bad.

Ok *deep breath*

It would be nice if all 'happy' cultures and 'sane' beliefs could be accepted stick out tongue

PVS
Originally posted by Syren
I read the entire thread and there's not a lot I can say that hasn't already been said, but I do have a genuine question. Why is a positive expression seen as Freedom of Speech and a negative expression seen as Hate Speech?

Surely both positive and negative should be simply seen as Freedom of expression, and isn't this the issue? That society should be allowed to express its views freely and comfortably, whether positive or negative, without being praised or condemned respectively?

im not sure what you mean.
people ARE free to express whatever ideal they please. the KKK is allowed to preach their ignorant hate publicly, so long as they dont incite violence, wacko branches of the southern baptist church are allowed to preach "god hate's f@gs" at a hate crime victim's funeral in front of his family and friends along with "thank god for 9-11", "god blew up the space shuttle" and "god hates america". their freedom of speech is upheld without question. but god forbid anyone openly supports gay people, and then that right is so easily denied.

Alpha Centauri
What's sane and what isn't is a whole other thread, so I won't get into that in a "gaysrok" thread.

Happy, by definition, cannot exist without sad. So again, wouldn't work.

If something dies, you appreciate life more. If you break up with someone, you appreciate the good times. Happy/Sad, Life/Death. Can't have one without the other.

-AC

Syren
yes Gotcha..

PVS
oh no, AC's gone on a rhetoric fit stick out tongue

see what you did?

Alpha Centauri
See what I did?

(Couldn't resist.)

-AC

FeceMan
Originally posted by PVS
im not sure what you mean.
people ARE free to express whatever ideal they please. the KKK is allowed to preach their ignorant hate publicly, so long as they dont incite violence, wacko branches of the southern baptist church are allowed to preach "god hate's f@gs" at a hate crime victim's funeral in front of his family and friends along with "thank god for 9-11", "god blew up the space shuttle" and "god hates america". their freedom of speech is upheld without question. but god forbid anyone openly supports gay people, and then that right is so easily denied.
That is sad. One behavior is completely inappropriate and, frankly, closing the distance between 'bad' and 'evil', while the other is showing support.

What the hell do those people think they are doing with license plates that say 'GAYSROK'? I mean, HONESTLY...

PVS
what goes up must come down
its always darkest before the dawn
never keep all your eggs in one basket
a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush
dont count your chickens before they hatch
all you need is love
a stitch in time saves nine

there that should do it stick out tongue

PVS
Originally posted by FeceMan
That is sad. One behavior is completely inappropriate and, frankly, closing the distance between 'bad' and 'evil', while the other is showing support.

What the hell do those people think they are doing with license plates that say 'GAYSROK'? I mean, HONESTLY...

you totally lost me there

FeceMan
Originally posted by PVS
you totally lost me there
Okay.

South Baptists who do shit = bad, bordering on evil.
'GAYSROK' = freedom of expression.

PVS
Originally posted by FeceMan
Okay.

South Baptists who do shit = bad, bordering on evil.
'GAYSROK' = freedom of expression.

my point was that in america our freedom of speech extends to hate groups, so long as they dont incite violence (boy do i hate repeating myself. boy do i hate repeating myself. boy do i hate repe--)

in order to preserve our freedom, all forms of expression which are non-threatening must be allowed. then we leave it up to the american public to decide for themselves. thus, the KKK and those certain baptist groups make themselves look like assholes and americans in general have the sanity to ignore them and see them for the joke that they are. the same as someone who hates gays can go on hating them regardless of what a license plate says.
same as someone who is gay can go on feeling assured in themselves regardless of what some clown puts on their license plate. now, if a plate says "killgays" we step into another issue entirely and they go far beyond freedom of speech.

as i said before and i'll say again, *rhetoric alert!!!* we have to take the good with the bad. thats the only way this freedom is preserved, unfortunately.

Syren
Originally posted by FeceMan
Okay.

South Baptists who do shit = bad, bordering on evil.
'GAYSROK' = freedom of expression.

eek!

I think I was heading somewhere like this in my earlier posts...

It would be perfect if people in today's society could differentiate between right and wrong in so far as to learn to accept one another's expressions... freedom to say and do what you believe in could be allowed to a certain extent.

