Since We Are At War Is Acceptable to use the Term "Towel Heads" Now?

[Wildest Bill]

Before ya'll start freak'n out hear me out. In WWII the US called Germans "krouts", called the Japanese "Japs" and "slants" the Italians "whops". In Vietnam the US referred to their people "charlie" "gooks", and other names. So since this is a declared war now, is it still not polically correct to call the terrorist "towel heads"?

Inotherwords, in the past wars names were acceptable and used by alot of people. Even opposing highschool football teams use duragatory names to their foes. Well? What do ya'll think?

[LifeOnWry]

I think this is headed directly for the Pit.

[Wildest Bill]

Why does it need to go to the pit? I am just making an observation from the past to the present. Can't we discuss this logically without all the nastyness of the pit?

[lieu]

I believe you meant "Krauts" and "a lot".
Are racial slurs ever acceptable? It wasn't a race or entire ethnic group that attacked us. It was a small group of zealots. I'm not going to blame an entire ethnicity for that.

[minty green]

WWJD, Bill?

[Dr. Lao]

No.

In the past it was more acceptable, in general, to stereotype and use racial slurs against people, regardless of whether we were at war with them. All of the slurs you cite were in usage before the wars and were acceptable. None of them are acceptable today. I think the conclusion clearly follows.

There are a lot of things wrong with "towel head" and other slurs. First, it is stupid. Many Muslims wear a head covering for modesty's sake. It would be like a rain forest tribe calling us "cotten legs" for wearing pants. Second, it negatively groups a large number of people, many of whom are not our enemy. It seems to imply that Muslims who are citizens of the US are our enemies as well as nearly the entire Mideast. This is a very dangerous mind set.

[lieu]

Oh, and Italians were never called "Whops". *chuckle*
Maybe they did make a mistake *chuckle again* choosing sides but isn't "Wop" what you're unfortunately trying to reference?
Jeez Bill, I'm surprised you spelled towel correctly. What are you going to do to "rug"?

[Wildest Bill]

Couldn't we just use towel head when we refer to terrorist?

[pldennison]

I just got off the elevator in my building, which I rode up with a man who is rather obviously of Middle Eastern descent, if not an immigrant. If I had called him a "towel head," I would have fully expected him to beat me within an inch of my life.

Also, this is not a "declared war," unless you have access to some act of Congress of which every single other person in the country is unaware.

I cannot for the life of me perceive it as acceptable for a Christian (or anyone else!) to use racial and ethnic slurs. The mind boggles.

[lieu]

I prefer "d*ckhead" but that's another story. I had considered starting a thread on just what to call them. Is that where this is headed? You take the lead if you'd like Wild Moses, you cotton-legged sh*t stirrer.

[Wildest Bill]

Originally posted by Dr. Lao
No.

It seems to imply that Muslims who are citizens of the US are our enemies as well as nearly the entire Mideast. This is a very dangerous mind set.

I am not sure if you have heard this or not. But in Florida two Muslims firefighters that the US pay taxes for their salaries refuse to ride on a fire truck that has an American Flag on it because it represents oppression. I am sure the wonderful ACLU will take up for them.
For me I say since they were once fireman, fire their butts.

[LifeOnWry]

OK, Bill, we can discuss it logically and without the nastiness.

Here goes: your answer is "no". It is not now, nor has it ever been, OK to use a derogatory term for any group of people. Consider that while it was popularly accepted to do so in the past, it was never acceptable.

And I would point ou that while "it was done in the past" does not mean that no one objected to it.

[roadrunner70]

Originally posted by Wildest Bill
Couldn't we just use towel head when we refer to terrorist?

I prefer "dead towel head" it's got a nice ring to it...

[gobear]

Bill, it's wrong to call anyone, even terrorists, "towelheads." Arabs wear the khaffiyeh or bernoose to keep the sun off their heads in a desert environment. When you call terrorists "towelheads," you're not attacking them specifically, you're attacking the ethnic group they come from, and that ain't cool.

You can call terrorists "low-live, mother-scratching, dung-eating vermin," for example, and that's fine because you're not attacking the terrorists only, and not traits they share with innocent people.

Think about Tim McVeigh. What if we had said, "All white people are a bunch of terrorists, I want to call them 'whiteys'." Would that have been fair or just?

[seawitch]

Yeesh. Why bother demonizing their choice of headgear, when a large number of innocent people wear the same style? Just a couple of points:

1. I saw some news footage showing a surveillance camera photo of one of the hijackers. He was wearing slacks and a dress shirt. They were sneaky, ya see. A turban, burnoose, and shiny curved blade held between the teeth weren't the clothing choices. I do support banning those stupid sans-a-belt men's pants, but that's a long-standing personal issue for me.

2. For me, and probably for most of us, the term terrorist is quite ugly enough. No slurs or euphamisms are necessary.

[gobear]

Whoops, that should read "...you're attacking the terrorists only.."

[lieu]

Originally posted by Wildest Bill
Couldn't we just use towel head when we refer to terrorist?
Yeah Bill, call the Pallestinians towel heads. Call the IRA towel heads. Call The Weather Underground, Black September, Timothy McVeigh and others towel heads and get the stupid f*cking look you deserve.

[Bomzaway]

Originally posted by Wildest Bill

I am not sure if you have heard this or not. But in Florida two Muslims firefighters that the US pay taxes for their salaries refuse to ride on a fire truck that has an American Flag on it because it represents oppression. I am sure the wonderful ACLU will take up for them.
For me I say since they were once fireman, fire their butts.



The facts aren't clear yet.



MIAMI --
From Key West to West Palm Beach, the US flag waves across South Florida as a symbol of solidarity. But for one South Florida Fire Department, the flag sits at the center of controversy.

The Miami-Dade Fire Department is trying to separate fact from fiction after reports that a couple of firefighters at Opa-Locka Station 26 balked at flying the American flag on their fire truck, saying that Old Glory was offensive.

Initial reports indicated the men are Muslims who see the flag as a symbol of oppression. The two firefighters, one an engine driver and the other a firefighter, showed up for work Saturday morning, saw the flag on the truck and refused to ride, said Miami-Dade Fire-Rescue spokesman Lt. Louie Fernandez.

