Virginia Saying No To Crack

*Anarky* · 02-09-2005, 01:23 PM

"That gay stuff"? Ai, come on, Gay people are the same as heterosexuals... and some people not showing off their butts certainly won't keep gay people from being gay. That is a quite silly assumption.

And what do you want? Uniforms for US-citizens? I suggest a blue overall (looks the same on male and female) and a lot of telescreens to watch whether people really wear their overalls.

*DrSpengler* · 02-09-2005, 02:01 PM

I love/hate living in Northern Virginia. It's a strange blend of conservative hillbilly good ole boys from the south and liberal hippy scum from the north. Kind like mixing dogs and cats. A crazy place to live, that's for sure.

*Duke* · 02-09-2005, 02:07 PM

Well, everyone here keeps saying everyone has the right to express themselves but I really don't remember that in the United States Constitution. The closest thing is Freedom of Speech but even the Supreme Court has ruled that it isn't absolute. Americans cannot threaten someone's life and say we have the right to because of Freedom of Speech. So to caim that they have the right, isn't accurate.

*Kid Icarus* · 02-09-2005, 02:13 PM

I'm a big fan of the First Amendment...

There was a ruling in Kansas back durring the vietnam war, by the US supreme court none the less, that proclaimed that people had the right to wear what they want to wear. It was over armbands that allowed a group of students to prostest the war quietly.

Based on that ruling, this is somewhat unconstitutional.

*KROW* · 02-09-2005, 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anarky

I suggest a blue overall (looks the same on male and female) and a lot of telescreens to watch whether people really wear their overalls.

Kind of like a creepy version of that "Come On Eileen" video.

The First Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or, abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So, no, expressionism is not in there. But, people can indeed petition this ruling to get rid of it.

Furthermore, I don't understand how having drooping trousers is a way of expressing yourself. What is it expressing exactly? Anybody know?

*Kid Icarus* · 02-09-2005, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KROW

Kind of like a creepy version of that "Come On Eileen" video.

The First Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or, abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

So, no, expressionism is not in there. But, people can indeed petition this ruling to get rid of it.

Furthermore, I don't understand how having drooping trousers is a way of expressing yourself. What is it expressing exactly? Anybody know?

I dunno... they're expressing their choice of underwear brand? You can BS a lotta stuff in our court system here... lol. But yeah, if they say they're expressing themselves, it falls under freedom of speech, and then this law's prohibiting that.

and about the "that's gay" thing... why not just say "that's stupid"? or "wow, that bad." or "gee, i wish that woulden't be that way".

*DrSpengler* · 02-09-2005, 03:09 PM

IMO calling something "gay" is completely different than calling something "homosexual". The conotation is completely different. "Gay", in this instance, means "stupid".

Like saying "that sucks". Are you saying that whatever it is literally and physically sucks (as in, the verb)? No. Of course not. You're just saying it's stupid.

Gay is a word with multiple definitions.

Now, calling someone, as in a person, "gay" is a completely different thing. You call a guy "gay" and that's an insult to his masculinity and is certainly the same as calling them a "homosexual".

But if you look at a throw rug and say "that's pretty gay" you aren't a homophobe. THe only people getting terribly offended and losing sleep are the sensetive.

**Jo Dawn** · 02-09-2005, 03:18 PM

*ahem* To stop this argument...

gay
adj. gay·er, gay·est

1. Of, relating to, or having a sexual orientation to persons of the same sex.

2. Showing or characterized by cheerfulness and lighthearted excitement; merry.

3. Bright or lively, especially in color: a gay, sunny room.

4. Given to social pleasures.

5. Dissolute; licentious.

n.

Nowhere in there does it say that it means 'that sucks'. Read the dictionary. And learn more adjectives.

Quote:

But isn't there a better word to describe utterly disgusting and plain revolting stuff? I mean, there has to be something that isn't insulting... for some minority at least.

Exactly. That's what Thesaurases are for.

愛 · 02-09-2005, 03:20 PM

It's a word used to describe something stupid where we live. It's a form of dialect, get over it.

**Jo Dawn** · 02-09-2005, 03:23 PM

I don't use it, but I didn't say I was agreeing to it, either. I was merely stopping the argument over what it really meant. Slang not included, the ACTUAL meaning.