If we could rid the world of the evil that corrupts it today, we would be able to be more accommodating of everyone's urge to express themselves freely.

Alpha Centauri
Evil, sanity, right and wrong differ among different people.

-AC

alcoholicpoet
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
Personal decisions meaning they are what? The alphanumerical on the back that IDs the car? A little sign one top? Whatever it is, if it's on a license plate, it shouldn't be there. Period.

Why not? I've said this alot in this thread.

Freedom of Speech.

Darth_Janus
Originally posted by alcoholicpoet
Why not? I've said this alot in this thread.

Freedom of Speech.

I'm sensing a pattern here...

PVS
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
I'm sensing a pattern here...

absolutely i sense a pattern as well.
the avoidance of the point "freedom of speech"

FeceMan
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Evil, sanity, right and wrong differ among different people.

-AC
Too many, I fear, the extremes of both sides number.

Darth_Janus
Originally posted by PVS
absolutely i sense a pattern as well.
the avoidance of the point "freedom of speech"

I think there's a pattern of people justifying this breach of government neutrality with "Oh, they went and did this." In no way am I arguing that what hate groups do or believe is right. The idea that the KKK can congregate in this day and age is ridiculous, and its because of an -abuse- of said freedom of speech that such things can exist.

Long time ago somebody got their foot in the door and said "Oh hey, the law vaguely says I can just express myself however I want. No limitations and no regard for the consequences to others besides myself. Woo hoo!". And thus the same shit that spawned this debate was born. Your freedom to swing your fist ends well before the other person's nose. Same should be for freedom of speech. This isn't a magazine article saying gays are okay, this is a bloody license plate made by the state. I don't care what anyone says, such a thing shouldn't exist and neither should any other kind of customization. You want customization? Eat at Subway.

Bardock42
Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Please do not use word fagot.
Sorry....I won't anymore.....

BadKitty
just for the record,gays do indeed 'rok'

Jackie Malfoy
I for one would not want to see a licence plate with it on it.But if that woman wants something that stupid on a plate by all means let her.JM

botankus
Listen, I know everyone wants to wail away at JM's post, but let me throw something out there. Since we've already established it would be better to have something like "gaysrok," which is a belief, than "gayssuck," which is slander....

...how would you classify (using the same logic, please) "KKKisCool?"

That statement is not straight-out slander (and I'm not in favor of it, of course) and it supports a group that subjectively is disapproved of for the most part. Hell, you could say the same things about gays, could you not? Since that statement could be said about many groups, so what would be the problem?

Bardock42
Originally posted by botankus
Listen, I know everyone wants to wail away at JM's post, but let me throw something out there. Since we've already established it would be better to have something like "gaysrok," which is a belief, than "gayssuck," which is slander....

...how would you classify (using the same logic, please) "KKKisCool?"

That statement is not straight-out slander (and I'm not in favor of it, of course) and it supports a group that subjectively is disapproved of for the most part. Hell, you could say the same things about gays, could you not? Since that statement could be said about many groups, so what would be the problem?

Wait wait wait a second.......who ever said that "gayssuck" shouldn't be allowed....same thing......its aboot the freedom here (at least I think so)....I don't think she'S allowed to have a license plate like that cause I think gays are cool but I think she can have one because its her own choice to have one.......same with Bigots, Nazis....and even Creationist....

Oh and JM...you are a bigot....but you are right anyways.....

botankus
I said it a few pages ago stick out tongue

I know slander is acceptable by freedom of speech standards, and if you want to pride yourself in using the same manner of speaking as JM, then by all means go ahead.

Bardock42
Originally posted by botankus
I said it a few pages ago stick out tongue

I know slander is acceptable by freedom of speech standards, and if you want to pride yourself in using the same manner of speaking as JM, then by all means go ahead.
So wait you use your own statement and try to dissprove it....interesting that is......

I don't know idf it is acceptable...I think everyone has the right to state their opinion.......and JM is right when she says: "But if that woman wants something that stupid on a plate by all means let her" .....although I wouldn't have added stupid....

And whi did you change it to KKK.......but still its te same thing.....

