(adj) lewd, obscene, raunchy, salacious (suggestive of or tending to moral looseness) "lewd whisperings of a dirty old man"; "an indecent gesture"; "obscene telephone calls"; "salacious limericks"


So, in what substantive way is being verbally explicit different than being visually explicit?

And aren't all laws against lewd behavior just some stick in the mud trying to enforce his morality on you? Why should there be laws against lewd behavior?

Do we know that there is a law there of that nature? Such law would be unconstitutional.

Oh, I don't know. It's hard to really, really offend someone by something said. But you know, a gang bang at the local mall might scar some people.

I amended my original post.

And I will agree there is a huge difference between letting an f-bomb fly if she stubs her toe, and dropping f-bombs like she's carpet bombing outside of Tikrit.

Hmm.. I may be mistaken but I don't remember it being afforded the right to life, liberty, RESPECT, and the pursuit of happiness. :hmmm:

I'm talking about our behavior. I don't actually care about breasts or cussing on tv, I can decide what I watch or don't watch. I'm talking about people having respect for each other. You're on a whole different subject.

No difference, unless someone is in danger. And kids' ears don't count as danger.

No, it is simply a reasonable expectation for all of us to have of each other.

Perhaps I find your saying the F word in front of my 5 year old daughter really, really offensive?

Is that the objective, to protect people from having to feel offended? In that case, we're going to need a LOT more laws about what you can say and do.

While I agree that people should have respect for each other, I also recognize that people shouldn't be FORCED to display respect nor should they be punished/reprimanded for lacking respect.

I believe certain things but I don't try to force my morals on others through legislation unless there is some sort of tangible harm induced if not regulated.

No, I'm not. It may be different than what you want to get at, but it applies to your previous statement.

As long as you are not putting others in danger (fire in a theatre) freedom of speech is covered. It doesn't say the speech can't be offensive. If you want that, go to Canada where they're having their hands full with hate speech laws so vague that it's absurd.

You don't have a right to be offended and have said offender persecuted.

That's my point. There is no danger. Kids' ears don't count as danger.

It seems the objective of the dissenters in this thread (your side) want to have this right of not being offended. You don't have it. People say offensive things. Period.

:clap:

So if you said "I'd like some ****ing fries with that" in front of a family, and one of the parents asked you politely to refrain from using foul language, would you oblige or continue to curse? Most people, yourself included, would have the decency to cut it out if asked respectively to do so.

I have asked people to watch their language on at least 10 occasions, mostly at sporting events, and not once has anybody had a problem or continued cursing. The most recent came at the Brigade season opener when 2 drunk guys were acting like they wanted to fight in the nosebleed seats in front of three of my friends and our young boys, and they were screaming F-you and P_ssy at each other. I went between them, pointed at the kids and asked them to tone it down or take it somewhere else. They were still both drink and mad, but it difused the situation.

This is beside the point. There is no law that mandates you have to be courteous.

Doesn't matter. There is no law that mandates you have to not be rude. Or a law that says you have the right not to be offended in public.