But some firefighters who work at the station say that's simply not true. Lieutenant Fay Davis, who was not on duty Saturday, but has talked to the men involved, said: "They are not Muslims, and it disappoints me that PIO for the department would go on TV and make these statements without talking to the men involved. What you have here is hearsay taking on a life of its own."

Department officials concede they had not spoken to the men who objected to the flag; they've been off since Saturday.

[Atreyu]

I'll add my opinion to the heap. Maybe if the heap gets big enough it will help Wildest Bill.

It is never, ever acceptable to use derogatory terms to refer to an ethnic group or minority.

Ever.

Doesn't matter if people did it in the past. It doesn't make it right to indulge in that kind of behavior today.

[minty green]

Seriously, Bill, What Would Jesus Do? You call yourself a Christian, after all. Why don't you try living up to it for a change?

[Atreyu]

Oh, and lest you think I made my last statement on the basis of political correctness, I'll just add this:

My response to your OP was not based on being politically correct. It was based on being a human being. I would not like it if someone were to refer to me by a derogatory name because of my ethnic background, nationality, or religion, or my deafness, and neither would you.

[Wildest Bill]

WWJD? Well since he came as the Prince of Peace the first time to try to to save the world, he probably wouldn't have. But the next time he is coming to condemn the people that rejected Him, I think he would throw the terrorists' butts in Hell which is a little worse I think than calling them a name.

[Ukulele Ike]

And don't do it if there's a Sikh in the room, because he might misunderstand the focus of your wrath and stab you with his dagger.

[Beagle]

In fact I am trying to be extra polite to any Muslim or turban wearers I meet. Are we really so unevolved we can't separate out "bad" Muslims from "good" Muslims? Do you really think everyone in a turban, like the nice guy at the BP station up the street, is involved in terrorism? He does not have time, as many double shifts as he works.

The ones I meet seem nervous, and not without justification. This garbage (though I hope in jest) does not advance the ball. Because, Bill, you may mean all this hypothetically and not be violent, whereas someone else hears it as a green light.

Next week: Hug a Muslim Week. A better idea than relaxing the social stigma on racial slurs.

[gobear]

I strongly urge you to go to your local library and borrow Karen Armstrong's Islam: A Short History and An Unexpected Light: Travels in Afghanistan by Jason Elliot. The Armstrong book gives an excellent overview of where Islam came from, what Muslims believe, and the causes of the current situation. The Elliot book is a account of a British journalist's encounters with the Afghan people in 1999, while the Taliban were consolidating their stranglehold on that sad country. These books will help you, as they've helped me, see the Afghans not as a faceless "them," but as individual people caught in a continuing tragedy.

[b]Bill, do you think Jesus wants you to call people bad names and insult them because of how they dress? You are making Jesus very sad.

[minty green]

That's very Christ-like of you, Bill. :rolleyes:

[Wildest Bill]

Originally posted by Atreyu
I would not like it if someone were to refer to me by a derogatory name because of my ethnic background, nationality, or religion, or my deafness, and neither would you. [/B]

I could care less what people call me(can't you tell I've hung here long enough and been called every name in the book). I also see this board use the term "fundie" all the time and no one ever flames them for using it. So I would say that there is some(not everybody mind you) hypocrisy on the ole SDMB.

[minty green]

Note: I for one do not use the term "fundie," and I agree that it is derogatory and demeaning. But using that as an excuse for your own bigotry won't go over real well come Judgment Day, Bill.

[Captain Amazing]

Originally posted by Wildest Bill
WWJD? Well since he came as the Prince of Peace the first time to try to to save the world, he probably wouldn't have. But the next time he is coming to condemn the people that rejected Him, I think he would throw the terrorists' butts in Hell which is a little worse I think than calling them a name.

So, how would he feel if you called Christian Arabs "towel-heads"?

[RickJay]

Originally posted by Wildest Bill
Couldn't we just use towel head when we refer to terrorist?

Since many terrorists are not Arabs, it wouldn't make much sense, would it?

Bill, I stuck up for you in the Pit and now you're trolling. Come on, you know your OP was full of it. You know there's no "declared war." Get off it.

Here's a little math exercise for you. There are, roughly speaking, about 1.1 billion Muslims in the world, most of whom aren't even Arabs but that's another issue. Let's say for the sake of argument that there are 10,000 hard core Muslim terrorists - guys who are legitimately willing to kill you and/or themselves in the name of Islam because they think America is evil. 10,000 is a high estimate; it's way, way more than any credible estimate of what Osama bin Laden has under him.

Put those numbers together and it means that any random Muslim has less than one thousandth of one percent of a chance of being a terrorist. In other words, if you met 100,000 random Muslims, maybe one would be a terrorist. Hell, Bill, that's less than any likelier than any random American being a KKK member. Would you like it if someone called you a Klansman because there was a 1 in 100,000 chance of you being in the KKK?

When you use an acknowledged racist term, you're not just slandering the terrorists, you're slandering all Muslims and/or Arabs (Most people don't seem to know the difference.) Do you think it would be acceptable for me to call criminals "Niggers" because I'm only referring to criminals, not all blacks? Would it be okay for me to refer to greedy people as "kikes" or "heebs" as long as I say "Hey, I only mean misers, not Jews." You know that's wrong, so don't pretend you don't.

[gobear]

Here's what Jesus had to say, from the Gospel of Luke:27
"But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you,bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also.

"If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even `sinners' love those who love them.
And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even `sinners' do that.
But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked.

Besides Bill, Jesus came from the same part of the world the terrorists do, and he wore a long head covering, too, so when you call somebody "towelhead," you're throwing that right into Jesus's face!

[pldennison]

Here's the only answers you need, right here:

James 3:9-10 "With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in God's likeness. Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers, this should not be."

Matthew 7:17-23 "Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit.
Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them. Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, `Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, `I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'"

Matthew 25: 40-46 ""The King will reply, `I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.' Then he will say to those on his left, `Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.
For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.' They also will answer, `Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?' He will reply, `I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.' Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."

If those answers are not good enough for you, I don't know what is.

IzzyR, if you're around, this is precisely what I mean by "cheap grace" in reference to Bill.

[Dr. Lao]

Originally posted by Wildest Bill
I am not sure if you have heard this or not. But in Florida two Muslims firefighters that the US pay taxes for their salaries refuse to ride on a fire truck that has an American Flag on it because it represents oppression. I am sure the wonderful ACLU will take up for them.
For me I say since they were once fireman, fire their butts. Wow! Two Muslims out of millions feel this way. Let's kick them all out of this country this instant! I mean, two, for God's sake! That is definitely a representative sample.