Jackie Malfoy
Originally posted by Bardock42
Wait wait wait a second.......who ever said that "gayssuck" shouldn't be allowed....same thing......its aboot the freedom here (at least I think so)....I don't think she'S allowed to have a license plate like that cause I think gays are cool but I think she can have one because its her own choice to have one.......same with Bigots, Nazis....and even Creationist....

Oh and JM...you are a bigot....but you are right anyways.....

I am no bigot my friend and that does not make any sence.JM roll eyes (sarcastic) laughing

Bardock42
Originally posted by Jackie Malfoy
I am no bigot my friend and that does not make any sence.JM roll eyes (sarcastic) laughing

Actually yes.....sayijng "something that stupid " aboot Homosexuality is bigot (unrational intolerant).....

botankus
Fine. She's a bigot and you're a slanderer. Everybody happy?

Bardock42
Originally posted by botankus
Fine. She's a bigot and you're a slanderer. Everybody happy?

I sure am......

Also I don't see why I am a slanderer....

botankus
Actually, I'm a slanderer myself for calling you that!

PVS
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
I think there's a pattern of people justifying this breach of government neutrality with "Oh, they went and did this." In no way am I arguing that what hate groups do or believe is right. The idea that the KKK can congregate in this day and age is ridiculous, and its because of an -abuse- of said freedom of speech that such things can exist.

Long time ago somebody got their foot in the door and said "Oh hey, the law vaguely says I can just express myself however I want. No limitations and no regard for the consequences to others besides myself. Woo hoo!". And thus the same shit that spawned this debate was born. Your freedom to swing your fist ends well before the other person's nose. Same should be for freedom of speech. This isn't a magazine article saying gays are okay, this is a bloody license plate made by the state. I don't care what anyone says, such a thing shouldn't exist and neither should any other kind of customization. You want customization? Eat at Subway.

you dont like freedom of speach? oh no, you're all for it, just so long as YOU dont find it offensive......then move to china erm see what happens when limitations are put of such freedom

Bardock42
Originally posted by botankus
Actually, I'm a slanderer myself for calling you that!

Hmm yes......interesting........I was not asking if you were a slanderer though but why I am one....just cause I state the truth...oh you cruel world.....

botankus
You called her a name. (I'm telling!)

This just in: We all suck! How's that for a license plate?

Bardock42
Originally posted by botankus
You called her a name. (I'm telling!)

This just in: We all suck! How's that for a license plate?

I called her bigot......that's not a name...but a description of her behaviour.....

Yes that's ok......

botankus
If I call you a Nazi it's calling you a name. But I won't since I know that term is tirelessly overused on your behalf here at KMC (and also unfunny).

Bardock42
Originally posted by botankus
If I call you a Nazi it's calling you a name. But I won't since I know that term is tirelessly overused on your behalf here at KMC (and also unfunny).

If I would state the Party Programme of the Nazi Party and said that I agree to it....and then I would get called Nazi that wouldn't be name calling but the siomple truth...

botankus
It's still a derogatory term. If I called someone a "wimp" because they wouldn't jump off of a waterfall, I would be calling them a derogatory name. By definition, "wimp"...well, we all know what it means and I would be describing them. It doesn't mean that anything in-between was or wasn't stupid, it's still a name.

Darth_Janus
Originally posted by PVS
you dont like freedom of speach? oh no, you're all for it, just so long as YOU dont find it offensive......then move to china erm see what happens when limitations are put of such freedom

Freedom comes with responsibilities and consequences. Obviously you live by the modern mindset that is ever-so-popular here in the United States that the rights of expression and the individual override the already-shaky morality of a society. I notice that if one disagrees with either a gay way of life or their "right" (Read: priviledge) to have a "gaysrok" license plate, one is immediately a bigot, hate mongerer, and slanderer. But at the same time one is allowed to bash Christians, which include a large majority of Western civilization, even if there are a small portion of said Christians who are openly hateful of gays and work actively to thwrt them.

That is really really just ****ing stupid.

And FYI, you have limitations on freedom all the time. Freedom isn't as general as you'd like to believe. It includes political freedom, circumstantial freedom, freedom of expression and many others I'm not going to regurgitate here for you since I doubt you're really listening anyways. But the point is freedom is a priviledge, no matter how much you try and color it otherwise. You have as much freedom as another person/situation/government/etc. allow and no more.

