Seattle Bans Potentially Offensive Words Like 'Citizen' and 'Brown Bag'

It was intentional, and rhetorical...not so smart after all, are you?

*DISMISSED*

This ain't the military, Gummo. You don't get to "dismiss" jack shit.
On the other hand the bullshit premise of this thread was dismissed back on page one. Six dozen posts later some of y'all are still going on as if it's real. Oblivious.

Btw you might wanna look up what "rhetorical" means.

"No one has the right NOT to be offended" -- :lmao:
Actually? *I DO* get to dismiss YOU.

Get it? Excercising my LIBERTY as those employees will come election time.

YOU still don't get it, and it shows.

Carry on smartly dumbass. You wear your ignorance well.


Hey, I post the way I want to whether you dig it or not.
See how this works?

I just loooove the irony when some internet wag wagging about some entity telling people what they can or can't say like authoritarian statist asswipes -- starts trying to tell other posters what they can or can't say like an authoritarian statist asswipe.

meter.jpg
 
Last edited:
...removal of all crackers from store shelves in Seattle...

These Nabisco Crackers and others similarly labeled "crackers" are offensive to us white peoples. I also demand the relabeling of all White Bread, all Jewish Rye Bread, Black-eyed peas, Yellow squash, Irish potatoes and other foods that may offend us white peoples.

Saltine.jpg

These will also have to be pulled from the shelves right away:

Spic_and_Span-resized200.jpg


1337536845.1.jpg

No more listening to this either:

doo%20wop%20classics.jpg

And as far as these guys...

66086.jpg

Fun fact: >> Twice in the 1950s (the McCarthy era), the Reds, fearing that their traditional club nickname would associate them with the threat of Communism, officially changed the name of the team to the "Cincinnati Redlegs".[1] From 1956 to 1960, the club's logo was altered to remove the term "REDS" from the inside of the "wishbone C" symbol. << (Wiki)
 
Violation of the First Amendment is an everyday occurrence?

The city needs to be bitch slapped.

And where is it, this "violation of the First Amendment"?

The city is allowed to do what it does, however, we are allowed to think they are stupid and controlling for doing it. You can't legislate behavior and Seattle is trying.

And where is it, this "legislation"?

Is this the Fantasy Forum? Do you guys have any clue what "facts" are?

Darkwind is right out of the same can of stupid that gave us the likes of Katzndogz, the Rabbi, the T, and on and on.

There was no ban. There is no violation of free speech.

What the hell, you were to lazy to check to see if it was true or not and assumed it wasn't true, you think the opinion of a lazy ass idiot is going to carry weight? Oh wait, you are a liberal, you think you are privileged.
 
And where is it, this "violation of the First Amendment"?



And where is it, this "legislation"?

Is this the Fantasy Forum? Do you guys have any clue what "facts" are?

Darkwind is right out of the same can of stupid that gave us the likes of Katzndogz, the Rabbi, the T, and on and on.

There was no ban. There is no violation of free speech.

What the hell, you were to lazy to check to see if it was true or not and assumed it wasn't true, you think the opinion of a lazy ass idiot is going to carry weight? Oh wait, you are a liberal, you think you are privileged.

Uhhh-- you have it 180 degrees bass-ackwards there, Ted Baxter. The OP is false; there is no "ban" and there is no "law". And that was ascertained by reading the article.

Which I understand is available to everyone. What a world.
 
Darkwind is right out of the same can of stupid that gave us the likes of Katzndogz, the Rabbi, the T, and on and on.

There was no ban. There is no violation of free speech.

What the hell, you were to lazy to check to see if it was true or not and assumed it wasn't true, you think the opinion of a lazy ass idiot is going to carry weight? Oh wait, you are a liberal, you think you are privileged.

Uhhh-- you have it 180 degrees bass-ackwards there, Ted Baxter. The OP is false; there is no "ban" and there is no "law". And that was ascertained by reading the article.

Which I understand is available to everyone. What a world.

You don't have the "right" to not be offended, nor the "right" to even suggest what words I use....pretty simple...eh kid?
 
What the hell, you were to lazy to check to see if it was true or not and assumed it wasn't true, you think the opinion of a lazy ass idiot is going to carry weight? Oh wait, you are a liberal, you think you are privileged.

Uhhh-- you have it 180 degrees bass-ackwards there, Ted Baxter. The OP is false; there is no "ban" and there is no "law". And that was ascertained by reading the article.

Which I understand is available to everyone. What a world.

You don't have the "right" to not be offended, nor the "right" to even suggest what words I use....pretty simple...eh kid?

:cuckoo:

You are truly insane on top of insane.
See post 101.
 