[Wildest Bill]

Rickjay,

As usual you made some very good points. I guess I think terrorist is not bad of enough name for them. It seems like it needs to be more duragatory and degrading for what they do. I retract this post.

[tracer]

minty green wrote:

Seriously, Bill, What Would Jesus Do?
Oh, probably something like this:


"Seeing a fig tree by the road, he went up to it but found nothing on it except leaves. Then he said to it, 'May you never bear fruit again!' Immediately the tree withered."

-- Matthew 21:19 (NIV translation)

[Vector]

One more thing. We are NOT at war! War is a very specific term; there is no enemy defined as of yet. There has been no declaration of war and there are no hostile governments. The Taliban is being un-cooperative, but not hostile. Educate yourselves and realize that the recent usage of the term "war" is nothing more than a political expression to help a hurting nation heal.

[rjung]

Yeah, Bill, go ahead and call them "towel heads."

Then they'll call you a "Spawn of Satan" who's out to destroy Islam.

Then you'll call them all a bunch of nuts who worship a "moon god".

Then they'll call you an ignorant jerkwad who needs other people to fight wars for you.

Then it'll be back and forth and back and forth, and the next thing you know we'll be lobbing nuclear warheads and germ canisters.

And then the cockroaches can try to make a better go at it.

Sheesh.

:rolleyes:

[BF]

hee-hee, Thanks, WB, for making me spurt soda through my nose... but, ahem, ..cough-cough.., what every body else said, bad form. Don't do it again...

[Atreyu]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Wildest Bill
I also see this board use the term "fundie" all the time and no one ever flames them for using it.

So because you see behavior that you disagree with me makes it OK for you to consider doing the same thing yourself?

Um...interesting philosophy.

[Lemur866]

Originally posted by gobear
I strongly urge you to go to your local library and borrow Karen Armstrong's Islam: A Short History and An Unexpected Light: Travels in Afghanistan by Jason Elliot...[snip]...[b]Bill, do you think Jesus wants you to call people bad names and insult them because of how they dress? You are making Jesus very sad.

Uh, gobear? Did I just go insane, or did you suggest that Bill go *read a book*? The mind boggles. What were you thinking?

[gobear]

Call it the triumph of optimism over experience. On the other hand, I believe it was Oscar Wilde who said, "Ignorance is like a hothouse flower: touch it, and the bloom is lost."

[Ben]

Originally posted by Wildest Bill
I could care less what people call me(can't you tell I've hung here long enough and been called every name in the book). I also see this board use the term "fundie" all the time and no one ever flames them for using it. So I would say that there is some(not everybody mind you) hypocrisy on the ole SDMB.

So you don't like being called a fundie, but you're arguing for calling people "towelheads." Yeah, there's some real hypocrisy on the SDMB.

What particularly sickens me is that the Bible has a few ambiguous things to say about homosexuality, and gay Christian teens sometimes kill themselves over it. The Bible also has some very unambiguous things to say about turning the other cheek, but that doesn't even slow most Christians down.

Wildest Bill, instead of wasting your mental energies on finding the perfect slur, why don't you read a book for once? I would suggest one on Islam or geopolitics, but it might be best if you finally got around to reading the Bible.

-Ben

[manhattan]

Originally posted by Ben
...it might be best if you finally got around to reading the Bible.

-Ben

Just don't let tracer pick the passages!

::g,d&r::

[rjung]

Originally posted by Lemur866
Uh, gobear? Did I just go insane, or did you suggest that Bill go *read a book*? The mind boggles.
Oh, come on, guys. I have it on very good authority that Wildest Bill reads books.

Of course, it's convincing him to read something other than the Bible and the Left Behind series that's the trick... ;)

[RickJay]

Originally posted by Atreyu
So because you see behavior that you disagree with me makes it OK for you to consider doing the same thing yourself?

Um...interesting philosophy.

In fairness, the OP does not say HE wanted to call people "towel heads." He asked if it was becoming acceptable to do so.

It's a good question, and one with enough historical precedent to merit asking it. It's true that during World War II we routinely referred to Japanese as "Japs" and Germans as "Krauts" or "Huns." Not just in impolice society, either; the word "Japs" was routinely used in the headlines of major daily newspapers.

So let's answert the question; will it become politically correct to call Arabs or Muslims "towel heads" or "Camel jockeys"?

My guess is "no freakin' way," for four reasons.

1. Society in general is more sensitive to racial slurs now than it was in 1943, so we're less likely to accept racial slurs no matter if there's a war or not.

2. As a result of (1) the use of racial slurs to identify military enemies has become uncommon since World War II. It was NOT common in polite company to refer to Vietnamese as "gooks" during the Vietnam War (and "Charlie" was a military slang term that referred to a military force.) It wasn't widely acceptable to call Arabs "towel heads" during the Gulf War.

3. The common use of racial slurs in World War II is different from what we might see now, in that World War II was a full scale knock-down survival war against two enormous military empires. We were engaged in full-scale wars of conquest on a previously unknown scale, massacring thousands and millions of each other's people. It's not the slightest bit comparable to this conflict. Or most conflicts. Calling a German a "kraut" during friggin WORLD WAR II is different from calling an Arab a "raghead" during something that isn't even a war yet.

4. Arabs and Muslims are a far more widespread, global ethnic group than Germans or Japanese were in WWII. There's really only two majority-German nations; Germany and Austria, and we were at war with Germany and they'd eaten up Austria. The only Japanese nation is Japan. But there are many Muslim and Arab nations. If we're at war with Iraq and Afgahnistan, we're still friends with Egypt, Bahrain, Indonesia, etc. The enemy cannot be summed up as the entirety of an ethnic group.

[Demise]

See, I told y'all that Wildest Bill is a comedian. He's just trying out new material on us!

[Monty]

1. We're not at war, no matter how often E.D. of Fox & Friends repeats her mantra.

2. Looks like the press is jumping the gun with ferver again, seeing as nobody knows the facts on the firefighter/flag issue. However, the firetrucks up in Bezerkley aren't going to be flying the nation's flag for a while 'cause the anti-everything protesters might be targeting the poor firefighters whilst the firefighters are out trying to save lives.