And before you start burning bibles and chanting "We have rights" and "freedom of speech", I'd like to point out that any fully-functional government that wants its people to maintain trust in them must also place restrictions on their people or risk anarchy. And any idiot knows that anarcy works about as good as lighting a cigarette in a blizzard.

Now... If you actually had something to say besides "Freedom of speech" ad naseum, and you could actually -try- and convince myself and everyone else here of why freedom of speech as you define it is so important (and try not to draw parellels between a state that doesn't want a pro-gay license plate with Communist China or Fascist Germany) I'd be impressed.

But really, you're just gonna attack me and spin a bunch of nonsense, like you've been doing, and totally ignoring the point that no government should allow customized license plates with this or anything else on it other than the number, plain and visible.

PVS
ill say whatever the hell i please. i think you're a bible beating hypocritical bigot, who thinks that everyone who doesnt fall into your pinheaded group think is not a REAL christian. you say whatever you want about me, and guess what? neither of us will be dragged away and thrown in a cell for stating what we wish. thats the beauty of america. like i said... if you dont like it, ship your ass to china.

and please quit your petty grandstanding and educating. im well aware of the 'limitations' on free speach, but they only apply to situations where your words can cause direct physical harm to others.

edit: and fyi custom plates annoy the shit out of me. however, i doubt you would complain at all if the plate read "jesusroks". well, what if i was with the church of satan and found that offensive. does that give me the right to dictate whats appropriate and whats offensive?

Syren
PVS, DJ has some pretty damn good arguments, but you continually throw the fact he's a devout Christian back in his face erm

I like the fact that he writes excessively long essays roll eyes (sarcastic) You may already know everything he points out but I'm willing to bet half of KMC would learn a thing or two if they bothered reading what he's written.

Not trying to provoke anything, just saying that DJ is discussing things rationally, yet you seem hell bent on insulting him. From my viewpoint anyway ninja

alcoholicpoet
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
I think there's a pattern of people justifying this breach of government neutrality with "Oh, they went and did this." In no way am I arguing that what hate groups do or believe is right. The idea that the KKK can congregate in this day and age is ridiculous, and its because of an -abuse- of said freedom of speech that such things can exist.

Long time ago somebody got their foot in the door and said "Oh hey, the law vaguely says I can just express myself however I want. No limitations and no regard for the consequences to others besides myself. Woo hoo!". And thus the same shit that spawned this debate was born. Your freedom to swing your fist ends well before the other person's nose. Same should be for freedom of speech. This isn't a magazine article saying gays are okay, this is a bloody license plate made by the state. I don't care what anyone says, such a thing shouldn't exist and neither should any other kind of customization. You want customization? Eat at Subway.

Jackass, Freedom of Speech was made so we could make watever statement we want, It's not like the state is saying that, a single person is, how does someone in Utah with a 'GAYRYTS" liscence plate affect you? If your offended then don't drive in Utah.

FeceMan
Originally posted by PVS
ill say whatever the hell i please. i think you're a bible beating hypocritical bigot, who thinks that everyone who doesnt fall into your pinheaded group think is not a REAL christian. you say whatever you want about me, and guess what? neither of us will be dragged away and thrown in a cell for stating what we wish. thats the beauty of america. like i said... if you dont like it, ship your ass to china.

and please quit your petty grandstanding and educating. im well aware of the 'limitations' on free speach, but they only apply to situations where your words can cause direct physical harm to others.

edit: and fyi custom plates annoy the shit out of me. however, i doubt you would complain at all if the plate read "jesusroks". well, what if i was with the church of satan and found that offensive. does that give me the right to dictate whats appropriate and whats offensive?
1. You seem to enjoy throwing the term 'bigot' around. Please stop doing so unless the person at which you are aiming the attack is actually a bigot.

2. What the hell is with your hostility?

3. Darth Janus has repeatedly stated that he believes that neither pro-gay or anti-gay/pro-Christian or anti-Christian/etc. license plates/what-have-yous should be placed on cars.

4. You want someone to say that you're not a 'real' Christian? Fine. I'll say it: PVS, you aren't a "real" Christian. You may believe in Christ and have asked for his forgiveness--which does make you a Christian--but your liberal ideals directly contradict what is written in the Bible.