Last edited:
The city of Springfield memo to all employees, the word atheist is no longer to be used...only "godless heathen" will be acceptable in the future for all official correspondence...thank you, that is all.
 
Citywide memo, the word Democrat will no longer be acceptable in official city work-product, only the word Liberal will be acceptable, that is all.
 
Citywide memo:

The phrase "democratic party" will no longer be acceptable in official city work-product and officially disseminated materials...only the phase "democrat party" will be acceptable...thank you, that is all.
 
Uhhh-- you have it 180 degrees bass-ackwards there, Ted Baxter. The OP is false; there is no "ban" and there is no "law". And that was ascertained by reading the article.

Which I understand is available to everyone. What a world.

You don't have the "right" to not be offended, nor the "right" to even suggest what words I use....pretty simple...eh kid?

:cuckoo:

You are truly insane on top of insane.
See post 101.

Good, glad you agree, now fuck off.
 
You don't have the "right" to not be offended, nor the "right" to even suggest what words I use....pretty simple...eh kid?

:cuckoo:

You are truly insane on top of insane.
See post 101.

Good, glad you agree, now fuck off.


"Don't have the right to not be offended" is pure unmitigated insanity. Seek professional help.

Btw if we "don't have the right not to be offended", then logically you must not have the right to tell Noomi to fuck off -- even though she's already in agreement about PC-itis. Or me for the same thing.

Sucks to be Roo. :cuckoo:
 
Last edited:
What the hell, you were to lazy to check to see if it was true or not and assumed it wasn't true, you think the opinion of a lazy ass idiot is going to carry weight? Oh wait, you are a liberal, you think you are privileged.

Uhhh-- you have it 180 degrees bass-ackwards there, Ted Baxter. The OP is false; there is no "ban" and there is no "law". And that was ascertained by reading the article.

Which I understand is available to everyone. What a world.

You don't have the "right" to not be offended, nor the "right" to even suggest what words I use....pretty simple...eh kid?

If no one has the right to "suggest" what words you use, what the fuck gives you the right to bitch and whine about political correctness?

Political Correctness is nothing more than people using their free speech to criticize the speech of others.
 
The city of Springfield memo to all employees, the word atheist is no longer to be used...only "godless heathen" will be acceptable in the future for all official correspondence...thank you, that is all.

I'm good with "Godless heathen." I have been known to refer to myself as such...
 
The city of Springfield memo to all employees, the word atheist is no longer to be used...only "godless heathen" will be acceptable in the future for all official correspondence...thank you, that is all.

I'm good with "Godless heathen." I have been known to refer to myself as such...

Sorry, no capitalizing 'godless', can't show any religious favoritism...thank you, that is all. :D
 
The city of Springfield memo to all employees, the word atheist is no longer to be used...only "godless heathen" will be acceptable in the future for all official correspondence...thank you, that is all.

I'm good with "Godless heathen." I have been known to refer to myself as such...

Sorry, no capitalizing 'godless', can't show any religious favoritism...thank you, that is all. :D

I submit that godless and Godless are two different concepts, as the latter is specific. One could be Godless while not godless.
 
:cuckoo:

You are truly insane on top of insane.
See post 101.

Good, glad you agree, now fuck off.

"Don't have the right to not be offended" is pure unmitigated insanity. Seek professional help.

Btw if we "don't have the right not to be offended", then logically you must not have the right to tell Noomi to fuck off -- even though she's already in agreement about PC-itis. Or me for the same thing.

Sucks to be Roo. :cuckoo:

Nope. Sucks to be you. Roo is right.

You have no "right" not to be offended.

You have a right to express your disagreement when you are offended, but if you had some actual "right" to NOT be offended, you'd have to have some way to vindicate that right.

You don't.

You can't sue me if my expressed beliefs happen to offend you. So, to put it as a smart old law school professor once noted: There is no "right" without a remedy and there is no "remedy" without a right.

I have a right to speak freely; and if whatever I share by way of some opinion happens to offend you, tough toenails.
 
Uhhh-- you have it 180 degrees bass-ackwards there, Ted Baxter. The OP is false; there is no "ban" and there is no "law". And that was ascertained by reading the article.

Which I understand is available to everyone. What a world.

You don't have the "right" to not be offended, nor the "right" to even suggest what words I use....pretty simple...eh kid?

If no one has the right to "suggest" what words you use, what the fuck gives you the right to bitch and whine about political correctness?

Political Correctness is nothing more than people using their free speech to criticize the speech of others.
No, it's an attempt to silence speech with which they disagree.
 

Forum List

Back
Top