Seattle Bans Potentially Offensive Words Like 'Citizen' and 'Brown Bag'

[Luddly Neddite]

If it this story were true, you'd think the rightwingers would be cheering; they're always going on and on about how much better the universe would be if the power of government were at the local level.

What a stupid fuck you are.

We're always going on about NO Gov intervention.

You are female, aren't you?

You're joking, right?

or did you forget all the yammering from the wacko right about birth control, gay marriage, abortion, forced birth of babies caused by rape and on and on and on and on and on and on and on ........................

Government intervention?
No.

Complete control?
You betcha.

 

[Pogo]

Uhhh-- you have it 180 degrees bass-ackwards there, Ted Baxter. The OP is false; there is no "ban" and there is no "law". And that was ascertained by reading the article.

Which I understand is available to everyone. What a world.

You don't have the "right" to not be offended, nor the "right" to even suggest what words I use....pretty simple...eh kid?

You have every "right" in the world to "feel" offended,most women (like yourself) demand it......

"Being" and "feeling" are two different things.....your feminism betrays you.

You realize you just replied to yourself?

 

[American_Jihad]

Seattle Bans Potentially Offensive Words Like 'Citizen' and 'Brown Bag'

The city's Office of Civil Rights instructed city workers in a recent internal memo to refrain from using er terms "citizen" and "brown bag" because some may find the words offensive, according to reports from KOMO.

"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?'"

Bronstein, during an interview with Seattle's KIRO Radio, revealed the phrase "brown bag" had been previously used to judge a person based on their 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."

Read more at Seattle Bans Potentially Offensive Words Like 'Citizen' and 'Brown Bag'

Cracker and honky are ok ..... Seattle must be full of pussy ass girly hand Liberals.

Progressive/liberals should wrap up before they go out side so they don't get offended...

 

[Pogo]

Seattle Bans Potentially Offensive Words Like 'Citizen' and 'Brown Bag'

The city's Office of Civil Rights instructed city workers in a recent internal memo to refrain from using er terms "citizen" and "brown bag" because some may find the words offensive, according to reports from KOMO.

"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?'"

Bronstein, during an interview with Seattle's KIRO Radio, revealed the phrase "brown bag" had been previously used to judge a person based on their 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."

Read more at Seattle Bans Potentially Offensive Words Like 'Citizen' and 'Brown Bag'

Cracker and honky are ok ..... Seattle must be full of pussy ass girly hand Liberals.

Progressive/liberals should wrap up before they go out side so they don't get offended...

^^ AJ all dresssed up for the microwave...

 

[Nova78]

Fundamentalist" – Even a sixth grade English student can point out that the term “fundamental” means “relating to the anus”. Which I imagine is pretty offensive if you're a homophobic religious zealot. So watch your mouth and show a little respect for the people maintaining that sense of irrational hatred that the rest of the world seems to have been PCified into forgetting about.

 

[Pogo]

Fundamentalist" – Even a sixth grade English student can point out that the term “fundamental” means “relating to the anus”. Which I imagine is pretty offensive if you're a homophobic religious zealot. So watch your mouth and show a little respect for the people maintaining that sense of irrational hatred that the rest of the world seems to have been PCified into forgetting about.

"Alle þe filþ of his magh ['maw'] salle breste out atte his fondament for drede". -- Cursor Mundi (anonymous), early 14th century

-- fundament (fondament) meaning "bottom", as in "base". Seven hundred years ago. Nothing to do with anus.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Speak of the devil. I was just going to note, RE Doctor's post:


-- that Roo's doo doo is remarkably akin to your own whining over here about boycotts "putting a thumb on the scale of the free market" -- which I noted amounts to belief in the concept of the free market, "as long as I like how others are using it".

Same thing here with the free market of ideas. Those ridiculously claiming nobody has a right to be offended, uttered in the act of being offended, are in fact practicing the same thought control they claim to disdain. Again, see post 101.

Thanks for stopping by

Your usual incoherence is once again on display.