Tell me I'm a hypocrite, that I'm a bad Christian. That I'm judgmental. But don't try and argue your viewpoints by involving your beliefs about Christianity. They don't hold water.

This isn't what this thread is for. ***** about it in the Religion forum or PMs, but not here.

5. I'm noticing a pattern in what people say about arguing with you: you twist and manipulate their words. Either they are all full of crap, or they are all making an accurate observation.
Originally posted by Syren
PVS, DJ has some pretty damn good arguments, but you continually throw the fact he's a devout Christian back in his face erm

I like the fact that he writes excessively long essays roll eyes (sarcastic) You may already know everything he points out but I'm willing to bet half of KMC would learn a thing or two if they bothered reading what he's written.

Not trying to provoke anything, just saying that DJ is discussing things rationally, yet you seem hell bent on insulting him. From my viewpoint anyway ninja
There is a difference between a viewpoint and observing something objectively and stating the facts, Syren. You are demonstrating the latter.
Originally posted by alcoholicpoet
Jackass, Freedom of Speech was made so we could make watever statement we want, It's not like the state is saying that, a single person is, how does someone in Utah with a 'GAYRYTS" liscence plate affect you? If your offended then don't drive in Utah.
Nice way to start your post. 'Jackass'. Darth Janus is talking about something that goes beyond what happened in Utah. He's talking about the entire United States. It's not 'GAYRYTS' that bothers him--it's not that hard to comprehend, if you actually take a second to read and comprehend his posts--it's the abuse of the freedom of speech.

PVS
Originally posted by FeceMan
1. You seem to enjoy throwing the term 'bigot' around. Please stop doing so unless the person at which you are aiming the attack is actually a bigot.

2. What the hell is with your hostility?

3. Darth Janus has repeatedly stated that he believes that neither pro-gay or anti-gay/pro-Christian or anti-Christian/etc. license plates/what-have-yous should be placed on cars.

4. You want someone to say that you're not a 'real' Christian? Fine. I'll say it: PVS, you aren't a "real" Christian. You may believe in Christ and have asked for his forgiveness--which does make you a Christian--but your liberal ideals directly contradict what is written in the Bible.

Tell me I'm a hypocrite, that I'm a bad Christian. That I'm judgmental. But don't try and argue your viewpoints by involving your beliefs about Christianity. They don't hold water.

This isn't what this thread is for. ***** about it in the Religion forum or PMs, but not here.

5. I'm noticing a pattern in what people say about arguing with you: you twist and manipulate their words. Either they are all full of crap, or they are all making an accurate observation.

There is a difference between a viewpoint and observing something objectively and stating the facts, Syren. You are demonstrating the latter.

Nice way to start your post. 'Jackass'. Darth Janus is talking about something that goes beyond what happened in Utah. He's talking about the entire United States. It's not 'GAYRYTS' that bothers him--it's not that hard to comprehend, if you actually take a second to read and comprehend his posts--it's the abuse of the freedom of speech.

still on you little mission against me, oh mr. hypocrite troll? erm

FeceMan
Originally posted by PVS
still on you little mission against me, oh mr. hypocrite troll? erm
Rather than defend yourself, you would deflect attention by calling me names. Okay.

PVS
no need to defend myself against blatant hypocrisy. your antagonistic nature speaks volumes, and the very thought that you would think yourself "above it all" makes me giggle.

so i just wont dignify your compulsive trolling with a response.
awwww sad all that typing for nothing...burns the shit out of you doesnt it laughing out loud

Darth_Janus
First off, Syren, thanks for recognizing that I'm trying to (or have already) gotten a point across. PVS is hellbent on Christian bashing and calling everyone bigots and hate mongers when the only person here showing real hatred is him. Also, he's been assuming this whole time that I am a Christian. That's just plain assinine. While I have religious family members, and my views sometimes coincide with those of church-going folk, I am not a Christian by any definition of the word. So by insisting that I am a Christian, PVS hopes that I will be taken as some kind of fundamenta extremist.