To stop people from arguing what it meant, it's definition. Can't argue with the true meaning.

**ThirdMarioBro** · 02-09-2005, 03:26 PM

Virginia once again proves this country has gone to hell and become a self absorbed hole of middle aged losers who want to control society.

*DrSpengler* · 02-09-2005, 03:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo Dawn

Nowhere in there does it say that it means 'that sucks'. Read the dictionary. And learn more adjectives.

I'm pretty sure "fo shizzle", "chillaxing" and other slang, regardless of how stupid they are, won't wind up in Websters anytime soon.

Regardless of what Mr. Dictionary says, people use it, WIDELY, to say "it sucks". And it isn't a matter of learning more adjectives. Sometimes saying "oh sh*t" is a lot more appropriate than saying "My goodness gracious".

**Jo Dawn** · 02-09-2005, 03:33 PM

Well, I lived 25 years using multiple adjectives and such to never swear. And not saying things that may offend others, because of the word.

So, really, I do think there are many more 'appropriate' things to say other than swearing, or something that may be offensive.

It's not difficult. I did it the first 25 years of my life.

**ThirdMarioBro** · 02-09-2005, 03:34 PM

Passing laws that tell you how to dress is just plain iditoic. Hell, take a lesson from Europe. Let there be nude parks.

**Machias Banshee** · 02-09-2005, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gwgtrunks

I dunno... they're expressing their choice of underwear brand? You can BS a lotta stuff in our court system here... lol. But yeah, if they say they're expressing themselves, it falls under freedom of speech, and then this law's prohibiting that.

and about the "that's gay" thing... why not just say "that's stupid"? or "wow, that bad." or "gee, i wish that woulden't be that way".

It cant really be helped in some places. People just start up stupid phrases.

I had one girl in school, where she'd describbed stupid people as 'Immigrants', stupid stuff as 'jewish'... It wasnt right, but people got into the phrases (kinda).

If Ai wanted, he coulda described it as Queer, but then still people would make a fuss of it. Queer originally means 'strange or unusual'. Look at any old English writing or even Nightmare Before Christmas. Jack uses it in 'What is This?" Gay Used to mean Jolly or happy. It is only in recent times that these words got tied to homosexuals.

Every society has their strange sayings. I remember in England I almost fell over when someone said they had a few ******s to burn. It turned out that they meant cigarettes.

What was my point with this? Oh yeah... dont fall to pieces if you hear something that sounds unusual or offensive. Even PM folks if you want to understand what they meant. Who knows, you might learrn something interesting...

*Duke* · 02-09-2005, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KROW

The First Amendment:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or, abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Actually it isn't unconstitutional for Virginia to pass a law at all banning expressionism at all. The first admendment clearly states that Congress (the federal government) cannot make a law violating these rights. It was never intended to apply to state governments at all. The whole idea was that if Virginia or any other state passed a law against the freedom of speech then people who disagreed with these laws had the opportunity to move to another state. If the federal government passed these laws then the only choice people would have would to move to another country. Anyways that is how it was intended not how it is.

***This is not a post saying I believe the Bill of Rights should only apply to the Federal Government. I'm simply pointing out a historical fact.***

*KROW* · 02-10-2005, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duke

Actually it isn't unconstitutional for Virginia to pass a law at all banning expressionism at all. The first admendment clearly states that Congress (the federal government) cannot make a law violating these rights. It was never intended to apply to state governments at all. The whole idea was that if Virginia or any other state passed a law against the freedom of speech then people who disagreed with these laws had the opportunity to move to another state. If the federal government passed these laws then the only choice people would have would to move to another country. Anyways that is how it was intended not how it is.

*ahem*

Quote:

Originally Posted by KROW

So, no, expressionism is not in there. But, people can indeed petition this ruling to get rid of it.

Demented Utrom · 02-11-2005, 05:04 PM

Nobody wants to see a full moon during the day.

*Anarky* · 02-11-2005, 06:24 PM

And nobody wants to see your random posts neither during the day nor during the night.

Thank you for stopping that behaviour, Shredder Utrom.

**Machias Banshee** · 02-13-2005, 10:10 PM

Update!!

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...0211204334&e=5

the law was kicked out!