As to my "thumb on the scales" comment, I of course stand by that since it is, simply and obviously, true. The market works a the market works. Toss in some "boycott," and it's no longer the market forces at play. You can deny it, but you aren't honest when you do so.

As for Roo's comment, again: he's right. And that means that YOU are (again) just wrong.

You have NO right not to be offended. In fact, it is validly a matter of indifference to all that you might BE offended. Who cares? Too fucking bad. Get over it, ya whiny bitch.

And once again you've contradicted yourself in one paragraph.
Having "no right not to be offended" -- two negatives canceling each other out -- means we are all required to be offended.

Read much?

Your reading comprehension level (i.e., abysmally low) is on display again.

You seem to believe that the sentence would read better if I asserted that you have a right to be offended. Well, silly kid, that much is actually true.

You do. Go ahead and assert that right. BE offended.

But, you have NO corresponding "right" not to be offended.

Sorry that perfectly proper English grammar confuses the snot out of you.

Go get a remedial education.

And if that observation offends you, too fucking bad; because you have no "right" to not be offended.

Stated differently, if you had a "right" to not be offended, then I'd have to have some kind of corresponding "duty" to refrain from offending you. I have no such duty.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

And once again you've contradicted yourself in one paragraph.
Having "no right not to be offended" -- two negatives canceling each other out -- means we are all required to be offended.

Read much?

A right is not a requirement. You have the right to vote. You are not required to vote.

So...it looks like he's right, and you're wrong.

I just said reading is a lost art, so thanks for the affirmation.

If you DO NOT have the right to NOT be offended, then your only option is TO BE offended. You have no other choice.

Thanks for playin'.

False. If you have no right to not be offended, then you may be left either unoffended or offended. And either way, since you have no right, you ignorant silly twit, no "right" of yours is implicated in any way whatsoever.

Damn you are silly and ignorant.

It's not that reading is a lost art. It is that you are saddled with a piss poor ability to comprehend.

 

[Big Black Dog]

More proof that folks on the left-coast are really fucked up in the head.

 

[peach174]

This is the same thing that communists do.
Rather than using re education camps, the left do it with Political Correctness.
Our Constitution won't let them do it with camps, so they use our schools and political correctness to indoctrinate the people to Socialism.

What was the purpose of re education camps?
To change the way that the people think about politics. To make them become Politically Correct.
Political correctness here, in the USA does the same thing.
Your must think like a Socialist Democrat.
If you don't go along with the correct words that they choose and think is wrong, you are a bad person and or you lose your job.
This is the lefts attempt to make people sensitive to people who are not Citizens. This way they can make changes to the laws for everyone that is not a Citizen. The left do not see or comprehend the harm in this way of thinking.

Then they wonder why we on the right call them Socialists and Communists.
Just because the left does it a little different here, because of our Constitution, it is still does the same exact thing.
They are using your feelings & emotions to think, like they want you to.
This is collectivism (aka) Communism at it's finest.
Collectivism good, individualism bad.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If it this story were true, you'd think the rightwingers would be cheering; they're always going on and on about how much better the universe would be if the power of government were at the local level.

What a stupid fuck you are.

We're always going on about NO Gov intervention.

You are female, aren't you?

So no conservatives on this site support English only, or English as the official language LEGISLATION,

FROM THE GOVERNMENT???

LOL

 

[Papageorgio]

If it this story were true, you'd think the rightwingers would be cheering; they're always going on and on about how much better the universe would be if the power of government were at the local level.

What a stupid fuck you are.

We're always going on about NO Gov intervention.

You are female, aren't you?

So no conservatives on this site support English only, or English as the official language LEGISLATION,

FROM THE GOVERNMENT???

LOL

I don't care what language you speak, you speak out of your ass.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

If it this story were true, you'd think the rightwingers would be cheering; they're always going on and on about how much better the universe would be if the power of government were at the local level.

What a stupid fuck you are.

We're always going on about NO Gov intervention.

You are female, aren't you?