Now, about religion. The interpretation that is held by most conservative Christians is that homosexuality is wrong. In particular, there is a passage that states men shall not lay with men as they do with women, or some such wording. Your conservative Christians will say it means homosexuality is unnatural and against god's will. Liberal Christians who advocate same-sex relationships (or in PVS' case, defend them tooth and nail) often take that line and say "Well, hey... men don't lay with men like they do with women. It's a totally different act." Well, I can understand conservative Christians hearing that and saying "Yeah, you can call a duck a goose... doesn't make him one."

But you can argue that particular passage in religion/philosophy. The focus of this thread was the Utah license plate thing, and not the accused bigotry of everyone who doesn't pull a happy face and say it's okay to be gay. Hell, I'm surprised PVS doesn't break out in song and dance... I mean, I've never said people can't believe what they want... But when you start bashing people for not believing in your views (And I am speaking directly to you on this, PVS...) You're a hypocrite. This whole time you've been labelling anyone who's against the license plate and has a negative viewpoint on homosexuality as a hate mongerer and a bigot, and yet you're the bigot here. Specifically, you've lumped me in with fundamentalist religious fanatics (Because I don't share your views) and you don't know me from Adam.

And alcoholicpoet... Seriously? You need to get a better grip on the situation. Let me disect everything you said in your longest post to me yet:

- You cannot say whatever you want. You cannot yell "fire" in a movie theatre. You cannot threaten to kill the president before officials. You cannot lie and slander people in a way that will harm them publically or in print.

- The freedom of speech was made so that Americans could exrcise freedoms they didn't have under King George. It was NOT made so everyone can just say anything whatever, to whomever or however. A freedom with no boundaries is too easily abused.

- For the last time, this isn't about me driving in Utah and seeing the license plate and being offended. It's about the fact that a US court decided it was okay to have such license plates (especially in what is thought to be a rather conservative and 'non-progressive' state!) and this will have reprocussions in the future. Now, having license plates or stickers that say "I eat crap" or whatever may seem extreme, but this could prove to be the wedge which drives open the limitations of freedom of expression and leads to a whole new age of liberal America, with no moral structure and no respect for one another's views...

- You have in America (and in most places) to say what you want in certain company. You can tattoo your body with any image you want. You can wear dirty clothes in most places. You can drive your own car. In a land (or lands) that has all these freedoms that you take for granted, but you will crap and cry over not being able to have a license plate issued by the state that broadcasts your views in yet another way... seriously... If you aren't happy with what you have, you have problems. People already have more freedom than they know what to do with.

alcoholicpoet
Originally posted by FeceMan


Nice way to start your post. 'Jackass'. Darth Janus is talking about something that goes beyond what happened in Utah. He's talking about the entire United States. It's not 'GAYRYTS' that bothers him--it's not that hard to comprehend, if you actually take a second to read and comprehend his posts--it's the abuse of the freedom of speech.

How exactly can one abuse freedom of speech? Stating words and opinions no matter how offensive or contreversial, is not hurting anyone.

Darth_Janus
Originally posted by alcoholicpoet
How exactly can one abuse freedom of speech? Stating words and opinions no matter how offensive or contreversial, is not hurting anyone.

You're kidding me, right? You honestly don't know how freedom of speech can be abused, or how people can be hurt?

Try an experiment: go to someone close to you, and say the most hurtful things you can imagine. Say whatever it is you want to say because you want to and because you believe you have the 'right'.

And then tell me again that words, expressions cannot hurt people.

Do you have anything else to add, or will you be reading the rest of my post sometime during this fall?

alcoholicpoet
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
You're kidding me, right? You honestly don't know how freedom of speech can be abused, or how people can be hurt?

Try an experiment: go to someone close to you, and say the most hurtful things you can imagine. Say whatever it is you want to say because you want to and because you believe you have the 'right'.

And then tell me again that words, expressions cannot hurt people.

Do you have anything else to add, or will you be reading the rest of my post sometime during this fall?

Walk away from the guy, it's not like he'll follow you, and if he does, then he's breaking the law.

Darth_Janus
Originally posted by alcoholicpoet
Walk away from the guy, it's not like he'll follow you, and if he does, then he's breaking the law.

That made no sense. I suppose you're living up to your SN. Well, I was foolish to think I'd get some decent feedback at 3 AM...

alcoholicpoet
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
That made no sense. I suppose you're living up to your SN. Well, I was foolish to think I'd get some decent feedback at 3 AM...