02-09-2005, 01:23 PM	#1
Anarky Outlaw Hero Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Tannhauser Gate Posts: 4,867	"That gay stuff"? Ai, come on, Gay people are the same as heterosexuals... and some people not showing off their butts certainly won't keep gay people from being gay. That is a quite silly assumption. And what do you want? Uniforms for US-citizens? I suggest a blue overall (looks the same on male and female) and a lot of telescreens to watch whether people really wear their overalls. __________________ Because it's... I dunno... brutal.

02-09-2005, 03:23 PM	#10
Jo Dawn Inactive Moderator Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Authority On All Things Don Posts: 5,190	I don't use it, but I didn't say I was agreeing to it, either. I was merely stopping the argument over what it really meant. Slang not included, the ACTUAL meaning. To stop people from arguing what it meant, it's definition. Can't argue with the true meaning. __________________

02-09-2005, 03:26 PM	#11
ThirdMarioBro Tea Time! Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 8,905	Virginia once again proves this country has gone to hell and become a self absorbed hole of middle aged losers who want to control society. __________________

02-09-2005, 03:33 PM	#13
Jo Dawn Inactive Moderator Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Authority On All Things Don Posts: 5,190	Well, I lived 25 years using multiple adjectives and such to never swear. And not saying things that may offend others, because of the word. So, really, I do think there are many more 'appropriate' things to say other than swearing, or something that may be offensive. It's not difficult. I did it the first 25 years of my life. __________________

02-09-2005, 03:34 PM	#14
ThirdMarioBro Tea Time! Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 8,905	Passing laws that tell you how to dress is just plain iditoic. Hell, take a lesson from Europe. Let there be nude parks. __________________

02-09-2005, 02:01 PM	#2
DrSpengler Foot Elite Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 4,842	I love/hate living in Northern Virginia. It's a strange blend of conservative hillbilly good ole boys from the south and liberal hippy scum from the north. Kind like mixing dogs and cats. A crazy place to live, that's for sure.

02-09-2005, 02:07 PM	#3
Duke Mad Scientist Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 1,913	Well, everyone here keeps saying everyone has the right to express themselves but I really don't remember that in the United States Constitution. The closest thing is Freedom of Speech but even the Supreme Court has ruled that it isn't absolute. Americans cannot threaten someone's life and say we have the right to because of Freedom of Speech. So to caim that they have the right, isn't accurate.

02-09-2005, 02:13 PM	#4
Kid Icarus Foot Elite Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Angel Land Posts: 4,150	I'm a big fan of the First Amendment... There was a ruling in Kansas back durring the vietnam war, by the US supreme court none the less, that proclaimed that people had the right to wear what they want to wear. It was over armbands that allowed a group of students to prostest the war quietly. Based on that ruling, this is somewhat unconstitutional.

02-09-2005, 03:09 PM	#7
DrSpengler Foot Elite Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 4,842	IMO calling something "gay" is completely different than calling something "homosexual". The conotation is completely different. "Gay", in this instance, means "stupid". Like saying "that sucks". Are you saying that whatever it is literally and physically sucks (as in, the verb)? No. Of course not. You're just saying it's stupid. Gay is a word with multiple definitions. Now, calling someone, as in a person, "gay" is a completely different thing. You call a guy "gay" and that's an insult to his masculinity and is certainly the same as calling them a "homosexual". But if you look at a throw rug and say "that's pretty gay" you aren't a homophobe. THe only people getting terribly offended and losing sleep are the sensetive.

02-09-2005, 03:20 PM	#9
愛 Super Moderator Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 7,449	It's a word used to describe something stupid where we live. It's a form of dialect, get over it.

02-11-2005, 05:04 PM	#18
Demented Utrom Hench Mutant Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 474	Nobody wants to see a full moon during the day.

02-11-2005, 06:24 PM	#19
Anarky Outlaw Hero Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Tannhauser Gate Posts: 4,867	And nobody wants to see your random posts neither during the day nor during the night. Thank you for stopping that behaviour, Shredder Utrom. __________________ Because it's... I dunno... brutal.

02-13-2005, 10:10 PM	#20
Machias Banshee Super Moderator Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 17,163	Update!! http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...0211204334&e=5 the law was kicked out!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode