California Legislature Declares "Cuss-Free" Week

shewfig writes "The California legislature, which previously tried to ban incandescent light bulbs, just added to the list of banned things ... swear words! Fortunately, the measure only applies for the first week of March, and compliance is voluntary — although, apparently, there will be a 'swear jar' in the Assembly and the Governor's mansion. No word yet on whether the Governator intends to comply."

Comments

CA must be on easy street

[Monkey-Man2000]

what a fucking waste of time

Re:CA must be on easy street

[brainboyz]

No fucking shit. Especially since this forsaken shithole is practically broke because of these dim witted bitches and their cock-biting agendas.

On a related note, the Facebook response is a group called "Fuck Week." I didn't join, but I was quite amused.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[Anonymous Coward]

Stop fucking swearing you goddamn ass.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[Mistlefoot]

California? As in:

"For some time now I have lamented the fact that major issues are overlooked while many
Unnecessary bills come to me for consideration. Water reform, prison reform, and health
Care are major issues my Administration has brought to the table, but the Legislature just
Kicks the can down the alley.

Yet another legislative year has come and gone without the major reforms Californians
Overwhelmingly deserve. In light of this, and after careful consideration, I believe it is
Unnecessary to sign this measure at this time."

Re:CA must be on easy street

[Anonymous Coward]

Watch your fucking language. There are sensitive goddamned cocksuckers here.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[j-turkey]

Those California legislators are totally un-politically correct. This bill is insensitive to people with Tourette syndrome.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[mmontour]

WARNING: This thread contains words known to the State of California to cause offense and hurt feelings or other psychological harm.

Please ensure that future discussions on this topic are RoHL (reduction of harsh language) compliant.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[silverglade00]

This is probably the only way to stop this in California. Good job!

Re:CA must be on easy street

[Useful Wheat]

I hope 4chan replicates operation titstorm here. Australia bans some types of dirty pictures and gets their fax machines flooded with porn. I can just see a few hundred robocallers swearing at california. Maybe using google voice numbers. I'll leave the implementation up to you.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[toadlife]

The reforms California needs are fundamental changes to the way the government is structured. Right now, the populace can vote huge spending projects with 50% + 1 vote via referendum, but the legislators cannot raise taxes to pay for those projects without a 2/3 vote, which are politically impossible to achieve.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[Jurily]

Half the words in the dictionary can "cause offense and hurt feelings or other psychological harm", if used the right way.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[tomhudson]

I can just see a few hundred robocallers swearing at california.

They wouldn't be noticed among the tens of thousands of humans calling every day to swear at the gubbimint.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[tomhudson]

You missed the point. Here, let me fix it for you,

For some time now I have lamented the fact that major issues are overlooked while many
Unnecessary bills come to me for consideration. Water reform, prison reform, and health
Care are major issues my Administration has brought to the table, but the Legislature just
Kicks the can down the alley.

Yet another legislative year has come and gone without the major reforms Californians
Overwhelmingly deserve. In light of this, and after careful consideration, I believe it is
Unnecessary to sign this measure at this time."

Re:CA must be on easy street

[bertoelcon]

Half the words in the dictionary can "cause offense and hurt feelings or other psychological harm", if used the right way.

The other half can "cause offense and hurt feelings or other psychological harm" if used in the wrong way.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[Khyber]

Insightful, Funny, and Informative mods need to be tossed upon you in droves.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it alright if we substitute RoHL compliance with RoFL (reduction of foul language) compliance?

Re:CA must be on easy street

[Jackie_Chan_Fan]

Fuck week sounds a hell of a lot better...

Lets get our dicks out and vote with boners. R.I.P. Andrew Koenig.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[Anonymous Coward]

I think that was his point. Hence the CAPS.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[toadlife]

W
H
O
O
S
H
!

Re:CA must be on easy street

[JWSmythe]

    In respect for George Carlin (rest in peace)... (NSFW)
    "Shit, Piss, Fuck, Cunt, Cocksucker, Motherfucker. and Tits."

    All the goddamned fucking cussing really pisses me off. Those cocksuckers really should do something about that fucking shit.

    Sincerely,

    The rest of the fucking world.

    Or as I like to sing in a most politically incorrect way at work,

    Shit goddamn hell motherfucker,
    Suck my big cock motherfucker.
    I don't give a damn,
    what the fuck you wanna say,
    'cause I'm gunna fuck your mother,
    motherfucker!

    Of course, I only sing that in the appropriate audiences, so I haven't been fired on the spot yet. :)

    Ahh, that feels better. Back to my normal polite self.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[JWSmythe]

Thank you, I have a new tagline. :)

    And to keep with the theme here...

    That's the stupidest fucking shit I've ever heard.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[simoncpu was here]

what a fucking waste of time

What the frak? It's not a frakking waste of time, you mentally special and different-abled, person! Oh gods, don't you realize that this will protect the children?

Re:CA must be on easy street

[DiEx-15]

http://dontfingussthisweek.ytmnd.com/ (Note: The music is NSFW)

Feel free to send this to the CA Legislators!

Re:CA must be on easy street

[cayenne8]

" In respect for George Carlin (rest in peace)... (NSFW)

"Shit, Piss, Fuck, Cunt, Cocksucker, Motherfucker. and Tits.""

...and tits shouldn't even be on the list!!

I mean..it sounds like a snack!! New..Nabisco Tits!!

Cheese Tits...Onion Tits...Tater Tits!!

Damn...I miss George Carlin..we need him more than ever these days...

Re:CA must be on easy street

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, not to be a pedant, but what you're referring to is coprolalia. It's actually relatively rare in Tourette's sufferers.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

Fuck you. We can take care of ourselves. Cunt.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

Half the words in the dictionary can "cause offense and hurt feelings or other psychological harm", if used the right way.

Which is why swearing or being offensive is often sensitive to context. I guess the idea is to avoid using language to purposefully insult others, for a week.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[Opportunist]

Context is important, as Mr. Carlin already showed ages ago in his "you can prick your finger but don't finger your prick" bit.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[Opportunist]

Oh gods, don't you realize that this will protect the children?

So you want to say, it's not just a waste of time but also threatening our kids' adequate preparation for reality? Because that's what "protecting our children" has become nowadays.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[simoncpu was here]

Yepp. I also think that words, by themselves, don't have any meaning at all. In Slashdot terms, the world is like the following code:

something_evil();
do_something();

They're trying to ban the "something_evil()" string because it causes their system to crash. What happens if we rename "something_evil()" into "something_euphemistic()?" What if someone uses the name "something_evil()" for appropriate purposes? The fix is useless. The correct fix is to fix the programmer.

In other words, they need to ask themselves why teenagers feel the need to rebel against authorities. Is it because they are emotionally maladjusted? Why? Is it because of the stressful changes in economy and breakdown of social institutions? If so, then they need to fix that instead.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[BeanThere]

Not just time, but money. Your tax dollars, hard at work, put to good use. That huge deficit is so justified. Isn't it time we voted out all this deadweight?

Re:CA must be on easy street

[Sir_Lewk]

Half a dictionary can cause serious physical harm, if used the right way.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[kramerd]

...I thought the capititalization of words was odd...well done sir.

Re:CA must be on easy street

[Anonymous Coward]

But using the whole damn thing does so much more damage!

May I be the first one to say

[mudshark]

Fuck that.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[tbird20d]

I understand the somewhat easy humor here, but I've never completely understood the desire to intentionally offend people often displayed by the most rampant cussers out there. I think that somehow people who intentionally cuss think they are "stickin' it to the Man", when "the Man" is nowhere to be seen.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[Ranzear]

Sticks and Stones man. If these words could kill it'd be another issue. Explicatives and slang have now become casual english.

It still takes the same amount of care and discretion as applying salt to food; everyone has their own tastes. California could try to ban salt, even with true health concerns, but that won't stop anyone from cooking with it.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[glenn.ramsey]

Speaking as a "rampant cusser" myself, I can say that I am in now way "stickin' it to the Man" when I use curse words. Truth be told, I'll never fully understand why words get classified as curse words. They're simply another part of language used to convey extreme emotions. Sure, one could choose other words to display such emotions, but would it be as effective and why? Is it because some group of people decided that such words are offensive and this classification has been propagated throughout the generations? I say fuck that (I say that I do not agree with such arbitrary classification of said words). See the difference in emotion conveyed? Was anybody harmed by my wording? This world has become far too politically correct, and with no reason. If you can substantiate the classification of curse words with cases of where harm has come to a person because of their use, please do, I'd love to hear it.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[HeronBlademaster]

Sticks and Stones man. If these words could kill it'd be another issue. Explicatives and slang have now become casual english.

And that makes it ok to deliberately offend people?

Expletives (not "explicatives") are completely unnecessary in the forms they are most commonly used. Specifically, they do not add meaning to the sentence; they're merely an attempt to convey emotion or add "shock value". Take, for example, the common use of the "f-word":

"That f-ing dog bit me!"

Given that the dog was not actually attempting to copulate with anything, using the expletive adds no meaning to the sentence.

In this case, it is an attempt to convey the victim's anger toward the dog, which is something already conveyed by vocal tone and physical indicators.

However, that particular use is understandable. This, however, is not:

"You're a f-ing moron."

Again assuming the moron is not attempting to copulate with anything, what meaning does the expletive convey? None. We already understand the speaker's opinion of the moron, because, well, he's being called a moron. There is presumably disdain in the speaker's voice and some equivalent expression on his face.