What? Stalking is illegal is it not?

PVS
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
PVS is hellbent on Christian bashing

thats my point. i called your whole frikin arguement before it happened.
you compared homosexuality to raping an animal, then go on to say freedom of speech should be limited to what you find non offensive, which i find to be very anti american. and then you go on to typically nail yourself to the cross,
and call it "christian bashing" roll eyes (sarcastic)
i saw this line coming from you the moment you started posting. am i psychic? or just able to observe repetition. oh but i should pretend i dont notice, so that i wont seem like a "christian basher". because i hate christians right? REAL christians like you, not hell-bound blasphemous heathens like myself.

i know what you think because your viewpoint is borrowed and regurgitated over and over, and thus i feel like we've argued countless times before. only this time you dont have the rocks to say what you really mean. that i cant respect.

thats all i have to say on this.

Capt_Fantastic
I think the question of morality v. reality is moot. This thread and what is has turned into is pretty much the norm here in the states. Every time someone mentions the word gay, it's met with a long descent into shit.

Everyone has their own opinion on the subjectof homosexuality. Anyone who supports "gay rights"(excuse my use of the term gay rights, as I don't believe gay people should have any special rights)is viewed as moraly irresponsible. Those who oppose gay rights immeadiately label them as extremists who want to help bring about the end of modern American society.

The only real issue here is god. Darth_Janus, if you remove your god from the equation, then what higher moral ground can you stand on?

Darth_Janus
Originally posted by PVS
thats my point. i called your whole frikin arguement before it happened.
you compared homosexuality to raping an animal, then go on to say freedom of speech should be limited to what you find non offensive, which i find to be very anti american. and then you go on to typically nail yourself to the cross,
and call it "christian bashing" roll eyes (sarcastic)
i saw this line coming from you the moment you started posting. am i psychic? or just able to observe repetition. oh but i should pretend i dont notice, so that i wont seem like a "christian basher". because i hate christians right? REAL christians like you, not hell-bound blasphemous heathens like myself.

i know what you think because your viewpoint is borrowed and regurgitated over and over, and thus i feel like we've argued countless times before. only this time you dont have the rocks to say what you really mean. that i cant respect.

thats all i have to say on this.

It wasn't a direct comparison and it was a horrible one, I've already admitted as such. Was that grounds for ignoring everything else I said? Or are you just incapabe of a rational retort and this is all you have?

Second, I said (and I've been saying) that the issue here is with the license plate, that anything ranging from gayrok to raidersrulez shouldn't be allowed. But you just keep missing that. And you keep saying that "freedom of speech should be limited to what I find offensive". Anyone here care to point out where specifically I said this, because I don't remember it at all. PVS, I realize it's dark in that lonely basement at your mother's and the WOW servers are down so you've come in here to tear apart all opposition and twist things so that everyone else is wrong and you're right (without adding a single solid piece of logic, I might add) but please... Give it a rest. You are not the last line of defense for freedom of expression or gay rights, even if you act like it.

And if you're psychic, you should be able to see my point for what it is and not drag up every little thing that can be twisted to your quasi-advantage like you've been doing.

The only repetition we see here is you attacking the opposition without giving anything substantial in return.

But of course, if you don't like how some of us actually argue (using some kind of brainpower, all that...) You could always go to China, right?

Cap't Fantastic, in regards to your question, you have to define god first. And if god as Christian know him doesn't exist, there is something I listen to in lieu anyways, and it's moral law founded -outside- of holy text. You don't have to know a single word in the bible nor believe in god to be a good person, and anyone who says otherwise has a very narrow mind on the issue. My final justification for anything should never be "god's will" or anything like that. It should be that it satisfies the rational mind and the whole idea makes sense from whereever I approach it.

Capt_Fantastic
Originally posted by Darth_Janus

Cap't Fantastic, in regards to your question, you have to define god first. And if god as Christian know him doesn't exist, there is something I listen to in lieu anyways, and it's moral law founded -outside- of holy text. You don't have to know a single word in the bible nor believe in god to be a good person, and anyone who says otherwise has a very narrow mind on the issue. My final justification for anything should never be "god's will" or anything like that. It should be that it satisfies the rational mind and the whole idea makes sense from whereever I approach it.

DJ-

First off, I don't need to define your own god to you.

Secondly, from where does your hatred/mistrust/disgust/issue with homosexuality come, if not from your faith?

The reason I attribute your beliefs with your religion is easy to figure out. Anyone who condemns homosexuality simply because they don't believe thattheir faith has told them to, isn't playing with a full hand. If you want to ascribe those feelings to "morality", then you have to go one step further and figure out from where your sense of morality came. If the bible hadn't been misinterpreted for the last 2 thousand years, from where did your sense of morality originate?

It's simply impossible to espouse christian rhetoric and then expect anyone to believe that your religion has no effect on your moral view.

PVS
Originally posted by Darth_Janus
It wasn't a direct comparison and it was a horrible one, I've already admitted as such. Was that grounds for ignoring everything else I said? Or are you just incapabe of a rational retort and this is all you have? not rational? why, because you said so? and as for your 'horrible comparrison', which was OBVIOUSLY a mistake roll eyes (sarcastic) . the mistake being that you spoke what was really on your mind. dont take back what you see as the truth and replace it with a lie to make me happy. that commands zero respect.

Originally posted by Darth_Janus
Second, I said (and I've been saying) that the issue here is with the license plate, that anything ranging from gayrok to raidersrulez shouldn't be allowed. But you just keep missing that. And you keep saying that "freedom of speech should be limited to what I find offensive". Anyone here care to point out where specifically I said this, because I don't remember it at all. PVS, I realize it's dark in that lonely basement at your mother's and the WOW servers are down so you've come in here to tear apart all opposition and twist things so that everyone else is wrong and you're right (without adding a single solid piece of logic, I might add) but please... Give it a rest. You are not the last line of defense for freedom of expression or gay rights, even if you act like it. oooooops...there goes your holy high ground laughing out loud i thought you were so calm and piouse, and above insults...oh well.

switching your arguement in the middle and saying "i just dont like personalised license plates" is just sooooooooooooo frikin weak and a complete waste of time. once you get called on your own ignorance you quickly retreat and change your stand, then go on to pretend that was your stand all along. it went from:

-gays can be offensive to some, so nobody should have to see those plates
to
-i just dont like personalised plates

how positively weak! eek!

Originally posted by Darth_Janus

And if you're psychic, you should be able to see my point for what it is and not drag up every little thing that can be twisted to your quasi-advantage like you've been doing.

Originally posted by Darth_Janus
But of course, if you don't like how some of us actually argue (using some kind of brainpower, all that...) You could always go to China, right?

and you talk to me about warped logic? ok, so im a lover a freedom and liberty, a staunch supporter of the freedom for both of us to offend eachother....so i should move to china because you're being an ass? you totally lost me there. roll eyes (sarcastic)

Ronny
Originally posted by Tex
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8734642/



Can you believe that in 2005, a state actually fought, and may continue to fight, the removal of a 'GAYSROK' license plate?

Seeing as the statement is "offensive" and "indecent".

It's sickening.
A license plate that represents acceptance, understanding and compassion is deemed "distasteful" by the heavily Republican/Mormon Utah government.

The only distasteful, indecent and offensive thing I see is the outrageous prejudice and hate spewed by the Utah government.

They are such hateful and close minded people that would forcefully prevent you from expressing beliefs they deem "obscene". In other words, compassion, respect, understanding and equality have no place in Utah.

Repulsive!
Thats like me walking into school with a button that say "Promote Tolerance" and getting smacked messed Obviously everyone has a right to say how they feel, its in the constitution right? So why should someone advertising her tolerance for homosexuals get 'shot down' for stating her own opinion. Its unfair and unconstitutional. erm



Utah has to many mosquitos.. horrible place.. never want to go back.

Barka
Originally posted by Darth Nauj
rememeber utah is the home of Mormons messed

How interesting.... so are you all going to hurt me now? roll eyes (sarcastic)

botankus
Originally posted by Ronny
Utah has to many mosquitos

I take it you don't live on the southeastern coastline. If you do, Utah must really suck in that department.

Ronny
No i live in the california valley stick out tongue

<< THERE IS MORE FROM THIS THREAD HERE >>