Slurs banned at stadium

[SageAgainstTheMachine]

That's what Jesus thought "Treat each other with respect and love because we are all children of God" and they crucified him. This world needs alot of work. The older I get, I now see the lunacy of most peoples behaviors regarding each other. Bills vs. Pats, Democrats vs. Republicans, Muslims vs. ???? whoever they don't like, India vs. Pakistan, etc, etc etc,

 

We are all people on the same planet, children of the same God, trying to exist and survive. Treat anyone you meet with respect and love because we are each others brothers and sisters.

 

Ok, I'm getting off my soap box now.

 

Please don't. Some people consider it a virtue to be jaded and combative.

 

To those people, anybody who doesn't approach the world with an "us versus them" mentality is deemed a naive child. I don't buy it and I never will. The world's a beautiful place with mostly good people in it.

Edited January 29, 2012 by SageAgainstTheMachine

[Just Jack]

huh??? ppp? wtf you talking about?

Politics, Polls, and Pundits

[The Big Cat]

Ok then, how about this...people should just be nice to one another.

 

I don't really care about political correctness. If somebody tells me that a word makes them uncomfortable, I'll find a different word to use.

 

If a large group of people takes the stance that a word is offensive for a logical reason, I'll take the time to spread that message.

 

In the particular case of homosexuals, yes, the sort of people that use "faggot" as a pejorative are generally responsible for their plight.

 

I agree completely that there's no justification for being downright rude.

 

To suggest that I find that behavior acceptable (as Coach Tuesday has) is like saying those who aren't pro-life are pro-abortion.

 

But groups who rally under the banner of rhetorical abolishment have misplaced insecurity, and continually prove that pushing back against "offensive" speech does nothing to change their station. It only adds fuel to the fire...like putting a ten year old alone in a room with a giant red button that reads "do not push."

[dwight in philly]

Politics, Polls, and Pundits

thanks, just wonder why i was asked to do so, unlike the others who offered comments.

[Coach Tuesday]

I agree completely that there's no justification for being downright rude.

 

To suggest that I find that behavior acceptable (as Coach Tuesday has) is like saying those who aren't pro-life are pro-abortion.

 

But groups who rally under the banner of rhetorical abolishment have misplaced insecurity, and continually prove that pushing back against "offensive" speech does nothing to change their station. It only adds fuel to the fire...like putting a ten year old alone in a room with a giant red button that reads "do not push."

 

Let's play your position out. Should it not be prohibited for a fan to scream "ni--er" at opposing teams' black players? Should that be allowed, because it's just a word?

[mob16151]

Let's play your position out. Should it not be prohibited for a fan to scream "ni--er" at opposing teams' black players? Should that be allowed, because it's just a word?

 

 

I think you've misinterpeted his position. He's not saying that you should scream the word ni--ger at black players. He's saying that making a big deal of the word, only makes people more likely to use it. At least thats how I'm interpeting what he said. And he does kind of have a point. Anyone remember the Wanda Sykes commercial that was saying that the word gay was a slur to the homosexual community? That commercial annoyed the ever loving hell out of me, and I consider myself, a reasonably tolerant person. There comes a time when PC'ness can go a little to far. IMO.

 

Sidenote: I agree that you shouldn't yell homophobic,racial, or sexual orientation based slurs, at anyone.

[Coach Tuesday]

I think you've misinterpeted his position. He's not saying that you should scream the word ni--ger at black players. He's saying that making a big deal of the word, only makes people more likely to use it. At least thats how I'm interpeting what he said. And he does kind of have a point. Anyone remember the Wanda Sykes commercial that was saying that the word gay was a slur to the homosexual community? That commercial annoyed the ever loving hell out of me, and I consider myself, a reasonably tolerant person. There comes a time when PC'ness can go a little to far. IMO.

 

Sidenote: I agree that you shouldn't yell homophobic,racial, or sexual orientation based slurs, at anyone.

 

I don't disagree with that. And that's one of the reasons why it's not against the law to say it - the Framers had that concept well in mind when they drafted the First Amendment. But to be allowed to scream "fa--ot" at a professional sporting event is the same as being allowed to scream "ni--er" at a professional sporting event. It's not about being "PC" - it's about promoting decency.

[mob16151]

I don't disagree with that. And that's one of the reasons why it's not against the law to say it - the Framers had that concept well in mind when they drafted the First Amendment. But to be allowed to scream "fa--ot" at a professional sporting event is the same as being allowed to scream "ni--er" at a professional sporting event. It's not about being "PC" - it's about promoting decency.