[Jackmannii]

Nope, WB, that derogatory term is not acceptable, in peace or war.

You may however begin warming up the term "Talibandits", if it should become necessary to use it.

[Freedom]

Please forgive m if this has been mentioned already, but I didn't want to read the entire "educate WB again" thread:)


In case you missed it Wildest Bill, here is a picture of two of the terrorists:


Pictures Of The Terrorists (http://www.thisislondon.com/dynamic/news/story.html?in_review_id=458448&in_review_text_id=410060)


I find it hard to believe that you missed it since you like Drudge so much. (so do I BTW) You should notice that two of the terrorists are not wearing anything on their heads. The funny thing is, I never pictured them in my mind as wearing turbans, and I doubt that any of the others wore turbans as they took over the planes.

You have fallen victim to a stereotype, and you would do well to try and figure out who our enemy really is, instead of imagining monsters under your bed.

[bare]

Wildest Bill

As an act of contrition, I suggest you turn to the east, bow down till you can see between your legs and chant the old Muslim prayer "O'wotanas siam". If you repeat it three times, we may be able to forgive this latest transgression.

[atypicalcarl]

I agree with the majority on this one; it's racist and completely wrong.

I would like to suggest, however, that it's much easier to kill people if you dehumanize them first. I think that I'd have fewer nightmares after shooting a 'slur' than I would after killing a person. If this escalates into a major war, I worry that racist stuff like this may be tolerated.

Before the flames get me, let me say that I served my country proudly for 6 years, and this sort of thing wasn't tolerated in the peacetime army.

[Monty]

Bare,

The joke was okay in the punchline, but to call it an old Muslim prayer is just prejudicial.

[Ben]

Originally posted by rjung
Of course, it's convincing him to read something other than the Bible and the Left Behind series that's the trick... ;)

Given the number of times he behaves in an unacceptable fashion and then demands that we provide Bible passages that say he can't do it, I have to wonder if he's read the Bible much at all.

-Ben

[Monty]

Ben, Ben, Ben, Ben; have you learned nothing from the appearance of FourthofGod? Do you not remember when he practically screamed at us all that Heaven is really sin and God is filled with the terrible sin of Pride?

Ya gotta keep up with the nuts, friend.

[Ben]

Originally posted by Monty
Ben, Ben, Ben, Ben; have you learned nothing from the appearance of FourthofGod? Do you not remember when he practically screamed at us all that Heaven is really sin and God is filled with the terrible sin of Pride?

Ya gotta keep up with the nuts, friend.

Huh? I don't remember this at all. You mean the "movie that will change your life" guy?

-Ben

[Monty]

That would be the lunatic in question, Ben. You may recall that he beat to death durn near the concept that yeast in the Bible ALWAYS means evil (when it doesn't) and that God is PROUD of the lunatic in question. After he declared himself, unwittingly (after all, he had no wits to begin with), the fourth member of the godhood, I began calling him FourthofGod. Takes a bit more to type it, but worth it for the visual effect.

[Monty]

Oh, yeah. There's even a drinking game named after ol' Fourth. It's in the BBQ Pit.

[arara123]

Apparently, it is.

I saw Rep. John Cooksey (R-La.) on TV yesterday (Thursday) evening.

His idea for stopping terrorism was encouraging police to pull someone over if they "had a diaper on his head and a fan belt wrapped around the diaper on his head." :(

I tried to find a link. Google gives two hits on "diaper," "fan" and "Cooksey" that mention the quote in the summary but when I went to the pages I didn't see the quote.

[Esprix]

And we go yet another round with ignorance... :rolleyes:

Esprix

[gobear]

And just a technical correction, it was FriendofGod, not Fourth of God, which sounds like the High Holy Days with fireworks.

[Ben]

Wildest Bill, I'd like to reiterate the question I asked in the pit. You made some broad anti-Muslim remarks earlier, and then apologized for them, but now you're making more anti-Muslim remarks. Could you explain to us just what you were apologizing for in the first place? So many people were so willing to accept your apology, that I think they deserve a little clarification about what, exactly, you were offering. Because I must say, in light of this thread it's very unclear to me what you meant.

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=86553

-Ben

[Wildest Bill]

Ben I apogized for wanting to nuke their countries. Nuking someone and calling someone a silly name is to different things wouldn't you say? Also this was just a question type thread. If you don't understand it, read Rickjay second post. He not looking to find fault in me (like you do all the time) understood what I was getting at. Secondly, I clarified and said why don't we just call the terrorist towel heads.

Esprix if you don't like me or my threads, why the heck do you read 'em?

[Ben]

Originally posted by Wildest Bill
Ben I apogized for wanting to nuke their countries. Nuking someone and calling someone a silly name is to different things wouldn't you say?

So you stand by your earlier claims that all Muslims hate all non-Muslims, and that Muslims are destroying America from within?

Also this was just a question type thread. If you don't understand it, read Rickjay second post. He not looking to find fault in me (like you do all the time) understood what I was getting at.

If you think I'm bad, wait 'til you meet Jesus.

-Ben

[Monty]

Originally posted by gobear
And just a technical correction, it was FriendofGod, not Fourth of God, which sounds like the High Holy Days with fireworks.

Same individual. After he, essentially, declared himself to be the fourth member of the Godhead, I commenced calling him FourthofGod.

[pldennison]

Originally posted by Ben
If you think I'm bad, wait 'til you meet Jesus.

This just may be the single best sig line fodder anyone has ever produced in the history of the SDMB. Ever.

[Chez Guevara]

Originally posted by Wildest Bill
Esprix if you don't like me or my threads, why the heck do you read 'em?


This is a good question.

I've got to hand it to you. You are far and away the best kite flyer I have ever seen. Your strategy is to dream up an issue, anything will do as long as it's controversial, and submit it for discussion knowing that many replies will follow, 99% of them disagreeing with your OP.

This is OK as far as it goes, but you are not really interested in the issue, you are interested in the kite.

And people do reply. Why this is, I just do not know. And when the kite looks like dropping you return to make a few adjustments in order to keep it aloft.

When the kite eventually falls, you may apologise, or not as the case may be, before grabbing another kite and floating that one instead.

I am not saying you are wrong to do this. Not at all. If you can get away with it, all well and good. Personally I read very few of your threads. I can tell what's in them just by looking at the title.

