Ban offensive words....

[tod evans]

These "people" are sucking up tax dollars!


Seattle officials call for ban on 'potentially offensive' language

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08/02/seattle-officials-call-for-ban-on-potentially-offensive-language/?test=latestnews


Government workers in the city of Seattle have been advised that the terms "citizen" and "brown bag" are potentially offensive and may no longer be used in official documents and discussions.
KOMO-TV reports that the city's Office of Civil Rights instructed city workers in a recent internal memo to avoid using the words because some may find them offensive.
"Luckily, we've got options," Elliott Bronstein of the Office for Civil Rights wrote in the memo obtained by the station. "For 'citizens,' how about 'residents?'"
In an interview with Seattle's KIRO Radio, Bronstein said the term "brown bag" has been used historically as a way to judge skin color.
"For a lot of particularly African American community members, the phrase brown bag does bring up associations with the past when a brown bag was actually used, I understand, to determine if people's skin color was light enough to allow admission to an event or to come into a party that was being held in a private home," Bronstein said.
According to the memo, city employees should use the terms "lunch-and-learn" or "sack lunch" instead of "brown bag."
Bronstein told KIRO Radio the word "citizen" should be avoided because many people who live in Seattle are residents, not citizens.
"They are legal residents of the United States and they are residents of Seattle. They pay taxes and if we use a term like citizens in common use, then it doesn't include a lot of folks," Bronstein said.

[otherone]

PEEPEE DOODY CACA

[redmod79]

Fuck these people.

[kathy88]

It's like every local government is in a contest to spend money on the most retarded legislation.

[tod evans]

Fuck these people.

Amen!

Reincarnate Vlad.

[Occam's Banana]

Seattle officials call for ban on 'potentially offensive' language

I call for a ban on "actually offensive" Seattle officials ...

[donnay]

These citizens better be more concerned about the government black bagging them in the middle of the night. :rolleyes:

[otherone]

These citizens better be more concerned about the government black bagging them in the middle of the night. :rolleyes:

REPORTED, citizen...er, I mean denizen...

[Occam's Banana]

These citizens better be more concerned about the government black bagging them in the middle of the night. :rolleyes:


REPORTED, citizen...er, I mean denizen...

And if "brown bagging" is verboten, what are we to make of "black bagging" ...? *tsk-tsk*

donnay is clearly incorrigible. I fear that measures sterner than merely reporting her may be necessary ... :eek:

[tangent4ronpaul]

Reminds me of an instructor I had once. I used the term third world, and she took offense to that. Offering up a PC alternative that replaced those 2 words with a LONG paragraph of liberal PC crap...

:rolleyes:

-t

[tod evans]

Doesn't seem that long ago that carrying a "brown bag" to school was a mark of self reliance, something to actually be proud of...

[AFPVet]

If someone says something offensive to you, what do you say to them? ... class? &*^* you! ... that's right! Here's your A for the day.

[Origanalist]

Seattle, nuff said

[LibertyEagle]

It is called a brown bag, because that is what it is. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the color of someone's skin. :rolleyes:

http://thefeedingdoctor.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/brown-bag-lunch2.jpg

[Tinnuhana]

In North Carolina, Brown Bagging was bringing your liquor into a restaurant with you discreetly. Nothing to do with race; everything to do with state liquor laws.

[Anti Federalist]

Bronstein told KIRO Radio the word "citizen" should be avoided because many people who live in Seattle are residents, not citizens.

"They are legal residents of the United States and they are residents of Seattle. They pay taxes and if we use a term like citizens in common use, then it doesn't include a lot of folks," Bronstein said.

Subjects, Bronstein.

The word you are looking for is "subject".

[Philhelm]

According to the memo, city employees should use the terms "lunch-and-learn . . . ."

That term is punch-worthy.

[Philhelm]

According to the memo, city employees should use the terms "lunch-and-learn . . . ."

That term is punch-worthy.

[otherone]

Subjects, Bronstein.

The word you are looking for is "subject".

I dunno about you, AF, but the King of England is starting to look pretty good by comparison....

[Anti Federalist]

I dunno about you, AF, but the King of England is starting to look pretty good by comparison....

No kidding.

I'd take King George over this shit, any day.

[GregSarnowski]

Well if it only affects government employees (leeches) who cares. Still maybe Seattle should work on doing something about their out of control (corrupt and abusive) police department instead.

Thank God for the First Amendment. In Canada you can be jailed for hurting someone's feelings.

[heavenlyboy34]

Doesn't seem that long ago that carrying a "brown bag" to school was a mark of self reliance, something to actually be proud of...
That and having better food. :cool:

[heavenlyboy34]

No kidding.

I'd take King George over this shit, any day.
People look at me funny when I say that. Boobus doesn't "get" freedom. :(

[heavenlyboy34]

No kidding.

I'd take King George over this shit, any day.
+1

[RabbitMan]

It's not that they are banning language from use by the public--it is an organization regulating itself, and a public organization at that. There is nothing wrong here, what is the big deal?