It's an attempt to add "shock value" - an attempt to further offend the recipient of the insult by using expletives.

What's worse, so many people have allowed their vocabulary to shrink to the point where they use few adjectives which aren't expletives; there are many people who use them in place of other more appropriate adjectives in normal conversation, or to fill a void in the flow of their conversation when they can't think of the word they mean to say (i.e. to replace "um"):

"I was going to the store to buy a... f-ing... to buy a lawnmower..."

This of course adds no value and actually distracts the listener from the topic of conversation (unless of course the listener also has this habit).

It's not helped by the fact that people with large vocabularies are nowadays viewed as pretentious merely for using the words at their command. It's sad that so many people look down on others for using real adjectives instead of adjectives derived from expletives.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, you're a fucking moron.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[gilgongo]

I understand the somewhat easy humor here, but I've never completely understood the desire to intentionally offend people often displayed by the most rampant cussers out there. I think that somehow people who intentionally cuss think they are "stickin' it to the Man", when "the Man" is nowhere to be seen.

Perhaps, but swearing is a very mysterious thing and the whole attitude against it baffles me. Depending on the context, swearing can cause as much comfort and amusement as it does shock and anger. Personally, I find swearing uplifting if it's done well (google Philip Larkin), and simply embarrassing if not. 10 year-old doesn't know how to swear - its a bit like hearing a beginner playing a violin. Adults generally do, and it aids their communication no end. Emotional connection is greatly curtailed by not swearing under some circumstances.

I dunno, perhaps it's a cultural thing. It always seems to be Americans who care about swearing. The rest of the (English-speaking) world cares a bit, but not nearly as much I think. Just as the Aussies.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[russotto]

And that makes it ok to deliberately offend people?

If people are offended by swear words not directed at them, the problem lies with them and not the speaker.

"That f-ing dog bit me!"

Given that the dog was not actually attempting to copulate with anything, using the expletive adds no meaning to the sentence.

Number one, it's a dog; it probably was trying to copulate with something, perhaps the leg of the victim. Number two, conveying emotion is a perfectly valid use of language.

Use of expletives as an intensifier, as in "You're a fucking moron", is also a perfectly valid use of language. If you object to deliberately offending people, it's not the expletive which is the problem.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[Gizzmonic]

Hmmm...which do you know less about, linguistics, or brevity? Tough choice, but I'm going to say linguistics. You seem to think the word "fuck" only refers to the literal act of copulation.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[HeronBlademaster]

If people are offended by swear words not directed at them, the problem lies with them and not the speaker.

If people are offended by my naked body out in public, that's their problem, not mine.

Seriously, we have public decency laws for a reason - it's so we don't go around offending people.

If you object to deliberately offending people, it's not the expletive which is the problem.

Suppose I have a neighbor who is offended by the word "noodle", for some inexplicable reason. You're saying it's perfectly acceptable for me to deliberately use the word "noodle" in every way possible every time the neighbor is within earshot?

Common decency would suggest otherwise. I may think it's absurd to be offended by the word "noodle", but I'm certainly not going to deliberately offend my neighbor.

And yet you're saying it's perfectly acceptable to go around deliberately offending people. I guess you have no sense of decency.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[HeronBlademaster]

By literal definition, it does; I'm pretty sure I spent that entire post describing other ways it's used, so obviously I realize it is used many other ways.

None of those other ways, however, has a particular definition. Using it to increase the "shock value" or emotional weight of a sentence does not confer some magical definition on the word.

Or do you have a counter-example?

Re:May I be the first one to say

[svtdragon]

At least in the former case, it can relieve the pain of being bitten.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[HeronBlademaster]

From the article you linked:

There is a catch, though: The more we swear, the less emotionally potent the words become, Stephens cautions. And without emotion, all that is left of a swearword is the word itself, unlikely to soothe anyone's pain.

Furthermore, the study didn't examine whether merely yelling or screaming wordlessly would have a similar effect, or whether distracting yourself by e.g. singing a song would also work.

At any rate, there's certainly no reason to be using expletives as common adjectives.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[Anonymous Coward]

Heron,
          While I understand your attempt at explaining the pointlessness of using the word 'fuck', it doesn't change the fact that it is commonly used and as such, can not be explained away or merely outlawed. Take the word 'ain't' for instance. Ain't isn't (wasn't) a word. However enough people used it that webster felt the need to document this as a word. Does this mean everyone needs to use this word now? No. But it also doesn't mean some grammar nazi can tell me that I can't use it if i don't want to. The word may offend someone, but as they say "it takes 2 to tango". 2 things can happen in that situation, the speaker can change his dialect or the listener can change what offends them. Why must it be the speaker that has to change?

It would be just as easy for the listener to tune out the offending words... such as a man might tune out his woman while watching a game of sports on TV. Why must it always be the other that has to change? That would be like you knocking on my door, trying to change my religion to your religion and I don't want to because your religion offends me. Since it offends me, does that mean you should change your religion? No, it means that we just don't talk anymore or talk about religion anymore.

So riddle me this batman, if i say "i went to the fucking store to get a god damn bandaid because your stupid ass dog bit me", does that relay the same type of emotion and distress as 'i went to the store to get a bandaid because your dumb dog bite me'? I would argue not. Would you deny others the right to express their feelings in a manner they feel proper just because your virgin ears can't handle spoken words that are no more then a combination of sound?

Re:May I be the first one to say

[HeronBlademaster]

Why must it always be the other that has to change? That would be like you knocking on my door, trying to change my religion to your religion and I don't want to because your religion offends me. Since it offends me, does that mean you should change your religion? No, it means that we just don't talk anymore or talk about religion anymore.

That's exactly the logic I would use with cursing. I don't really care to outlaw it, but I also don't think people should be forced to hear words they find offensive in public in the interest of "tolerance" or whatever.

I would merely argue that if some word or topic of conversation is offensive to a person or group of people, you should avoid that word or topic while you're around that person or group of people. Most people are ok with showing that small amount of respect and restraint.

With your example, if you find religious talk irritating or offensive or whatever, I'm going to avoid the subject whenever I'm around you. Why should it be different for swear words than for any other topic?

My earlier post did go somewhat off-topic; I started by saying "it shouldn't be ok to deliberately offend people" and then went on to say "besides, it's stupid anyway because X, Y, and Z."

Would you deny others the right to express their feelings in a manner they feel proper just because your virgin ears can't handle spoken words that are no more then a combination of sound?

If you know I'm offended by that sort of language, and you choose to use the words anyway, then I would expect you to restrain yourself out of a sense of common decency.

You know, that basic respect that society is built on.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[VJ42]

None of those other ways, however, has a particular definition.

Whilst I don't swear much myself, I beg to differ: http://www.unoriginal.co.uk/english-fuck.html
;p

Re:May I be the first one to say

[Anonymous Coward]

LoL, ok, i'm just playing devil's advocate here, but what if I am talking with a group of my peers who have no problem with cussing and then someone offended comes into the group. Does that mean we all (the originating group of non-offended people) have to quit cussing because the newb can't hand the language?

Wait, this sounds familiar... i think i saw this in a sexual harassment video one time. A group of people are standing around telling dirty jokes and a woman joined the group and became offended and reported them for sexual harassment.

Great... whats next? No smoking outside? oh wait, they did that...well shit.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[tomhudson]

If people are offended by swear words not directed at them, the problem lies with them and not the speaker.

If people are offended by my naked body out in public, that's their problem, not mine.

Seriously, we have public decency laws for a reason - it's so we don't go around offending people.

Seriously? You're welcome to go around here in public totally naked. We'll have fun watching you freeze in sub-zero weather.

Suppose I have a neighbor who is offended by the word "noodle", for some inexplicable reason. You're saying it's perfectly acceptable for me to deliberately use the word "noodle" in every way possible every time the neighbor is within earshot?

Common decency would suggest otherwise. I may think it's absurd to be offended by the word "noodle", but I'm certainly not going to deliberately offend my neighbor.

And yet you're saying it's perfectly acceptable to go around deliberately offending people. I guess you have no sense of decency.

No, your neighbor then needs to get their noodle examined. What if your neighbor is offended by gays and lesbians? What if your neighbor is offended by inter-racial marriage? What if your neighbor is offended by YOU?

What if I find it offensive that your neighbor is so easily offended? What if I find it offensive that YOU defend such offensive behaviour? Have you no sense of decency?

Re:May I be the first one to say

[HeronBlademaster]

If you're in public, I would hope you'd tone it down out of a sense of respect for others, regardless of what the law says.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[Anonymous Coward]

It's sad that so many people look down on others for using real fucking awesome language instead of fluffy puffy adjectives derived from ponies.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[HeronBlademaster]

It's sad that I get marked Troll merely for expressing my opinion that cursing is pointless and stupid. "Fluffy puffy adjectives derived from ponies" are not relevant.

I also fail to see how cursing is "real [f-ing] awesome". What's so awesome about it? The fact that some people find it offensive?

Re:May I be the first one to say

[AthleteMusicianNerd]

You're a pompous ass.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[daturan]

It's the cure for what ails ya: http://science.slashdot.org/story/09/07/12/1433249/Swearing-Provides-Pain-Relief-Say-Scientists?from=rss

Re:May I be the first one to say

[Anonymous Coward]

WHen others have respect for me and my feelings. Lets get started.

1. I want everyone to stop letting their dogs outside at night to bark at each other.

2. I want everyone to pay more attention on the roads.. Esp you old people.. comon speed limit is 40 can we at least go 30?