[Fenris]

Originally posted by Nostradamus
Originally posted by Wildest Bill
Esprix if you don't like me or my threads, why the heck do you read 'em?


This is a good question.

I've got to hand it to you. You are far and away the best kite flyer I have ever seen. Your strategy is to dream up an issue, anything will do as long as it's controversial, and submit it for discussion knowing that many replies will follow, 99% of them disagreeing with your OP.

This is OK as far as it goes, but you are not really interested in the issue, you are interested in the kite.

And people do reply. Why this is, I just do not know.

I do.

It's because Silence=Assent at least in many people's minds. When Bill posts assinine comments like (paraphrased, but based on a real WB thread...I can't find the original thread) "Hay, ya'll gay guys. If youd jsut try it with a girl, yo'ud like it!", everyone knows it's idiotic, but you can't just let the statement stand unchallenged any more than you could leave an equally contemptible statement like..."Hey Black Dopers? Do you really like watermelon and white women?" It's why I strongly belive that we have to challenge Fred Phelps types, Holocaust Deniers and Klansmen every chance we get, rebutting and mocking their arguements. If we stay silent, their bile starts to become accepted as normal.

If we ignore WB's periodic tantrums, he might go away, but then again, he might not and he'll be able to point to earlier threads, saying "But you didn't argue with me there!" (or, more accurately "Buut ya'll dnid't aurgue with me their!")

In addition, as a wild-ass guess, 95% of the people who read this board don't post frequently or at all. When people are lurking, I don't want them getting the idea that WB's views are so accepted that they represent the majority opinion. Frankly (and this'll never happen), I'd like to see WB's attempts at outrageousness met with nothing but a wall of posters responding with nothing but :rolleyes:. We're never going to convince him of anything as Ben has so aptly pointed out earlier in the thread and debating him is like debating sand: there's nothing to grab onto. If thirty or fourty Dopers would just enter his threads posting only :rolleyes:, we could show the contempt we have for his ideas and not give him the jollies he gets when people try to argue back. But like I said: it ain't gonna happen.

And Nostradamus, I think your "kite" analogy is dead on.

Fenris

[Feynn]

Bill
:rolleyes:

Feynn

[Guinastasia]

Not to mention slowing down the servers in the process, I'm sure.

Also, this place is dedicated to fighting ignorance, so that's what we're doing.

[PunditLisa]

Why don't you go to a bar tonight and do a case study on your OP? Be sure to report back to us with the results!

[pantom]

- An Indian immigrant has been killed in Mesa, AZ, because as a Sikh he is required to wear a turban. That his religion has zero to do with Islam meant nothing to the person who killed him.

- A Pakistani immigrant had his tire store burned down.

- Mosques have been violently attacked.

- An Egyptian Christian was killed.

Is that enough for you, Wildest Bill? It's not funny. It's contemptible. Go away.

[The Flying Dutchman]

Wildest Bill , Rudyard Kipling you are not. "Towel Heads" will never become a socially benign phrase such as "Fuzzy-Wuzzy" a descriptive name (because of their crainial appearance) ascribed to members of the Hadandoa tribe of the Beja peoples of the Eastern Sudan. There is a lesson here, lest we get too cocky. The Fuzzy-wuzzy, tribes of islamic fundamentalists opposed to western imperialism literally wiped out in one battle, 10,000 troops (save 250)of the most powerful nation on earth

[Rogue1stclass]

Why is towel-head even derogatory?

Just one of those things that confuses me...be like calling an American "sock feet" or "rag neck" (meaning ties)...

[DiveGirlAZ]

Sure, Bill.....just as long as I can call you "white trash"!

Didn't like that, did you? It was insulting, stupid and beneath your dignity, right? Quite possibly totally inaccurate, even.

Just like the term "towel head".

And take this into consideration.......who blew up the Murrah building in Oklahoma City? Tim McVeigh.....a white, Protestant guy. So, does that mean I can go around saying slurs about Methodists, screaming at Baptists that they are terrorists, and threatening their personal safety? I think not.

To the rest of the Dopers......look, if Bible quotes won't get it through his skull, maybe that will......

Of course I'm being optimistic.....

[atypicalcarl]

Originally posted by Rogue1stclass
Why is towel-head even derogatory?

Just one of those things that confuses me...be like calling an American "sock feet" or "rag neck" (meaning ties)...

The epithet is already applied by bigots to a race of people. Would you find any of the others objectionable? How about camel jockey? Sand nigger?

This is thread is merely searching for justification of a pre-existing hatred.

[atypicalcarl]

This thread is merely searching for justification...

Sorry about that line... I was pissed. The word 'hatred' may be a little strong. I'm new here, but I imagine that such comments belong in the pit.

[Qadgop the Mercotan]

Originally posted by atypicalcarl
This thread is merely searching for justification...

Sorry about that line... I was pissed. The word 'hatred' may be a little strong. I'm new here, but I imagine that such comments belong in the pit.

Personally, I think you hit the nail right on the head. And I think it's ok here, as it's a valid opinion about motivation, not a slur aimed at the OP'er. But IANAM (moderator), so my opinion's only worth what you paid for it.

Qadgop

[Rogue1stclass]

You misunderstood me...

I wasn't debating that it is objectionable, that is obvious...I was just wondering why it was...

Racial epithets are by their nature mocking and insulting, and this one is decidedly not...I mean, what is the implication here, that we are somehow better than them because they were cloth on their heads? I don't get it...If every single Arab wore a turbin or scarf (or even an actual towel) on their head all day, every day, it wouldn't make them any less intellegent or civilized or capable...Hell, in the desert, its probably a good idea...

Again, I'm not defending use of the term...Just knowing that people take offense to it is enough to exclude it from my vocabulary...But I hate avoiding something and not knowing why...

[Chez Guevara]

Originally posted by Guinastasia
Also, this place is dedicated to fighting ignorance, so that's what we're doing.


There is no percentage in fighting ignorance which is not there.

Wildest Bill does not lack information, or knowledge, or education. He merely chooses to exercise his mind in ways which prove time-consuming to the other posters on this board.

It is clear to me that Wildest Bill's brain is an untapped source of wisdom which could be used effectively for the good of mankind.

Do not mock me, for if you do, you mock Wildest Bill.

Instead of helping Wildest Bill keep his kites aloft, would it not be better to dust off your own kites and fly those for Wildest Bill's attention and comment.