 

Yea I agree about the decency part. Just got sidetracked toward the PC end of the spectrum.

[NoSaint]

thanks, just wonder why i was asked to do so, unlike the others who offered comments.

Reading your posts, it seems pretty clear to me that your replies especially stood out as fitting in at PPP and not the main board. Which part do you not understand - the difference in boards or why yours fit the standards there better?

[Bruce]

You really don't see the difference between a player dropping a slur and a fan? If a player says something to another player, they will have to deal with the consequences face to face.

 

Most fans who hurl slurs are drunk cowards. They yell from a safe distance or get tough behind a computer screen. They would crap their pants if they were actually confronted by a player.

 

I'm far from PC but defining the right to use racial slurs seems really silly to me. It's along the lines of white people complaining about not being able to use the n word because "they call themselves that."

 

The issue that also needs to be addressed is who gets to decide what is acceptable behavior?

 

Do you really believe that people are so much cruder today? I mean let's recall, back in earlier days, Jackie Robinson was not even allowed to play baseball, solely because of his skin color. Blacks were not allowed in the same schools as whites. Or in the same restaurants. Or to drink out of the same water fountain. Or ride in the front of a bus. In certain parts of the country, blacks were lynched. This is as recent as 50 years ago.

 

But on the other hand, do we want to live in a Gestapo-like country of WWII Germany, where whispering anything against the Fuhrer was a punishable defense of imprisonment or death? Granted, this is an extreme example, but I, for one, am not all amped up to surrender my freedom of speech to a government official, because he knows better. Some Orwellian thought-speak hell, where Big Brother controls all is not my cup of tea, and does not mix with the idea of freedom and liberty.

 

If someone says something that you don't like, does that make it wrong?

 

Now, I'm not condoning this type of language, and I am certainly not one who uses it. This type of crude behavior is what is partly responsible for me not wanting to bring my children to a professional sporting event (along with the prohibitive prices).

 

I believe that the real issue here, is the tremendous lack of any sense and morals in society. I agree that these types of things should not be uttered. They are cowards and drunkards that issue such slander. But where I disagree is that we need a government, or a league, or any regulatory body to legislate speech constrictions.

 

I place the burden of responsibility solely on the laps of the perpetrators, and think that more laws do more harm than good.

 

If we all had a little more sense, then more laws would not be needed.

[NoSaint]

The issue that also needs to be addressed is who gets to decide what is acceptable behavior?

 

Do you really believe that people are so much cruder today? I mean let's recall, back in earlier days, Jackie Robinson was not even allowed to play baseball, solely because of his skin color. Blacks were not allowed in the same schools as whites. Or in the same restaurants. Or to drink out of the same water fountain. Or ride in the front of a bus. In certain parts of the country, blacks were lynched. This is as recent as 50 years ago.

 

But on the other hand, do we want to live in a Gestapo-like country of WWII Germany, where whispering anything against the Fuhrer was a punishable defense of imprisonment or death? Granted, this is an extreme example, but I, for one, am not all amped up to surrender my freedom of speech to a government official, because he knows better. Some Orwellian thought-speak hell, where Big Brother controls all is not my cup of tea, and does not mix with the idea of freedom and liberty.

 

If someone says something that you don't like, does that make it wrong?

 

Now, I'm not condoning this type of language, and I am certainly not one who uses it. This type of crude behavior is what is partly responsible for me not wanting to bring my children to a professional sporting event (along with the prohibitive prices).

 

I believe that the real issue here, is the tremendous lack of any sense and morals in society. I agree that these types of things should not be uttered. They are cowards and drunkards that issue such slander. But where I disagree is that we need a government, or a league, or any regulatory body to legislate speech constrictions.

 

I place the burden of responsibility solely on the laps of the perpetrators, and think that more laws do more harm than good.

 

If we all had a little more sense, then more laws would not be needed.

 

 

Extreme much? Were talking about foul language at a football game. There are lots of private entities that restrict language. I'd fully expect to be kicked out of a large number of places for yelling slurs. Why should a football game not be allowed to regulate that?

Edited January 29, 2012 by NoSaint

[dwight in philly]

Reading your posts, it seems pretty clear to me that your replies especially stood out as fitting in at PPP and not the main board. Which part do you not understand - the difference in boards or why yours fit the standards there better?

just mine?? so all the posts about this topic, you feel that mine should be on ppp? wow.. the others arent?

[The Big Cat]

Let's play your position out. Should it not be prohibited for a fan to scream "ni--er" at opposing teams' black players? Should that be allowed, because it's just a word?

 

Language should not be prohibited, no.

 

There should be no written rule that states if you use this word you will be punished in this way. period.

[Beerball]

Language should not be prohibited, no.

 

There should be no written rule that states if you use this word you will be punished in this way. period.

Welcome to Big Cat's world.

[Coach Tuesday]

Language should not be prohibited, no.

 

There should be no written rule that states if you use this word you will be punished in this way. period.

 

1) Ok - you should be free to say anything you want to anyone you want at a live sporting event, with no ramifications. Got it.

 

2) I'm quite sure that the prohibition won't be tied solely to the use of specific words.

[uncle flap]

Extreme much? Were talking about foul language at a football game. There are lots of private entities that restrict language. I'd fully expect to be kicked out of a large number of places for yelling slurs. Why should a football game not be allowed to regulate that?

 

 

THIS^^^^

 

plus, it's not just foul language in general in these cases. it's targeted language that most people find reprehensible. it's the difference between yelling "you f--kin suck!" - which is certainly foul and of course not family friendly - and a personal attack on a particular player because of his race.

 

 

Language should not be prohibited, no.

 

There should be no written rule that states if you use this word you will be punished in this way. period.

 

because it's been working out so well for them without a rule...

 

and it's not just language, it's people throwing flares and bottles at players. because of their race. if you are racist and want to go to a game, fine. but check your racism at the gate.

 

the mob mentality with the racist chants allow these clowns to think they are heroes by physically attacking players and fans of different race/heritage/creed.

_______________________________________________________________________________

from today's man u v LFC match: My link

 

 

Following the game, Liverpool made it clear that it would not tolerate racist behavior from its fan base

 

i dont think anyone should say racist stuff, but that's because i dont think people should be racist. and i think football clubs are making a stand to be clear that they wont tolerate that type of behavior, because if they did they'd implicitly be condoning it.

[truth on hold]

Let's play your position out. Should it not be prohibited for a fan to scream "ni--er" at opposing teams' black players? Should that be allowed, because it's just a word?

When Jason sehorn played how about screaming "hey whitey, you people can't play defensive back!!!"

Edited January 29, 2012 by Joe_the_6_pack

[SageAgainstTheMachine]

The issue that also needs to be addressed is who gets to decide what is acceptable behavior?

 

Do you really believe that people are so much cruder today? I mean let's recall, back in earlier days, Jackie Robinson was not even allowed to play baseball, solely because of his skin color. Blacks were not allowed in the same schools as whites. Or in the same restaurants. Or to drink out of the same water fountain. Or ride in the front of a bus. In certain parts of the country, blacks were lynched. This is as recent as 50 years ago.

 

But on the other hand, do we want to live in a Gestapo-like country of WWII Germany, where whispering anything against the Fuhrer was a punishable defense of imprisonment or death? Granted, this is an extreme example, but I, for one, am not all amped up to surrender my freedom of speech to a government official, because he knows better. Some Orwellian thought-speak hell, where Big Brother controls all is not my cup of tea, and does not mix with the idea of freedom and liberty.

 

If someone says something that you don't like, does that make it wrong?

 

Now, I'm not condoning this type of language, and I am certainly not one who uses it. This type of crude behavior is what is partly responsible for me not wanting to bring my children to a professional sporting event (along with the prohibitive prices).

 

I believe that the real issue here, is the tremendous lack of any sense and morals in society. I agree that these types of things should not be uttered. They are cowards and drunkards that issue such slander. But where I disagree is that we need a government, or a league, or any regulatory body to legislate speech constrictions.

 

I place the burden of responsibility solely on the laps of the perpetrators, and think that more laws do more harm than good.

 

If we all had a little more sense, then more laws would not be needed.

 

Sports leagues are businesses and businesses have the right to refuse service to anybody. If they deem hateful language a reason for expulsion, it's their prerogative under the eyes of the law.

 

That's an example of the 1st amendment in action, not the other way around as you seem to be implying.

[The Big Cat]

Welcome to Big Cat's world.

 

Yeah, such radical thought, not wanting to ban words..?

[Beerball]

Yeah, such radical thought, not wanting to ban words..?

You would agree that sometimes words can be demeaning to a particular group of people? You aren't naive enough to disagree with this are you?

 

 

If you can agree with the above statement then my question to you is "when is it OK to demean another person?"

 

If you agree that it isn't OK to demean someone then why should it be allowed anywhere, much less a place with a wide range of ages, people of all sexual orientations and cultures?