3. I want all of you to stop being republican, and conservative. It hurts my feelings your so fucking stupid

Start worrying about me feelings and beliefs, and ill stop cussing, till then go fuck youself.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[tbird20d]

It's polite to avoid making other people feel uncomfortable unnecessarily. I suspect people who have long been exposed to vulgarity lose a sense of it's emotional impact. No one is required to avoid offending people. And I'm no fan of political correctness. But avoiding rudeness just seems nicer than the alternative.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[HeronBlademaster]

Respect has to start somewhere. If everyone goes by your own plan - "I'll be nice as soon as everyone else is nice" - then nobody will ever be nice.

That's a pretty simple concept. If you refuse to be a source of respect, then you're just part of the problem.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[tbird20d]

If you object to deliberately offending people...

Really??? Do you like deliberately offending people, or is it just a tool you use to get your way?

Re:May I be the first one to say

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm lets see here... weve got bad drivers, dogs that anony everyone, and god damn republicans.. i hate fucking republicans. Or you have me cursing... see you can ignore me, i cant ignore a bad driver...

Try again

Re:May I be the first one to say

[Opportunist]

Neither. It's a tool to vent of steam. And I'd prefer someone use the word "fucker" instead of using his fist to express his anger any time!

Re:May I be the first one to say

[Opportunist]

Erhm... try it sometimes. I can reassure you, f-ing is awesome. :)

Re:May I be the first one to say

[Hognoxious]

tfl;dfr

Re:May I be the first one to say

[Provocateur]

California could try to ban salt, even with true health concerns, but that won't stop anyone from cooking with it.

I've also heard about the small bands of militants smuggling transfat at night and crossing the California border. Their target: Los Angeles, the heart of the botox-and-silicon regime.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[drinkypoo]

At any rate, there's certainly no reason to be using expletives as common adjectives.

This is a patently false statement. There is an excellent reason: because I want to. Anyone who says that is insufficient can attempt aviary copulation with a ventrally rotating toroidal pastry. It's my language too, and I'll use it however I want. You're not required to listen to me, or read what I say. Surely you could use a word filter to protect your virgin eyes.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[HeronBlademaster]

You mean, sex is awesome? I certainly won't disagree with you, but that's completely off-topic :P

Re:May I be the first one to say

[trurl7]

At any rate, there's certainly no reason to be using expletives as common adjectives.

Sorry, this is according to whom, exactly? The rest of what you wrote is so much emotional fluff. It comes down to that quote: YOU believe people should not use expletives. Well good for you. The Mormons will make you an honorary member. You can get a free bar of soap from the local PTA to wash the mouths of young children.

Seriously, who appointed you the language police? It's not your opinion - it's your arrogance in assuming that your standard ought to apply to anyone besides yourself.

You don't like expletive-based adjectives? Terrific - don't use them. Don't like it when someone else uses them - change the channel. If you believe that use of such linguistic constructions in a wide-spread and socially permissible fashion is evidence of the dire state of our society, you may well be right. But counter-indicating their use with a "shouldn't be" is as useful as pissing against the wind.

-1 Arrogant, easily offended, sheltered ninny.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[trurl7]

Some people need to be offended. You, for instance. Do you care why people do it?

Maybe they think it's awesome. Maybe they are exploring the boundaries of what is socially acceptable - this is important for developing children. Maybe they are immature. Perhaps they are suffering from a greater emotional pain and so "politeness" and not offending you take a lower priority.

You are not their judge. I agree with you to this extent - it's not pleasant when you hear people casually cursing in public. It degrades the quality of the public discourse. But those people are dealing with their own demons - be it emotional or mental disturbance, or a plain lack of education. In all instances, your being offended means jack shit to them. You want to stop people cursing - do the hard thing: fix society. Otherwise, please STFU, already.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[HeronBlademaster]

YOU believe people should not use expletives.

I'm sorry. I didn't realize people would take my post as anything other than my opinion.

The Mormons will make you an honorary member.

No need for that, I'm already a member ;)

Don't like it when someone else uses them - change the channel.

Real life doesn't have a remote control... and you can't always just get up and leave the room.

If something offends a large number of people, why should the offended people have to get up and leave the room, especially when the offensive thing is merely a choice of words? Why is it so much to ask that people not use expletives around people they know will be offended?

I thought that was just common courtesy, but I guess you think otherwise.

As for "easily offended"... I think not. Personally I don't find (most) expletives offensive, merely distasteful.

At any rate, wouldn't the world be better off if we all had a large enough vocabulary that nobody found the need to use the f-word as an adjective in every sentence? I think it would, and I don't see why I should shut up about it just because you don't care.

Re:May I be the first one to say

[HeronBlademaster]

How do we "fix society" if talking about it is taboo? Just look at Slashdot's reaction to an optional curse-free week!

Re:May I be the first one to say

[Anonymous Coward]

Some of us aren't offended by fucking.

It turns out, many people even enjoy it.

Fuck you, asshole

[BadAnalogyGuy]

Give me your clothes.

Re:Fuck you, asshole

[Dark_Gravity]

How delightful. The first post to be moderated offtopic quotes cussing uttered by the governor of California in one of his better known roles, thereby making it relevant to the subject on two levels Where are my mod points when I really need them?

Re:Fuck you, asshole

[MightyMartian]

Fucking insightful, I say! You mod-fuckers mod that fucker up!

Re:Fuck you, asshole

[kramerd]

You dipshit fuckwad moderators.

Ok, mods, make it 5, offtopic then.

Re:Fuck you, asshole

[consorting-with-daem]

Chill out, dickwad.

Re:Fuck you, asshole

[LanMan04]

I thought it was "Give me your clothes, your boots, and your motorcycle."

And...

[Anonymous Coward]

Slashdot needs a no sampenzus-free week where he stops polluting the other categories with his idle crap. Exactly what does this have to do with YRO?

Re:And...

[Anonymous Coward]

He just wanted to tweak the boundary-hatin' libertarian types around here. It's like hitting a wasp's nest with a stick.

Joke?

[el_jake]

God damn this shit must be a fucking joke? We don't cuss in California!

Re:Joke?

[MightyMartian]

God damn this shit must be a fucking joke? We don't cuss in California!

No kidding. Most of you can't even fucking talk.

Re:Joke?

[Anonymous Coward]

they can't fucking walk either, or ride a bus, a train, or even carpool for fuck's sake. they just fill the fucking freeways with more and more fucking cars with only one fucking person in them. california just fucking sucks. i can't wait for the day when the whole fucking thing rides a shitslide into the fucking ocean.

this fucking post is going to be the best fucking one in slashdot in history. cussing and california bashing all in one.. too bad we can't squeeze fucking microsoft and shitty toyota into it, too. oh, wow, would you fucking look at that. i fucking did it! fuck yeah, baby!

Re:Joke?

[Anonymous Coward]

Jealous of us here in California much? You know, you could just move here and be happy. I sure as hell wouldn't want to live any place else (and yes, I have been to not only a lot of states, but many other countries).

Re:Joke?

[MightyMartian]

If that makes you feel better, then believe it.

Re:Joke?

[Hognoxious]

We don't cuss in California!

You just don't notice because everyone does it in Spanish.

Re:Joke?

[drinkypoo]

California overwhelmingly produces the majority of the world's entertainment media. Like it or not, the whole world is on California's dick.

Re:Joke?

[badkarmadayaccount]

Chinga tú madre!
I'm talking to you CmdrTaco, fix your fscking UTF-8 before I 8==D---< in your mom.
</joke>

Of course

[camperdave]

Of course, this story is going to generate the largest collection of cuss-word containing posts that Slashdot has seen in months. Maybe even all but one of the posts will contain cuss-words.

Re:Of course

[Anonymous Coward]

Your goddamn post is not the only fucking one to not cuss, bitch!

Re:Of course

[Anonymous Coward]

Pfft... Fuck that.

Re:Of course

[Arthur Grumbine]

Maybe even all but one of the posts will contain cuss-words.

Not this one. Belgium.

Re:Of course

[sconeu]

Oh come on. There is absolutely no way in hell that Slashdot could be considered a Serious Screenplay.

Re:Of course

[Rary]

Maybe even all but one of the posts will contain cuss-words.

All but two, actually.

Not only that, but of course this story gets tagged "censorship", even though the whole point of this is to merely ask people not to swear for one week. Absolutely no enforcement whatsoever is happening.

(Cue the "...for now" comments in 3... 2... 1...)

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a silly waste of time, and I wonder if CA politicians don't have actual issues to attempt to address. But this is a huge non-story.

Re:Of course

[owlstead]

Not a serious screenplay? It plays on my screen and it is as serious as you make it :)

Re:Of course

[Anonymous Coward]

You know, I think you're fucking right...

Re:Of course

[kevingolding2001]

(Cue the "...for now" comments in 3... 2... 1...)

...0

Re:Of course

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you read the poster's sig. The F-Bomb gets dropped twice in it.

Re:Of course

[Anonymous Coward]

Belgium, Belgium !!!
putain de merde, watch your language
    --A French citizen

Re:Of course

[josgeluk]

As a Dutchman, I draw the line at Belgium.

Re:Of course

[zig007]

For all those non-americans that also have read the book and still don't get the parents joke, there is a reason:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life,_the_Universe_and_Everything#Censorship

Ironically, this joke would not have been possible would it not have been for the utter stupidity of profanity censorship.

Ooo! Fiddle Dee Dee...

[genghisjahn]

...that will require a tetanus shot. But, I'm not going to swear. But I am going to BEAT THIS DOG HOUSE DOWN!!

Re:Ooo! Fiddle Dee Dee...

[foodnugget]

[nerd voice]
It was "kick this dog house down"
[/nerd voice]

Re:Ooo! Fiddle Dee Dee...

[genghisjahn]

Mother @$#^. You're right. My sig says it all.

Granola

[ArhcAngel]

Fruits,
Nuts,
Flakes,
Pelosi
.
.
.
Profit?

Re:Granola

[svtdragon]

You know, perhaps a swear jar is a very good idea--California's in a lot of pain right now, so if swearing is used for pain relief they could well make a <oblig>fucking</oblig> killing.

working hard...or

[TornCityVenz]

Good to see that with schools going down the toilet, a budget spirally out of control and more and more companies moving out of the area...the legislature is hard at work.

Re:working hard...or

[Knara]

Next they'll make a law that states people have the right to not be offended on the Internet.

Re:working hard...or

[dgatwood]

Good to see that with schools going down the toilet, a budget spirally out of control and more and more companies moving out of the area...the legislature is hard at work.

No, you're thinking too narrowly again. The "swear jar" in the state house is actually their solution to the school funding problems. Estimates are that it will bring in upwards of $2 million per day in added revenue.

Re:working hard...or

[Belial6]

That won't do us any good. They will just use the money to install more stadium lights and water slides. Yes. That's right. Here in California, they claim we don't have the money to buy books, but somehow have the money for stadium lights and waterslides in our High Schools. That's right. The water slide that you can see for yourself is in a High School pool.

Re:working hard...or

[bazorg]

where you come from governments don't multitask?

Re:working hard...or

[Arthur Grumbine]

Yet another example of the sway held by special interests, like the incredibly influential Knights of Standards and Practices. Too long have their outdated ways oppressed the advancement of dragon-kind. Free Geldon!!

Re:working hard...or

[BrettJB]

Man, did I go to the wrong high school when I lived in the Bay Area...

Re:working hard...or

[Anonymous Coward]

Where I come from, governments don't single-task.

Re:working hard...or

[compro01]

Here is the primary problem.

50%+1 to approve (and thus make mandatory) spending
66%+1 to approve taxes to pay for spending

Add in overly short term limits, current economic issues, and other miscellany, and you have a recipe for things getting screwed up.

Re:working hard...or

[Anonymous Coward]

I was in the San Francisco bay area Thanksgiving time, and in one town, drove by a street that was blocked off because the city had trucked in snow for the kids to sled on. Man, where I come from, we do everything we can to get rid of snow, but these guys are actually paying for it!

Re:working hard...or

[dgatwood]

No, that's not what's wrong. What's wrong is that laws that create new programs/spending are not automatically contingent upon passage of a bill to pay for them.... Having such a requirement would completely negate the problem caused by the inversion you're pointing out. Indeed, it would be a lot better than fixing the inversion itself, as it would mean that a smaller percentage of the government could come up with ideas and get them passed into "pending law" telling the way that things should be under ideal circumstances, so that as money becomes available, spending bills can allocate funding for pending programs with a clear view of all of those needs, thus making it easier to prioritize new spending. (Hey, why are you writing a spending bill for this pork barrel project when there are eighty things we already approved that are more important and have no funding yet?)

Also, we need a law that says that if revenue increases by more than... say 3% year-over-year, the entire remainder must be squirreled away for use during periods of budget shortfall and may not be borrowed against. This would, in effect, cap government growth at 3% per year, thus *forcing* prioritization instead of willy-nilly spending.

Re:working hard...or

[Millenniumman]

Do you know that that was paid for by public funds? Even a lot of normal athletic programs where I am rely on fundraising. Someone might have just donated it to the school.

Re:working hard...or

[Belial6]

While I cannot claim to have been a part of the water slide planning, I can say this. It is HIGHLY unlikely that the pool heating bill, as well as all of the maintenance is paid for by fund raisers. I also know that the schools put a lot of resources into raising funds for these kinds of projects. Basically it becomes a, spend money on this non-tracked item so that we can get it back in the tracked area. Pretty much money laundering. I also WAS involved when the local school district decided that stadium lighting was a good idea for all of the schools so that they could play sports well into the night. In that instance, they did embezzle public funds for the projects. Public funds were issued to replace the grass in the fields. The school decided to use that money run conduit and electric to all of the locations that they had already decided to install the stadium lighting. This way, when it came time to raise funds, most of the work would already have been paid for. The plan for paying for the stadium lights in residential neighborhoods, also had nothing in it to cover the ongoing costs in the project.

That doesn't even start to address the ethics of accepting a gift of a water slide when you are claiming you cannot buy books.

Fuck Off!

[Jerrry]

Fuck that shit!

God damn idiots

[Anonymous Coward]

The motherfuckas in CA legislature, and I apologize all the genuine mofos for the insult of comparison, cannot pass a budget or anything minutely useful.

Just the other day, they were passing (passed?) setting up a registry for "animal collectors" - people who collect large number of stray cats and such.

God damn state is going down the drain with 12% unemployment rate, and these are the things the fuckers fiddle with.

Re:God damn idiots

[MightyMartian]

They're doing that because they can't do anything else. Governments with their backs against the fiscal wall frequently start banning everything in sight. Banning is cheap, because inevitably they never put any money into enforcement, or in cases like cell phone driving bans, they let the cops go crazy with fines as a backdoor revenue generator. In any case, when you see a government get on the "ban this ban that" bandwagon, it means they're broke, can't actually pass any legislation that would in fact do anybody any good, but still need to justify their salaries.

Voluntary....

[headkase]

.... For now.

Re:Voluntary....

[headkase]

Are they going to escape injustice nation wide and be allowed to marry? Actually, scratch that, allowed to get life insurance on their parters? If you'd like to conflate issues further keep posting ;)

Re:Voluntary....

[khallow]

You just wanted to show off your sig.

Re:Voluntary....

[headkase]

;) and some filler to make up a minimum character limit =)

Obviously, they do not have any REAL problem

[gweihir]

Otherwise they would not do such stupid and utterly pointless publicity stunts.

This is also counterproductive, as cussing is part of normal and healty human behaviour. Banning cussing will only serve to cause people to built up anger without outlet. Maybe they should rename this the "promoting senseless violence week", which is more what this is likely to do.

Re:Obviously, they do not have any REAL problem

[sjames]

You don't realize it, but you've uncovered the answer. They ban cussing so people's frustrations build without an outlet. Then, just as they're about to blow, they get loaded into a combustion chamber so it will power a gas turbine.

They reduce the population, get free renewable power, and all that inheritance flying around to be taxed fixes the budget shortfall.

Re:Obviously, they do not have any REAL problem

[gweihir]

Hmm. I should have realized!

swear jar in the Assembly

[voodoo cheesecake]

Well, that sure beats the shit out of raising taxes!

Just one thing, Dude...

[orthancstone]

Do ya have to use so many cuss words?

Re:Just one thing, Dude...

[Anonymous Coward]

What the fuck are you talking about?

Re:Just one thing, Dude...

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course we do, stop being such an @$$#0|3

Re:Just one thing, Dude...

[hldn]

the fuck you talkin about?

Re:Just one thing, Dude...

[orthancstone]

Have it your way Dude.

This is such bullshit.

[jbarr]

Subject says it all!

Just what a bankcrupt state government needs.

[Antony T Curtis]

Just think.... with the money spent passing such nonsense, dozens of teachers or police officers could have been employed.

*sighs*

Re:Just what a bankcrupt state government needs.

[Anonymous Coward]

are you retarded?

This is a VOLUNTARY measure. No money was spent on it.

Please read more than the title of the article next time.

Re:Just what a bankcrupt state government needs.

[Nemyst]

Each and every second spent on this issue is money wasted. Yes, it's voluntary, but the legislators who worked on that didn't do it for free, now did they?

mandatory ...

[sammyF70]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJJL5dxgVaM

Re:mandatory ...

[drpimp]

That was definitely the ad I was thinking of when I heard this yesterday on NPR. Although there they called it 'cuss jar' which doesn't quite have the same ring.
Another quote that comes to mind when I hear this, yet slightly reverse context ... FUCK YOU, PAY ME

Re:mandatory ...

[Drathos]

I was thinking more along the lines of Demolition Man.

Anonymous Coward....

[Coffee Warlord]

...you are fined one half credit for violation of the verbal moralities statute.

Re:Anonymous Coward....

[Martin Blank]

Actually, it's "You are fined one-half credit for a sotto voce violation of the verbal moralities statute." An outright violation is one credit.

I really should find something more productive to do.

Re:Anonymous Coward....

[ElKry]

Coincidentally, the very same movie that talks about President Schwarzenegger and the amendments to the Constitution made to allow him to run for President of the USA.

Re:Anonymous Coward....

[Coffee Warlord]

Yeah, but that's still a few decades into the future. I'm figuring it's a good a half-credit now, adjusting for inflation.

Great Way to Raise Revenue

[thedbp]

They can appeal to the Moral "Majority" by saying "Hey! Let's not swear for a week, and we'll set up a swear jar too!" but really what they're saying is "Hey, you cocksucker motherfuckers! We fucking know you can't control your goddamn language you bastards, so cough up some fucking dough!" Great way to get some money in CA's coffers. They are struggling, and with all the filthy language that flies around that very liberal patch of land, this could very well lead to serious revenue.

Yes, I'm being facetious.