This policy will achieve two objectives. Firstly, Wildest Bill's kites will no longer have air superiority, and secondly Wildest Bill's brain will be stimulated into using the 99% which currently lies dormant.

I appreciate that Wildest Bill's threads may ultimately develop into a source of ironic amusement if this stratagem is adopted, but this will address the concerns of Fenris, who makes a telling point concerning the way these threads are seen by readers who do not post.

The worst case scenario is that Wildest Bill's brain shuts down completely, like HAL in 2001: A Space Odyssey, and this would indeed be tragic.

Nevertheless, sacrifices are often necessary in the fight against ignorance, and no doubt a collection could be organised to fund the erection of a Monument to this underused organ, should the unthinkable ever happen.

[Beagle]

Look here (http://www.msnbc.com/m/v/video_news.asp)and check out "Hate Crimes...Arab-Americans" in the "Dateline" section. I found the Islamic Fundamentalist family to be most interesting. So much for stereotypes.

This story will get play in the Arab world, and other than the behaviour of some Americans just being wrong, will undermine our efforts to claim we are not at war with Islam. I hope our bigoted, violent, minority does not make the geopolitical situation worse.

[eyewearlime]

So, what should we call the Tim McVeighs of the world?

Sikhs wear turbans, and they are no big fans of Islam (pardon the sweeping generalization as well as the one approaching). They are also the "warrior" caste in South Asia--you might want to refrain from pissing them off. Women with cancer wear them, and I understand they do a damn fine job of hiding adhesive tape from a temporary facelift as well. How long will it last if one third of the women in Beverly Hills and Scottsdale take offense?

If you insist on this (I'm NOT advocating it!) can't you come up with something a bit more clever and al Qaeda specific? The problem with epithets is the people who come up with them . . .

[eyewearlime]

Originally posted by Wildest Bill
Originally posted by Dr. Lao
No.

It seems to imply that Muslims who are citizens of the US are our enemies as well as nearly the entire Mideast. This is a very dangerous mind set.

I am not sure if you have heard this or not. But in Florida two Muslims firefighters that the US pay taxes for their salaries refuse to ride on a fire truck that has an American Flag on it because it represents oppression. I am sure the wonderful ACLU will take up for them.
For me I say since they were once fireman, fire their butts.

Where the hell did you hear this??? Be very specific, please.

[saudade]

If Jesus Christ came back, would he have the same body he did when he made his earthly debut 2000 or so years ago?
Just think, Yeshua Bin Yusef has come back, as the Bible says, as a 'thief in the night' - in other words unannounced, and in his previous earthly form...
People would probably call him a "sand n*gger" or a "camel jockey" too.

On another note I find those slurs not only derogatory, but rather lame. I mean if you are going to insult people be creative. I mean "towelhead"? I doubt if foreigners call Americans things like "capheads", "denimasses", and "burgerflippers". That's how silly ethnic slurs are when they come from another perspective.

[The Continuum]

Originally posted by Wildest Bill
Before ya'll start freak'n out hear me out. In WWII the US called Germans "krouts", called the Japanese "Japs" and "slants" the Italians "whops". In Vietnam the US referred to their people "charlie" "gooks", and other names. So since this is a declared war now, is it still not polically correct to call the terrorist "towel heads"?

Inotherwords, in the past wars names were acceptable and used by alot of people. Even opposing highschool football teams use duragatory names to their foes. Well? What do ya'll think?


I find it hard to believe someone actually posted this. What happened to the Str8 Dope saying about getting rid of ignorance. The original post here just shows that it is taking longer than expected to get rid of ignorance.

I don't think it's necessary at all to stoop to name calling of the so called enemy, especially if you are justified in going to war. Furthurmore, These names not only attack the enemy but attack others of the same origins that might live in the USA. They attack those from the many other cultures that also wear turbans. They attack the Sikhs that wear turbasn and beards as part of there religion.

It is this kind of behavior that causes the racist backlash that is running rampant in the uSA now, after the WTC bombing. Sikhs across the nation are being targeted in murder, assault, and general racist insanity. Please reffer to:

http://sikhnet.com/s/AttackonAmerica

http://www.attacksonsikhs.com/

http://www.satyacircle.com/tolerance.html

http://65.42.195.102/sikhs/ (This is an excellent site re:Crimes against Sikhs resulting from the WTC attacks)



These sites are logging some of the attacks on Sikhs resulting from the racist hate that is brewing in the country after the WTC attack. They can also explain in detail who Sikhs are and what they believe.

engaging in this sort of racist behavior, yes that includes name calling, only pulls this country apart. UNited we stand can no longer be true. The terrorist attacks are working. They are tearing the USA apart from the inside. Does the USA want to be like the countries in the Middle East and Asia? People in those countries have a hard time living together with differences like religion and culture. They kill each other everyday. They are at war constantly. Is the uSA to suffer the same fate? It will if racism is allowed to remain apart of the Fabric of the nation.

[The Continuum]

Originally posted by arara123
Apparently, it is.

I saw Rep. John Cooksey (R-La.) on TV yesterday (Thursday) evening.

His idea for stopping terrorism was encouraging police to pull someone over if they "had a diaper on his head and a fan belt wrapped around the diaper on his head." :(

I tried to find a link. Google gives two hits on "diaper," "fan" and "Cooksey" that mention the quote in the summary but when I went to the pages I didn't see the quote.

I heard this too. Actually so did the Sikhs of America. They even mentioned it to Pres. Bush when their rep was meeting along with leaders of other religions and the Pres. The Pres actually made Cooksey give a public apology, whic still showed his racist roots.

[magdalene]

Nostradamus, your idea is a good one, but mostly Bill likes the attention he gets from starting his own threads too much to read and participate in anyone else's.

WILDEST BILL, no, it is not acceptable to call people "towel-heads" even if you only mean terrorists. It is the equivalent of calling all middle-aged white men named Bill "blockheads" when really I only mean you.

Your apology, if I may borrow a word that's been thrown around on the boards quite a bit lately, is "tepid." You are looking for an excuse to hate and belittle people who are different than you, people who worship God in a different way, people that you secretly suspect may not be "real Americans" because they look different. You apologize for one thread, and then start a new thread in the same vein the very next day.

[portajon]

The term "towel head" (I prefer rag head)is a term used in reference to number of people and cultures that wear a turban as head gear. In context it is used to describe someone that you may be UNCERTAIN of their nationality or religion. The only thing certain is that they wear a turban. Hence it is ridiculous to see this as a stereo type other than the stereo type of people who wear turbans which is the point of the exercise. Anyone offended by the term "cotton legs" would be an idiot and like wise with the use of towel head to describe a person of otherwise unknown origin. It is alot shorter than the politically correct label we would have to give such a person: possible Iranian, Iraqi, Saudi, Kuwaiti, Yemeni, Pakistani, Afganistani, Indian, Sudanese, Egytian, etc. etc. etc.

[atypicalcarl]

Reason obviously isn't working here.

Let's make it less abstract.

My little sister married a Jordanian immigrant. Aside from his attendance at Tenn. State, he's a fine man. He's considered by his community to be a good christian. I currently have two little nephews of Middle-Eastern descent.

If one of them comes to me sobbing because a bigot called him a towel-head, rag-head, camel jockey, sand nigger, or any other slur - even if the bigot prefaces it by saying that he considers my nephew to be one of the "good" towel-heads - I will take it personally.

I will smack that person upside the head with the King James Version so hard that sh*t squirts out of both of his ears.

Say it if you must.
But look over your shoulder first.

[Chez Guevara]

Originally posted by magdalene
Nostradamus, your idea is a good one, but mostly Bill likes the attention he gets from starting his own threads too much to read and participate in anyone else's.

WILDEST BILL, no, it is not acceptable to call people "towel-heads" even if you only mean terrorists. It is the equivalent of calling all middle-aged white men named Bill "blockheads" when really I only mean you.

Your apology, if I may borrow a word that's been thrown around on the boards quite a bit lately, is "tepid." You are looking for an excuse to hate and belittle people who are different than you, people who worship God in a different way, people that you secretly suspect may not be "real Americans" because they look different. You apologize for one thread, and then start a new thread in the same vein the very next day.


magdalene.

I suggest earlier that responders to the threads of Wildest Bill should launch their own kites in response to the kites of Wildest Bill in his threads, and not commence threads of their own, and I regret any confusion in my recommendation.

Note also that Wildest Bill does not post on this thread for 89 hours. The reason is that this kite is flying so high he does not need to make aeronautical adjustments to its flight.

Furthermore, Wildest Bill does not wish other posters to agree with him. I post on one of his threads once and fully endorse his views in order to test my theory. Wildest Bill acknowledges my support but says immediately, 'Any other points of view?'

Also, to use this thread as an example, I reach the conclusion that Wildest Bill has no intention of calling anyone a towel head, he does not approve of others using the term towel head, he may even wish to plant his fist on anyone he hears use the phrase towel head for all I know.

I must repeat that Wildest Bill is a kite flyer par excellence, I never see his like before, and everyone who responds to his kites is simply keeping them aloft.

Of course, this thread goes back to the top of the pile following this post, but at least I know what I am doing.

[The Continuum]

Originally posted by portajon
The term "towel head" (I prefer rag head)is a term used in reference to number of people and cultures that wear a turban as head gear. In context it is used to describe someone that you may be UNCERTAIN of their nationality or religion. The only thing certain is that they wear a turban. Hence it is ridiculous to see this as a stereo type other than the stereo type of people who wear turbans which is the point of the exercise. Anyone offended by the term "cotton legs" would be an idiot and like wise with the use of towel head to describe a person of otherwise unknown origin. It is alot shorter than the politically correct label we would have to give such a person: possible Iranian, Iraqi, Saudi, Kuwaiti, Yemeni, Pakistani, Afganistani, Indian, Sudanese, Egytian, etc. etc. etc.


People, please. This is not a Utopian society. I can't go around saying "spic, gook, chink, wop, nigger." these names bring up deep emotions in many people.

The analogy of calling someone cotton legs is entirely rediculous. The point is that if someone is offended by the way another reffers to them, then don't call them that name. It's simple. Most names like the afore mentioned were created out of hate. These names were created with the intention to hurt those they refer to.

Let's be a little more reasonable. Instead of defending your love of calling people names that we know will offend them. Just not do it.

"Can't we all just get along?"

[davidshields]

Originally posted by atypicalcarl
Reason obviously isn't working here.

Let's make it less abstract.

<snip>

If one of them comes to me sobbing because a bigot called him a towel-head, rag-head, camel jockey, sand nigger, or any other slur - even if the bigot prefaces it by saying that he considers my nephew to be one of the "good" towel-heads - I will take it personally.

I will smack that person upside the head with the King James Version so hard that sh*t squirts out of both of his ears.

Say it if you must.
But look over your shoulder first.

Lovely post. I have a rather visual imagination, and I can just See the thwacking administered...

BTW, for the record, No, it is not acceptable. Over this side of the pond, we are also seeing racial hatred against our muslim (and many other middle eastern) groups. Seems sad, given that a large portion of muslims here are of Pakistani origin, and with Pakistan offering its help to the US.

[missbunny]

Gee, Bill, I would imagine that Jesus probably wore a "towel" on his head from time to time too. He did live in the Middle East, you know. Gets awfully hot out there in Galilee. But you, being the good Christian that you are, must know all about Jesus already. I'm sure he's looking down at you right now with great affection, marveling at how you so completely embody the spirit of Christ.

On another note, Fenris and Nostradamus are rapidly becoming two of my favorite posters. I don't think I've ever posted that about anyone before.

[portajon]

People, please. This is not a Utopian society. I can't go around saying "spic, gook, chink, wop, nigger." these names bring up deep emotions in many people.



So rather than learn tolerance we should censor the speech of Americans. How many millions is it now that have died defending my right to speak freely? If you don't care for what I have to say or can't control you emotions against simple words you are free to move away from earshot of me. Again I believe the problem lies with those offended. Just because you take it offensively gives you absolutely no right to assume it was meant to be offensive. I am not racist nor do I harbor an ounce of hatred for anyone so I feel no need to walk around on egg shells in the country that my father died for worried about who I might offend with a silly word like towel head. Get real here people, there are numerous terms used to describe all kinds of people and those terms are not going to disappear.

[magdalene]

portajon, I salute you as the anti-PC revolutionary that you claim to be. :rolleyes:

We have freedom of speech in this country. And people have died to defend it. So why do you want to waste your free speech, this amazing gift, on terms you know that other people find offensive?

