tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2289595359432630118.post3721623773817806934..comments2024-03-18T04:36:26.547-04:00Comments on Paul Levinson's Infinite Regress: More Bad Business from the Supreme Court on the FCC and the First AmendnmentPaul Levinsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07609987407926836519noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2289595359432630118.post-8856009605813466692009-04-29T05:21:00.000-04:002009-04-29T05:21:00.000-04:00Excluding blatant hate-speech, words are words and...Excluding blatant hate-speech, words are words and pose no danger to anyone. If a 3 year old hears the word fuck, shit,[insert expletive here], so be it - it's the parents' duty to teach their children what language means, and what language is appropriate for them until they reach the age at which they can decide for themselves. <br /><br />If a 3 year old says fuck, they are not going to go to hell. They'll probably make a lot of people giggle on YouTube. Words are words. <br /><br />The silliest thing in public broadcast is bleeping or substituting "f-word" and the like for what is really being meant. It just proves that the nature of the law is to prevent the USE of the word fuck and not the intent of the word fuck. Or shit, etc. etc. etc. <br /><br />If people truly had a problem with the meaning behind words like shit, fuck, etc. that are banned from most cable and public broadcast channels, they would be outraged by the usage of the meaning behind the words moreso than the words themselves. That people are not behaving in this way shows how silly an uproar over fuck, shit, etc. really is.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09102595869969246859noreply@blogger.com