Re:Great Way to Raise Revenue

[okooolo]

nothing short of swearing can express how most people feel about california's budget

Ob Penny Arcade

[Chris Mattern]

Here.

Response to Arnold's Letter

[Anonymous Coward]

This is probably a jab back at Governor Arnold's letter to them from a few months back. Note that they went out of their way to put a swearing jar in his mansion.

Role Models

[Tsiangkun]

Frequently I like to embrace the role models in our government and
use word placement to make a point. Arnold did this, and it was
clear what his intentions were. I applaud our government for
keeping their promises on this critical piece of legislation.

Year after year tax payer money gets thrown away on
one stupid idea after another. Unless we can educated the
uneducated, these movie stars will continue to rule.

America needs leadership that can dedicate a week to getting
results. A week just to stop swearing at each other, that is
not even a good start. We need a week away from faith in
our markets to fix everything. We need a week of using
logic to solve problems. We need to vote third party, the
democrats and republics are colluding, but they call it compromise.

Does anyone have the text of the resolution?

[NotQuiteReal]

I didn't look too hard, but I couldn't find the text.

If it was written by lawmakers, it should be long and rambling, and I am hoping to find the list of proscribed words, otherwise how will I know if I am in compliance?

Or are they just sticking to the classics; Shit, Piss, Fuck, Cunt, Cocksucker, Motherfucker, and Tits.

Tits? seriously? Piss doesn't seem like a swear word anymore either.

Re:Does anyone have the text of the resolution?

[Hatta]

Tits? seriously? Piss doesn't seem like a swear word anymore either.

Tits doesn't even belong on the list, you know. It's such a friendly sounding word. It sounds like a nickname. 'Hey, Tits, come here. Tits, meet Toots, Toots, Tits, Tits, Toots.' It sounds like a snack doesn't it? Yes, I know, it is, right. But I don't mean the sexist snack, I mean, New Nabisco Tits. The new Cheese Tits, and Corn Tits and Pizza Tits, Sesame Tits Onion Tits, Tater Tits, Yeah. Betcha can't eat just one. That's true I usually switch off . But I mean that word does not belong on the list.

-snip-

The reason Piss and Cunt are on the list is that a long time ago certain ladies said 'Those are the two I am not going to say. I don't mind Fuck and Shit, but P and C are out. P and C are out.' Which led to such stupid sentences as 'OK, you fuckers, I am going to tinkle now.'

RIP George, you dead fucker.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Sounds OK to me

[tbird20d]

I expect many Slashdotters will dismiss this as some kind of "censorship", although it's voluntary and apparently intended to be good-natured. I think it's a good thing.

One of my favorite definitions of courtesy is "acting so that those around you are most comfortable". All too often, people who use swear words are completely oblivious to those around them who would rather not hear them. I'm not in favor of any heavy-handed tactics on the part of government (or anyone else) to curb people's non-illegal behavior, but something that promotes civility and politeness in discourse seems unobjectionable to me.

Re:Sounds OK to me

[NewbieProgrammerMan]

I keep hearing how tough things are in California, and how many problems they have. I also hear legislators constantly talking about the need to "do something" about these problems, because (of course), if *they* don't do anything about problems, they never get solved.

So it seems to be, at best, a frivolous waste of time for them to worry about swearing. No matter how voluntary and good-natured this thing is, they still took up the time of legislators that (presumably) have more important things to worry about.

Add to that the tendency of people to do things they're told not to do, and it makes a law/resolution/happy-feelgood-bill like this totally fucking worthless.

Re:Sounds OK to me

[okooolo]

I'll be damned before I say "oh my goodness" next time my coworker almost nails my foot with a nail gun.. (while framing a roof) strong men need strong words

Re:Sounds OK to me

[russotto]

One of my favorite definitions of courtesy is "acting so that those around you are most comfortable". All too often, people who use swear words are completely oblivious to those around them who would rather not hear them.

I'm uncomfortable around those who are offended by my language. The need to constantly invent circumlocutions for "offensive" words, and the distractions engendered when such circumlocutions are skipped and someone takes offense, add significant effort to discourse... which may, in fact, be the reason for such rules.

Re:Sounds OK to me

[Anonymous Coward]

I live in California, and things are really tough right now. The fact that the state legislature is passing bullshit measures like this as opposed to worrying about the real issues should give you a rough idea of how fucked things are right now.

Re:Sounds OK to me

[taustin]

I'm not uncomfortable by people who are offended by my language. I simply don't care about them at all.

I am, however, very offended by people who believe they, and only they, have the right to tell me what words I am allowed to use, while I am not allowed to tell them what words they are allowed to use. Such people are not trying to make the world a better place, despite their politically correct lies. They are trying to make the world their place, and only theirs.

I hereby declare the first week of March to be Fuck Political Correctness In The Ass With A Spoon Week. Or Fuck The Politicaly Correct In The Ass With A Plasma Torch Week.

Re:Sounds OK to me

[webheaded]

I'll second that. When outside doing shit like that, the F word flies free. It's a man-right. When I worked at UPS EVERYONE cursed. Even the supervisors would curse. None of us were offended by it...they're just WORDS for fuck's sake. :p

Re:Sounds OK to me

[tbird20d]

I simply don't care about them at all.

That just makes you a rude person.

I am, however, very offended by people who believe they, and only they, have the right to tell me what words I am allowed to use...

Nice strawman. Who are you talking about?

Seriously - what is it about cussing that you find so enamoring?

Personally, I think it's a pride thing. Like... "No one can tell me what to do!!!" How about voluntarily managing your behavior to avoid offense when you can? Would you really use a boatload of expletives and vulgar references around women, children, your girlfriend, her parents? Would you praise the Nazi's in a room full of Jews?

If you don't care about what others find offensive, why should anyone care about what you find offensive?

Re:Sounds OK to me

[russotto]

Personally, I think it's a pride thing. Like... "No one can tell me what to do!!!" How about voluntarily managing your behavior to avoid offense when you can? Would you really use a boatload of expletives and vulgar references around women, children, your girlfriend, her parents?

How about not being so fucking touchy? The problem with a definition of civility which requires one to cater to another's irrational preferences is that people will then start adopting irrational preferences in order to control discourse. It's a comedy staple: a person trying to get an idea across in mixed company and constantly being admonished to watch his language, despite his use of tamer and tamer euphemisms. But in real life it's really irritating.

Would you praise the Nazi's in a room full of Jews?

_I_ wouldn't praise the Nazis at all, except perhaps sarcastically. That's not a matter of civility; that's the matter of the Nazis having been a bunch of murderous bastards for whom no expletive is strong enough.

Re:Sounds OK to me

[taustin]

Typical, predictable, expected passive/aggressive response, right down to invoking Godwin's Law.

Fuck you, too, you passive/aggressive little pussy.

Re:Sounds OK to me

[drinkypoo]

One of my favorite definitions of courtesy is "acting so that those around you are most comfortable".

I'm most comfortable when I get to say "fuck" frequently. I toss it into my verbiage like croutons on a fat man's salad. (And I am all too-well acquainted with this portion of reality.) Where are the people concerned about my level of comfort when they try to restrict my speech? My Amygdala requires frequent exercise, and utterance of expletives is part of that.

I'm also most comfortable when I'm naked, but we won't even go into that...

Re:Sounds OK to me

[tbird20d]

Here's a pointer on how to make other people feel comfortable. Actually think about them instead of yourself. Your response was all "me, me, me". People who cuss, particularly to deliberately offend, speak volumes about their self-centered-ness.

Re:Sounds OK to me

[trurl7]

As long as we're striving for the purity of our linguistic fluids, let me point out, Webster, that

enamoring

is the present participle of "enamor", which is a transitive verb that requires a direct object, usually denoted by a prepended "of" or "with". So your question undoubtedly was "what is it concerning cussing of which you are so enamored?" (if you insist on retaining the adjectival form).

That said, I am offended at your lack of proper grammar. Seriously - why are you so enamored with bad grammar?

Personally, I think it's a pride thing, like "No one can tell me what the proper rules of English grammar are!" How about voluntarily learning the proper language rules to avoid illiterate speech when you can? [When you can what? Let's not even get started on the rest of the sentence structures] Would you really use a boatload [nice censor - I think you were looking for "shitload"] of split infinitives and pronouns without referents around schoolkids learning English, your girlfriend, her parents? Would you praise atheists skeptics in a room full of fundamentalists?

If you don't care about how your language, and especially the purported contribution of your speech, is presented to other people, why should anyone care about what you find offensive?

Re:WTF?

[Anonymous Coward]

Certainly illustrates the diversity of the word...

Finally a solution

[Anxiety35]

Budget crisis fixed. It took real leadership to get us back on the right track.

Really? I don't think it will be a problem.

[Anonymous Coward]

The California legislature are just not familiar with the problem.

In any case, everyone can feel free to use this handy guide to help avoid foul language:
http://www.mit.edu/activities/safe/humor/avoid-foul-language

Acrostic

[Itninja]

Should be interesting.
Have they considered there are many ways one can curse?
I suspect they have not
Totally ineffectual law if you ask me.
A law on being polite? Workable? No...what's the word I am looking for?
Best.
Law.
Ever.

A different kind of air pollution.

[henrywasserman]

Now that there's some air pollution regulation that I can support and understand.

well......

[trum4n]

...fuck that!

With the California state budget as it is...

[Neanderthal Ninny]

good luck. Furlough Fridays, closing state parks, etc and "Cuss-Free" would take an Act of God.
I'll be back.

The obligatory

[sdnoob]

Shit
Piss
Fuck
Cunt
Cocksucker
Motherfucker
Tits

Re:The obligatory

[xaxa]

Pee!
Po!
Belly!
Bum!
Drawers!

Re:The obligatory

[BoozeRunner]

& refrencing the most veritile word in the english language . . .
Usage of the word F**K

Take credit cards?

[Ostracus]

" Fortunately, the measure only for the first week of March, and compliance is voluntary — although, apparently, there will be a 'swear jar' in the Assembly and the Governor's mansion. No word yet on whether the Governator intends to comply.""

Governors office:
Scene: Two aides about to get chewed out.
Governor walks over to the swear jar and puts in a $100. Apparently it's going to be a long night.

you're fucking kidding me...Seriously.

[moxley]

You're fucking kidding me...

Seriously - with all of the issues in my great home state, THIS is how they're spending their time in the legislature?

What a bunch of retarded fucking asshats. Fuck the fucking fuckers.

Re:you're fucking kidding me...Seriously.

[Anonymous Coward]

>>Seriously - with all of the issues in my great home state....

Dude, I got news for you. Your home state stopped being "great" about, oh, 50 years ago. Overpriced, over-rated, over-populated, and filled with the highest percentage of fucking lunatic douche-bags in the union. I wish it would drop into the Pacific already; it's a fucking cancer on this nations ability to think anywhere near straight; a blight that pollutes our collective culture and consciousness...

Re:you're fucking kidding me...Seriously.

[moxley]

I've lived all over the US, and California does have it's fair share of problems, (like every other state) but you sound like a pretentious asshole who doesn't know what they're talking about and likely has never even visited the state, or has only seen LA or something.

They have horrible gun laws. I will say that.

It's a large, large state - with a lot of very different areas. People like to bash CA, mainly due to their impression of Hollywood and the shite it puts out.

Shades of "Demolition Man"

[Locke2005]

Give them at ticket every time they swear, and at least they'll have something to wipe their ass with!

Re:Shades of "Demolition Man"

[DarthBling]

On the bright side, every time you needed some toliet paper, you just let out a litany of swear words?

Thanks a lot you shit-brained, fuck-faced, ball breaking, duck fucking pain in the ass. - John Spartan

Re:Shades of "Demolition Man"

[Locke2005]

Dude, if you would just learn how the use the 3 shells, you wouldn't need any toilet paper!

The One Signature

[BJ_Covert_Action]

Where's the post from the guy with the signature:

Take away the right to say fuck, and you take away the right to say "Fuck the government."

It seems he would have a particularly interested bit in this release. I wonder if he lives in California.

Re:The One Signature

[RedEars]

http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1564790&cid=31290064

America...

[Anonymous Coward]

America... fuck ya!

Motion seconded, do we have quarum?

[HeckRuler]

You've never felt the need to push the button labeled: "DO NOT PRESS"?

"the Man" is in California, and he's telling people not to cuss for a week. By cussing in response, we are showing that his efforts to control others is only bringing about more of the very activity that he hopes to diminish. Any legislature that seeks to restrict the people should be met with such an attitude. I'd say it's what a good citizen would do.

So I'll second the motion,
Fuck that.

Re:Motion seconded, do we have quarum?

[sconeu]

Actually, the correct response is "Fuck that shit".

Fixed it for ya.

Re:Motion seconded, do we have quarum?

[Anonymous Coward]

You've never felt the need to push the button labeled: "DO NOT PRESS"?

Not since I exceeded age, oh, nine or so.

"the Man" is in California, and he's telling people not to cuss for a week.

No, he isn't. You are a liar.

He is asking us politely to voluntarily refrain from cussing for a week.

Re:Motion seconded, do we have quarum?

[xaxa]

Reminds me of a song I like:

Don't tell me how to talk or how to live my life
(Fuck that shit, fuck that shit)
Every time I'm right a little part of you die
(Fuck that shit, fuck that shit)
Should I ever be punished for crossing the line
(Fuck that shit, fuck that shit)
It was made for those who can't think for themselves
(Fuck that shit, fuck that shit)

A little part of you die! (x16) ...

Revolt!
It's revolution!
Bring out the guillotine!

Combichrist -- Fuck that Shit

Re:Motion seconded, do we have quarum?

[Anonymous Coward]

And seriously, I would find it offensive that they would expect me to listen. The only people who would listen are the people who never curse anyway. So fucking shit guys, this is a waste of my god damn time.

Re:Motion seconded, do we have quarum?

[tbird20d]

"the Man" is in California, and he's telling people not to cuss for a week

Well I did say that I thought in many cases "the Man" is nowhere around. Do you think the California legislators are lurking on Slashdot to see the criticism? They're not, and all this "protest" cussing is just in an echo-chamber.

Any legislature that seeks to restrict the people should be met with such an attitude. I'd say it's what a good citizen would do.

I would disagree that requesting that people not offend others comes anywhere near the level of "restricting the people" that warrants any kind of backlash or protest. IMHO responding with cusswords just comes across as juvenile.

Re:Motion seconded, do we have quarum?

[badkarmadayaccount]

And people wonder why much of the youth like Eminem. It's completely understandable, it's just that there a bunch of stupid cunts and fucking pussies that can't or won't.

I've seen this before..

[Pinky]

The next step is to put a little box on the wall with speech recognition. Then it could print out a fine automatically..

".. you have been fined 1 credit for a violation of the verbal morality..."

Nuts

[magus_melchior]

I suppose that's the best a state government in a straight-jacket can come up with...

I like the saying:

[Shatteredstar]

The censorship of the word is what gives it power.

Somewhat true really, if the word was mainstream and not something people were shocked or suprised to hear, it would not be something people would need to hide or shelter others from.

On a similar line of thought....why do we use a word for certain things? Because at some point someone decided that word would mean that. Subjective by person

An apple might be called a quazar, a fish might be a globbitygook...all based on who decided to name that thing however long ago really, at least thats my view on the whole of language. (just look at how each language has different words for various things!)

Obligatory: Swears for Cares!

[Anonymous Coward]

See the YouTube video (starts at 20 seconds).

In CA now.

[bragr]

More specifically, I am sitting in a lecture hall of the University of California system that is starting to shown the signs of underfunding. So... fuck that that goddamn shit.

So California's fucking budget crisis is over?

[Kymermosst]

Now that the shitty Californian budget clusterfuck is solved, the cocksuckers in the legislature can get on to fucking some other shit up.

Actually, I can see an upside

[weston]

Profanity often can nudge interaction towards less restrained and thoughtful expression. The budget didn't spiral out of control by itself; it broke down because of (a) the laws surrounding how budgeting is to be done (b) the fact that the two parties couldn't work with each other.

Discouraging profanity won't fix problem (a), but it might make problem (b) somewhat more tractable.

what is going on there?

[Goldsmith]

Really. That state has major, major problems. Another few years of this kind of governing will lead to California being the "Greece" of the US. We need to take a hard look at what's happening to the EU when one of their member states has serious financial problems. Then look at California's tanking credit rating (lowest of any US state) and historic inability to balance even a basic operating budget, even during good years!

Swear Jar?

[Ardx]

Evidently someone in the California government likes Budweiser... or at least thier commercial. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifjMgEWDoWQ Would the owner of a white station please go fuck yourself.

Bill Hicks

[mister_playboy]

i can't wait for the day when the whole fucking thing rides a shitslide into the fucking ocean

Bill Hicks, is that you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arizona_Bay

Re:What's wrong swith cuss words?

[mister_playboy]

I assume the idea of swearing/cussing comes from the biblical injunction "not to take the lord's name in vain". How exactly that was twisted into covering all these other terms which are not obviously related to the lord's name is unknown to me.

The Governator

[HTH NE1]

The Governator responded with his catchphrase, "Fuck you asshole," which previously he only used in his R-rated movies. He then added, "You are one ugly motherfucker."

Kid who started the no cussing club

[unjedai]

About the kid mentioned in the article that started the no cussing club

"It hasn’t all been smooth sailing. At first, McKay almost quit because of negative response. Sometimes people would yell bad words at him. Or they would accuse him of trying to take away their freedom of speech. McKay points out that he isn’t making them do anything. He asks them to challenge themselves to improve. “I’m just trying to bring awareness about people’s language.”

In the accompanying video it says he's gotten death threats. Some people need to chill out.

California is a bit ahead of the curve

[night_flyer]

Since the Federal Gov't effectively banned incandescent light-bulbs with the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007... I hope they aren't leading the way on this also

yea,

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks a lot you shit-brained, fuck-faced, ball breaking, duck fucking pain in the ass.

Ok Seriously...

[tengeta]

California, this is the point where you stand up and tell your government that they will walk out of their buildings jobless or lose their lives.

Obligatory Farscape quips....

[TheHawke]

Frell this dren!

slightly disappointed

[Anonymous Coward]

A tiny naive part of me expected to come in here, check the comments, and not find a trace of profanity. A mass demonstration of people obeying this law would have been a great joke. Ah, but the discipline and coordination it would have taken .. I should have fucking known better.

Re:slightly disappointed

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck You!

There's a madness to this reason

[Quiet_Desperation]

Too many people were swearing at the legislature for their brain dead performance, so this is how they fix it.

Re:What's wrong swith cuss words?

[Anonymous Coward]

Japan doesn't even have "swear" words. You can insult people very effectively if you want, but there are no words that offend in themselves. I used to live with a Japanese woman with a little boy, he took to calling me "Oshiko head" but wouldn't tell me what it meant. One day Mom was going on a long trip, taking the boy, and she asked him "You oshiko yet?". He dutifully went to the bathroom to avoid having to make a special rest stop.

That's another thing, bathrooms used to be "water closets" until that became offensive, they used to be toilets, washroom, lavatory, latrine, head, WC, powder room, men's/ladies' room, can, and the ultimate in obfuscation, "rest room". I can assure you that I never visit one of these facilities in order to "rest"!

state motto

[strikeleader]

California’s new state motto:
Leading the way down the spiraling toilet of liberal legislation

Re:What's wrong swith cuss words?

[Inda]

I like to think of swearing as colourful. I particularly like the use of tmesis - the art of injection a swearword in the middle of another word. Not your common, ordin-fucking-ary swearword injection, it's got to be funny. The Australians do it best.

But no swearing on the TV during the day please. It's vulgar. There's a time and place for it. With people you trust. It's nasty hearing a young child effin and jeffin...

Why aren't people offended when I say "do one"? Everyone knows what I'm really saying.

Re:What's wrong swith cuss words?

[misexistentialist]

Bringing up bodily functions and using insults in conversation is generally rude. "Fucking awesome" is indeed diluted by unrelated uses, but it still is awkward for those of us who frequently hear it in the literal sense.

I sir, point to Amendment 1....

[Fallen Kell]

And say you can stick your fucking no swear week up your fucking ass...

My word!

[HeckRuler]

Oh, well in that case could you pretty please GTFO and if you don't mind, take your fail with you.
Once you've exited the premise, do be a dear and DIAF. At your convenience of course.

While you're at it, if it wouldn't be too much to ask, could you toss that old piece of trash constitution out? It's a dreadful bother for the poor widdle fascists here abouts and it would be ever so nice if you could turn your back for a but a moment.

Re:My word!

[Anonymous Coward]

The constitution? Fascism?

They are putting a swear jar in a couple government buildings. Nothing to see here, keep your nerd rage in your pants and move along.

Re:What's wrong swith cuss words?

[SleazyRidr]

A large part of it is that they are used almost exclusively in a negative context. My girlfriend doesn't like me using what she calls 'ugly' words around her daughter. This includes words like 'stupid' and 'ugly.' She wants her daughter to grow up to be a nice person, and using nice words is the first step in that direction.

Granted, I often do swear without an offensive meaning (e.g. 'Fuck it's hot today') but young children probably won't pick up on the subtleties so she tries to keep them from her until she's older.

Life Imitates Art

[Aerosiecki]

*bzzzt*

John Spartan, you have been fined one credit for violation of the Verbal Morality Statute.

Be well!

Re:What's wrong swith cuss words?

[BJ_Covert_Action]

Actually there is a bit in the Bible, the New Testament, where Peter, I think it is, is preaching to some unconverted tribes. He mentions, in very explicit terms that using, 'filthy language,' is considered sinful. I would look it up for you with the appropriate verse and what not, but I have already spent far too much time reading that book in my life. I don't intend to waste anymore time doing so.

A google search can probably find it for you.

Cuss-Free Week....

[Anonymous Coward]

is "one ugly mother fucker"

Re:What's wrong swith cuss words?

[DMUTPeregrine]

Because the Lord is a Shithead rapist who Fucked that Bitch Mary? Then, as Jesus, rode into town on an Ass.

Wow. Embarrassing!

[steppin_razor_LA]

I don't think I've ever said this before, but this actually makes me embarrassed to be a Californian.

What the Hell?

[Anonymous Coward]

As we say around here, "Fuck that Shit".

Wankers!

[nevillethedevil]

Knob

Re:What's wrong swith cuss words?

[BaronHethorSamedi]

I'm glad you brought this up. Let me turn this question around a bit.

I'm not actively offended by profanity. I grew up with it, hear it at work, in the media--about like we all do, I suppose. But even if I'm not actively offended by it, I'm not actively impressed by it either. Are you?

I suppose I may have had a bit of a "brainwashed upbringing" in that I had parents who were concerned that I learn to speak English well and communicate effectively. English is a language with an extraordinarily broad and varied vocabulary--in part because it's borrowed so heavily from so many other languages. When I hear a person who seems unable to construct a sentence without using four letter words--for whom "fuck" and its variants act as noun, adjective, pronoun and/or verb without any apparent notion of what that word actually denotes--I admit that at first blush I'm probably going to have a low opinion of that person. If I were an employer, I wouldn't hire him or her. I wouldn't want him or her dating one of my children.

I share your sentiment on "like" as a placeholder (I'm not too impressed by that either), but feel that even that is probably preferable to pointless (and invariably grammatically incorrect) references to sexual acts, excrement, and religious figures. And if you're making those references with a purpose to offend, are you really trying to communicate anything useful anyway?

Fsck swearing

[jamesh]

Fsck swearing... I want to hear them go a whole month (or even an hour) without saying any word starting with the letter 's' or something creative like that. The person that breaks the rule the most gets to sit on one of those seats over a tub of water that you throw tennis balls at a target and if you hit it dumps them in. Or even better, a bucket of slime over everyone's head that gets poured on them whenever they say "I don't know".

Fuck the government of California

[AthleteMusicianNerd]

People take this all as a joke, but the income tax started out at 1% and rose as high as 90%. This is what's called incrementalism. It's just a matter of time before they do punish people for cursing.
Of course excessive use of curse words gets annoying, but anyone offended by it needs to chill. The word fuck is synonymous with fornicate. Why is the former offensive and the latter not? Likewise with cunt and vagina, cock and penis, asshole and anus, etc....
When this "no cuss week" comes up, I am going to stand in the middle of the Spectrum and yell "Fuck" which is something I wouldn't have otherwise done. So they have in fact made the problem worse by coming up with this crap. I may even have a sign made saying "Fuck the CA State Assembly" and perhaps "Fuck Boxer and Feinstein" (but not literally) because they're both worthless cuntbags.

Re:Wow. Embarrassing!

[AthleteMusicianNerd]

Me too.

Re:What's wrong swith cuss words?

[Anonymous Coward]

So, like, what you're, like, saying is that, like, "like" should be, like, a cuss word? Like, am I right?

Re:What's wrong swith cuss words?

[Locke2005]

It is psychologically useful to have certain reserved word which only only used when extraordinary emotional impact is appropriate. For instance, saying "fiddlesticks!" when you stub your toe is much less satisfying than a load outburst of "fuck!" Overuse of these words in everyday speech lessens their emotional impact, and make them less psychologically satisfying when you really need to express your displeasure.
Personally, I've caught myself quoting an old coworker about piping data to /dev/null being like "sending the bits up an angel's ass!"... then realized I was talking to a devout christian coworker. He never batted an eye or complained, but I sure felt like an ass. There's a thin line between "colorful" and "offensive".

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

More popular "feel good measures"...

[Anonymous Coward]

Californians deserve everything they get.

This is what you empower your government to do? Sit around creating empty feel good measures while confiscating your property to fund their existence?

Idiots, one and all. Enjoy your servitude.

Or get off your arse and do something more constructive than "voting" for American Idol.

Re:What's wrong swith cuss words?

[azenpunk]

Think of what those words mean, what they refer to. Historically, profane is anything that's outside of the church. Grocery shopping is profane, because it's not part of worship. Now notice that all the topics they refer to are things that have little place in church services. Fuck, shit, bitch. You can talk about sex during a church service, you can mention feces, even female dogs but it would be done in a mature and respectful manner and done in relation to God, Jesus and the Gospels. However, referring to these topics in such crass and crude terms, such as talking about fucking, shit or referring to women as bitches, would really never have a place in church services and therefor would always be profane. Couple that with the puritanical roots of the United States and you can see how they are considered 'bad.'

To be fair though, excessive use of such words is a sign of immaturity, gratuitous and generally pointless. I do quite like the way many of them sound, their abruptness...they are like little verbal gunshots to my ears, and i do like to go shooting. A sentence filled with profanity is likely to be devoid of thought as well. I do approve of them being considered "bad" words at least for children as i would rather my children (when i have them) learn to express themselves thoughtfully over using expletive filled tirades.

As far as not being allowed to use profanity stifling "free expression," well that is totally false. You can invariable express your thoughts more accurately and clearly without the use of profanity. Consider the following phrases: "Fuck you pal!" and "Sir, if i ever gained the approval of a man such as yourself, i would hang myself in shame." Which is more expressive?

In fact, a ban on profanity does not infringe upon ones first amendment rights. Even if profanity is illegal you can still advocate any political view legally, one may have to achieve a higher level of eloquence however. I am vehemently against such a ban as that is not a power granted to the Legislature (federal i know for sure, pretty sure about CA state, and yes i do know this is not a ban). As far as the problem with allowing profanity on daytime TV, ask instead what would really be gained by allowing it. Are you really missing out on anything because of the FCC's ban? Likely not. I do not mean to dismiss the question you pose, however it alone is not sufficient to properly illuminate the topic.

Now:
"Hell, Damn Fart. Boobs Fart Boobs!"

So you can now swear

[houghi]

Well, at least the rest of the year. Look at the positive side. As it is banned only one week, it means that it is allowed 51 weeks. This would mean that if they allow things to be bleeped out on TV, your rights are violated.

So in order to not have cursing on tv, they better not do this and allow swearing all year around, so they can keep blocking it.

Now my head hurts. I am confused.

How does this work with Tourettes Syndrome?