Is it because you wish to offend people? Or is it because you wish to show how "cool" you are "excercising your free speech"?

Towel-head, rag head, camel jockey, and other derisive terms for people from the Middle East are not cool, and mark the user as an bigoted ignoramus. I find it stunning that it is too much effort for you to find non-offensive descriptive terms (hint: Arab is one).

[The Continuum]

Originally posted by portajon
So rather than learn tolerance we should censor the speech of Americans. How many millions is it now that have died defending my right to speak freely? If you don't care for what I have to say or can't control you emotions against simple words you are free to move away from earshot of me. Again I believe the problem lies with those offended. Just because you take it offensively gives you absolutely no right to assume it was meant to be offensive. I am not racist nor do I harbor an ounce of hatred for anyone so I feel no need to walk around on egg shells in the country that my father died for worried about who I might offend with a silly word like towel head. Get real here people, there are numerous terms used to describe all kinds of people and those terms are not going to disappear.


Now really, tolerance doesnt mena that sticks and stones will break our bones but names will never hurt us. Tolerance means we know that there are many different kinds of people out there with different beliefs and cultures, and this is all right with us. Tolerance is showing respect for all regardless of differences.

True we have the right to free speech, but with this comes responsibility. Free speech doesnt mean freedom to cause insults or freedom to slander.

Looks like some people are using some clasiscal thinking errors here. For a list of thinking errors see:

http://www.choicesoforegon.com/thinking_errors.htm#Redefining

There is no need to walk around on egg shells. I never use the racust terms afore mentioned. I never feel as though I have to be careful of what I say. Towel head actually isnt a descriptive enough word to be used to describe a group of people. It could be anyone from the middle east, far east, India, Asia, muslims, Sikhs, cancer patients, surgery patients etc. If you want to argue about using descriptive words then calling them a Sikh, etc. is much better. At least there wouldn't be any confusion.

People didnt die for this country to give us the right to call people names. They died so that we could have a place to live in religious freedom. So we could live free to express ideas.

To think that if someone is hurt by what we do is their fault is a complete thinking error (refer to website for definitions). The youth I work with that fill the group homes and detentiopn centers of this country, use this thinking pattern. If someone is hurt by what I do it's their fault. I once had a young man steal a pair of sunglasses while I had taken him to the store to buy a soda. his reasoning was that it was my fault he stole them because I wouldnt buy them for him. This way he doesnt feel guilty, He doesnt take responsibility for his own actions.

Why do a few still insist on using language like this, I'll never know.

[pantom]

The same people who use language like this are the ones who would like to respond to this attack on our freedom by restricting those same freedoms.
My first day back at work, as we watched the smoke still quite literally rising from the WTC attack site, I heard two of my co-workers decide that we were suffering from a surfeit of civil liberties.
Precisely what Osama thinks. Maybe we should send these fools to Afghanistan to join their co-religionists.

[portajon]

Originally posted by pantom
The same people who use language like this are the ones who would like to respond to this attack on our freedom by restricting those same freedoms.
My first day back at work, as we watched the smoke still quite literally rising from the WTC attack site, I heard two of my co-workers decide that we were suffering from a surfeit of civil liberties.
Precisely what Osama thinks. Maybe we should send these fools to Afghanistan to join their co-religionists.



This doesn't make sense. You openly use a broad brush to describe people who use "language like this". How do you figure if I say towel head that I must want to restrict our freedoms? Then you call us fools. I am more offended by that than any slur you could think of. As a matter of fact alot of folks would be offended if called a fool. Should we add fool to the list of words to not use. It is offensive to us fools ya know.

[pantom]

Fool would describe a character trait (obviously not objectively, but objectivity - not to mention objectivism - is greatly overestimated.) Towel head would not. That you don't get the difference says more than I could ever say.

[portajon]

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A leading U.S. dictionary publisher said it would revise entries for more than 200 offensive words after receiving complaints that some definitions, especially for the word ‘nigger’, were racist. Merriam-Webster Inc. said it would make the alterations to ethnic, religious and sexual slur words in the 1999 edition of its Collegiate Dictionary to ensure that readers were aware just how offensive the words are. The dictionary will also modify its entries for words considered vulgar and obscene.

But what, I ask, do they mean by racist, offensive, let alone vulgar? If, and one must assume they do, if they have a line, where exactly is it drawn? Who cannot be hurt; who, more vitally, can? The knee-jerk response is simple enough. The so called obscenities, natch; racism, of course, nationalist stereotyping, probably; homophobia, maybe; sexism, well, sometimes. The grey areas come swooping in. And, anyway, where do you stop? Because every group wants its say these days. The populist authoritarianism that is the downside of political correctness means that anyone, sometimes it seems like everyone, can proclaim their grief and have it acknowledged. The victim culture, every sufferer grasping for their own Holocaust, ensures that anyone who feels offended can call for moderation, for dilution, and in the end, as is all too often the case, for censorship. And censorship, that by-product of fear – stemming as it does not from some positive agenda, but from the desire to escape our own terrors and superstitions by imposing them on others – must surely be resisted.

[pantom]

Glad to see you know how to write. Now, this is real, real simple, so listen up:

People don't like to be insulted. In polite society, one at least makes a stab at manners.

That's not too hard, right?

[magdalene]

And censorship, that by-product of fear – stemming as it does not from some positive agenda, but from the desire to escape our own terrors and superstitions by imposing them on others – must surely be resisted.

I am anti-censorship. You have the right to say whatever you damn well please. Do you see? No one made a law restricting the use of any word. Want to call people spics, niggers, and other bad names? Go ahead. You can't be arrested for it. But using insulting, derogatory, racist terms does not make someone some kind of anti-PC freedom fighter. It makes that person a jerk, an idiot, a bigot, a loser, a highly offensive individual. Be offended by that or not. I was just exercising my free speech.

PORTAJOHN - Why are you defending the right to call someone a towel-head so dearly? It can't be censorship, since NO ONE IS PREVENTING YOU FROM USING THE WORD. So why is it so important to use the expression?

In this thread, we are not saying it should be illegal to use the words, just that it is not polite or right to use them. Journalists and politicians and other public figures who wish to be thought polite and enlightened supporters of freedom and non-bigots should not use them.