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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
it wasnt just some random example. and you know it
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.
KMC Community Forums
Jul 28th, 2005 03:19 PM