[Kitkoan]

Like this can be viewed as discriminatory against sufferers of Tourettes.

Does remind me of that one joke saying "If you don't believe in what I believe, and you deny Gosh then you'll be Darned to Heck".

Wait...

[Anonymous Coward]

Am I stupid, or just confused? In the Governator's mansion, without the Governator's express permission?

I've seen enough Terminator to see how this one ends...

Re:What's wrong swith cuss words?

[LordLucless]

Then you'd assume wrong. Expletives are a feature of languages the world over, and, in some cultures, predate exposure to Christianity. That injunction wasn't particularly to cover the use of God's name as a swear word, but to forbid people from using God's name in a manner that doesn't refelect well on God. That includes use as an expletive, but also swearing an oath in God's name and then breaking it, claiming to be a follower of God and then ignoring his laws, etc. It's basically saying, if you use God's name, you better be upholding what God says. Think of it as the world's first libel law.

Re:What's wrong swith cuss words?

[LordLucless]

Etymologically, in English, the distinction was class-based. Swear words generally have Germanic roots (fuck, shit, etc), while the clinical terms (copulate, excrete) have French/Romantic roots. At the time English as a language was developing, Germanic was considered barbarous, and French/Latin was considered cultured. Language is often one of the hallmarks of social groups (think of the vocabulary shift between generations - hip, groovy, cool, etc). If you want to fit in to a particular group, one of the first things you do is adopt the linguistic mannerisms of the group. Our society, as we have become more egalitarian, has tended to adopt "high culture" artefacts in preference to "low culture", so we've essentially inherited those manerisms, and relegated low culture to vulgarity.

Personally, my reaction to swear words varies in regards to context. The most common useage I see is generally people who use them deliberately to shock, or to show how much of a rebel they are by not conforming to social acceptable behaviour. I'm not offended by that, but I don't have much respect for the speaker.

Similarly, I see cathartic profanity ("Shit! The server's down") as indecision, or a lack of self control. When I hear this at work, it generally means something's gone wrong, and someone's standing around swearing instead of actually trying to fix it. The competent people don't usually swear when something happens, they act immediately to correct it.

Emphatic swearing ("Fucking awesome"), I don't really mind, but don't particularly see a point to it either.

bud light?

[mordorph]

will the monies garnered by the swear jar be used to purchase bud light for the legislature?

We in Texas Recognize...

[Anonymous Coward]

Pols in the Texas lege come up with this sort of thing when things are a mess. Costs no money, and redirects people's attention. Magicians call it a "misdirect." It was inevitable that CA pols would resort to this. I guess.

Tax Dollars?

[wisnoskij]

And how many Tax Dollars were wasted on this farce of law?

Makes sense:

[zippthorne]

Gives an excuse for officious busybodies to pretend to be the thought police and go around bothering everyone around them with, "no no no, it's cuss free week" and wag their finger like the president.

Simultaneously completely failing to encourage any kind of actual civility by asking the question, "What can I tell others to do to make the world a better place to live in?" instead of encouraging people to ask the question, "What can I do to make things more pleasant for the people around me?"

Re:What's wrong swith cuss words?

[zippthorne]

I think the real answer is class identity. It's a good idea to emulate the "upper classes" so you might be confused for a member and thereby potentially gain entry to the gentry. By using the idioms of the "lower classes" you allow yourself to be grouped into that group: just having a differentiation is enough to reinforce classism.

I remember in grade school being admonished for a cussing related incident (the details of which are simultaneously weird and super boring), and the words involved were described to me as "Vulgar." The world "vulgar" was new to me at the time as well, but after learning more about its various definitions, I think that it is actually the most apt description of cuss words I have yet heard.

Re:What's wrong swith cuss words?

[AthanasiusKircher]

Personally, I view profanity as an issue of decorum. There are circumstances where various behaviors are inappropriate, as some have said, perhaps around children, or grandmothers who might be offended, or whatever. In the same way, it would be usually be inappropriate to walk into a nice restaurant wearing ripped jeans and a tee-shirt with profanity on it. And it would be inappropriate to go around yelling obscenities in such a restaurant. You'd be ruining the nice quiet dinners of other people around you. Part of polite social conduct is respecting the people around you, even if they sometimes place arbitrary limits on behavior. If you don't want to socialize with those people, go to a different restaurant, or don't hang around the kids if you feel a compulsive need to swear continuously.

But, regarding laws, I generally prefer that the government mind its own business. If you don't want to hear profanity on television, watch another channel. If you don't want to buy liquor on Sunday, don't buy it. But generally the government should stay out of such things.

And yet I also can't quite object to a local government that decides to enforce local community standards, as long as they don't interfere with fundamental rights. You don't have the right to buy liquor on Sunday -- hell, you don't have a fundamental right to buy liquor at all. Hence, there are dry communities and counties within the US. Personally, I don't think such laws work (and there are some studies to prove it), but that's the local community's business. Just like you have the freedom to watch another channel if you don't like it, you also have the freedom to vote people out of office who pass laws you don't like (or, as a last resort, to move to another community without such restrictions -- the federal government should have nothing to do with such legislation).

Getting back to the question of swearing, I have to admit that I don't understand those who object to profanity out of hand either. I respect their wishes, but I've often seen inconsistencies in their behavior. For example, I had a friend a few years back who was actually someone that would tell you that she was offended if you used profanity in her presence. And yet, she also had her own "profanity" -- namely, she'd yell "APPLES, ORANGES, AND PEAS!" when she was really mad about something. I kid you not -- that's really what she'd say. So I pointed out to her that essentially she had her own phrase that did most of the things that profanity typically does for most people, so why shouldn't I be offended by her use of that phrase? I find the same issue with another friend who says "dag gommit" instead of "god dammit" -- again, I'm not sure I understand how this gets around his religious objection to "god dammit." It strikes me as a weird kind of technicality to get out of the "Lord's name in vain" issue. Isn't the dividing line arbitrary for these people? Don't the words that they end up using have the same force and effect that profanity has for others?

But in the end, all language is about arbitrary conventions for communication. Profanity is very effective at communicating certain things to certain people, while it offends other people (and thus fails to communicate to them), and its overuse can detract from its power of communication. So I don't tend to use it a lot myself (erring on the side of caution), except when it is useful as a precise way to communicate a particular expression or emotion in the right context.

Re:What's wrong swith cuss words?

[Anonymous Coward]

This isn't just some conceptual BS, if you stop and think, it doesn't make any sense whatsoever to be offended by a single word if it isn't used to intentionally offend you.

Lent for swearing

[Mal-2]

Since this vaguely resembles Lent, I think we should precede it with "Swear Like A Sailor" day on February 28 (or 29). I bet this inversion would prove more popular than the original event, just like most people going to Mardi Gras have no interest in Lent, just the massive party.

Mal-2

You missed one

[jonaskoelker]

Barbra Streisand

hmmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone should rent a van with huge speakers and drive around town with a tape of non-stop profanity, just to make things interesting.

go whoosh yourself

[Sir_Lewk]

No no, that is not how whooshes work.

Re:go whoosh yourself

[toadlife]

I'm from California. We operate by a different set of rules here.

Re:What's wrong swith cuss words?

[Macgrrl]

Most societies have concepts which are taboo. Many of these revolve around bodily function. The social convention is that you don't do or discuss these things in public.

What is society really, but a series of rules that allow us to occupy a small space together without killing each other.

Taboos evolve with society, most people today would be more confortable discussing their sex life than their paycheck. Money itself is now considered obscene.

You're an idiot, here's my rant.

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is that you're trying to infringe on MY rights over something stupid and irrational.

"Bad" words only have the power to offend the way they do precisely BECAUSE people such as yourself make such a big deal over them. It's a simple feedback loop started by backwards, self-loathing cults like Christianity.

By placing a taboo on a word, you draw attention to it, it will be used MORE due to it's risque nature, it will develop additional purposefully offensive meanings, which causes you to act more forcefully, which draws more attention, etc, etc, etc.

The problem is your irrational reaction to these harmless words and concepts. It's the same deal as the irrational shame taboo associated with nudity and sex.

Now, that said, it IS a common courtesy to avoid offending people, swearing included. But if I don't want to go out of my way to entertain your ridiculous and bizarre customs, I don't have to. If you don't want to hear me say certain words, don't go out in public. If you don't want your kids to hear those words, don't let them out in public. Society should not have to pander to your oppressively repressive insanity.

Re:You're an idiot, here's my rant.

[HeronBlademaster]

The problem is that you're trying to infringe on MY rights over something stupid and irrational.

Infringe on your rights? When did I ever mention banning such words? Even this thing in California was optional.

I fail to see how anything I've said infringes on anyone's rights.

Unless you think that merely sharing my opinion that cursing is stupid infringes on your rights, but that's your problem, not mine.

self-loathing cults like Christianity.

Nothing I've been taught by my church involves self-loathing. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Of course, you might be the type of person who thinks that any sort of self-restraint requires self-loathing, but again, that's your problem, not mine.

The problem is your irrational reaction to these harmless words and concepts.

Harmless? I disagree. The more you use expletives in everyday language, the less you use other words. An increase in expletive usage results in a smaller vocabulary over time. In other words, people who use expletives a lot lose the ability to express themselves without expletives. I've observed this happen to several people.

That, coupled with the tendency of many people to ridicule people with large vocabularies, should show you that expletive use is not exactly harmless.

That said, I wouldn't ask that expletives be outlawed; only that people observe the common courtesy of avoiding offending others. That's hardly too much to ask.