[Henry Rogue]

It's not that they are banning language from use by the public--it is an organization regulating itself, and a public organization at that. There is nothing wrong here, what is the big deal?
I am offended by the terms resident and sack lunch.

[phill4paul]

It is called a brown bag, because that is what it is. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the color of someone's skin. :rolleyes:

http://thefeedingdoctor.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/brown-bag-lunch2.jpg

Some of us remember when THIS was "brown bagging." :D

http://grapesofcath.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/bb.jpg

[JK/SEA]

No kidding.

I'd take King George over this shit, any day.

Madison and Jefferson and Franklin would agree.

[pcosmar]

Amen!

Reincarnate Vlad.

NO.. There are too many that would be him if not restrained.
It is mindboggling that such great evil is still celebrated as heroic.

[donnay]

NO.. There are too many that would be him if not restrained.
It is mindboggling that such great evil is still celebrated as heroic.

If you look into the Royals (both here and the UK) genealogy a good portion of them are lined with Vlad the Impaler.

http://www.infowars.com/headline_photos/April/vladtree.jpg


Source:
http://www.infowars.com/print/Secret_societies/vladtree.htm

[limequat]

My god what do you do at the grocery store when you don't want plastic bags???

"Please pack my groceries in that there wood-derived container whose color is neither red nor blue nor green."

[Anti Federalist]

It's not that they are banning language from use by the public--it is an organization regulating itself, and a public organization at that. There is nothing wrong here, what is the big deal?

A - It's a ridiculous on the face of it.

B - I would be angry if 10 cents of tax money went to thinking this up, if I was subject of the King's Realm in Seattle.

C - It sets a bad precedent. Free societies should not be in the business of banning words, at any level.

[Contumacious]

I disagree. Offensive words ought to be banned. Here lis my list.

Taxes
regulations
federal reserve board
interventionist foreign policy
NSA
TSA
..........>>>>>>

[phill4paul]

A - It's a ridiculous on the face of it.

B - I would be angry if 10 cents of tax money went to thinking this up, if I was subject of the King's Realm in Seattle.

C - It sets a bad precedent. Free societies should not be in the business of banning words, at any level.

Starts with words...proceeds to books....then even to unspoken thoughts....

http://saysomethingfunny.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/fahrenheit-451.jpg

[heavenlyboy34]

A - It's a ridiculous on the face of it.

B - I would be angry if 10 cents of tax money went to thinking this up, if I was subject of the King's Realm in Seattle.

C - It sets a bad precedent. Free societies should not be in the business of banning words, at any level.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqvLTJfYnik

[otherone]

It's not that they are banning language from use by the public--it is an organization regulating itself, and a public organization at that. There is nothing wrong here, what is the big deal?

You realize that they are claiming the term "citizen" is offensive? Frankly, the only people who should be offended by US citizenship are the US citizens.

[acptulsa]

It's not that they are banning language from use by the public--it is an organization regulating itself, and a public organization at that. There is nothing wrong here, what is the big deal?

Well, as a symptom of the general disease, it demonstrates what a pain in the ass it is to work for any government in this nation, except maybe the County of Dogshit, Nebraska. It shows why government never used to be able to hire any decent workers. And it points to the way government is attracting better workers--by allowing corporations to go batshit crazy without repurcussions and making small businesses illegal. Thus, of course, making decent jobs working for sane people a thing of the past.

[Keith and stuff]

Left Coast Loonies

[Dr.3D]

Just ban those thin skinned people who are always becoming offended by something.

[nobody's_hero]

Doesn't seem that long ago that carrying a "brown bag" to school was a mark of self reliance, something to actually be proud of...

I brown bag every Friday night as long as I have a designated driver.

[bolil]

There is already a deaf ban on some words, particularly being used by a certain demographic. They are just taking the next logical step and giving an already existing and widely supported ban the force of law. I wonder how swat teams will talk when serving word warrants... Maybe they will use a system of squeals and grunts. Or, will the costumed superheroes be above This law as well. Oh and... Shit fuck cock ass bugger.

[DamianTV]

Dont forget to take Tom Sawyer out of all libraries while youre at it. That book has offensive words in it too. Next on their shit list: 1984.

[Occam's Banana]

A - It's a ridiculous on the face of it.

B - I would be angry if 10 cents of tax money went to thinking this up, if I was subject of the King's Realm in Seattle.

C - It sets a bad precedent. Free societies should not be in the business of banning words, at any level.

D - It manifests an attitude that will NOT be satisfied with the mere application of such "rules" solely to the "regulation" of "public organizations."

[Origanalist]

A - It's a ridiculous on the face of it.

B - I would be angry if 10 cents of tax money went to thinking this up, if I was subject of the King's Realm in Seattle.

C - It sets a bad precedent. Free societies should not be in the business of banning words, at any level.

But you will be hard pressed indeed to find a kings subject there that will raise any objection. Most will either agree or keep it to themselves.

[Teenager For Ron Paul]

Another step towards Newspeak...