So no conservatives on this site support English only, or English as the official language LEGISLATION,

FROM THE GOVERNMENT???

LOL

The opposition (in general terms) to undue government interference is NOT the same thing as saying that conservatives oppose the idea of Congress legislating LAWS.

Geez. You libs are dull witted.

SOME laws are perfectly appropriate. OTHER laws are not.

 

[The T]

This ain't the military, Gummo. You don't get to "dismiss" jack shit.
On the other hand the bullshit premise of this thread was dismissed back on page one. Six dozen posts later some of y'all are still going on as if it's real. Oblivious.

Btw you might wanna look up what "rhetorical" means.

"No one has the right NOT to be offended" --

Actually? *I DO* get to dismiss YOU.

Get it? Excercising my LIBERTY as those employees will come election time.

YOU still don't get it, and it shows.

Carry on smartly dumbass. You wear your ignorance well.

Hey, I post the way I want to whether you dig it or not.
See how this works?

I just loooove the irony when some internet wag wagging about some entity telling people what they can or can't say like authoritarian statist asswipes -- starts trying to tell other posters what they can or can't say like an authoritarian statist asswipe.

And what did I write? I get to exercise my Liberty to dismiss you. And it doesn't matter whether *I* dig you or not. My God what a whiney twerp you are.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What a stupid fuck you are.

We're always going on about NO Gov intervention.

You are female, aren't you?

So no conservatives on this site support English only, or English as the official language LEGISLATION,

FROM THE GOVERNMENT???

LOL

The opposition (in general terms) to undue government interference is NOT the same thing as saying that conservatives oppose the idea of Congress legislating LAWS.

Geez. You libs are dull witted.

SOME laws are perfectly appropriate. OTHER laws are not.

Oh of course. Conservatives don't hate government, they hate the other guy's government. Conservatives don't hate government spending, they hate the other guy's government spending.

Some laws are appropriate? lol, so I guess laws that would dictate that a certain language, or a certain use of language,

in official government business, such as English only, or such as restrictions on the use of words deemed inappropriate or offensive by the appropriate governmental authority,

those kind of laws???

lol

 

[NYcarbineer]

A right is not a requirement. You have the right to vote. You are not required to vote.

So...it looks like he's right, and you're wrong.

I just said reading is a lost art, so thanks for the affirmation.

If you DO NOT have the right to NOT be offended, then your only option is TO BE offended. You have no other choice.

Thanks for playin'.

False. If you have no right to not be offended, then you may be left either unoffended or offended. And either way, since you have no right, you ignorant silly twit, no "right" of yours is implicated in any way whatsoever.

Damn you are silly and ignorant.

It's not that reading is a lost art. It is that you are saddled with a piss poor ability to comprehend.

You don't have the right to be offended either. Or offend others. Not if there is a governmental authority with proper authority and jurisdiction to prohibit it.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

So no conservatives on this site support English only, or English as the official language LEGISLATION,

FROM THE GOVERNMENT???

LOL

The opposition (in general terms) to undue government interference is NOT the same thing as saying that conservatives oppose the idea of Congress legislating LAWS.

Geez. You libs are dull witted.

SOME laws are perfectly appropriate. OTHER laws are not.

Oh of course. Conservatives don't hate government, they hate the other guy's government. Conservatives don't hate government spending, they hate the other guy's government spending.

Some laws are appropriate? lol, so I guess laws that would dictate that a certain language, or a certain use of language,

in official government business, such as English only, or such as restrictions on the use of words deemed inappropriate or offensive by the appropriate governmental authority,

those kind of laws???

lol

Damn but you are dull witted.

Conservatives applaud what the Founders and Framers accomplished.

They did not craft a government that is incapable of passing laws, you moron.

That is not that what we sought then nor is it what we want now.

The objective was to LIMIT the government, you imbecile. Compel it to work within channels. Limit its authority and limit what it could even address.

I sure as hell DO oppose the liberal's present day notion of government. Why wouldn't I?

You idiot's have the goal of undoing what the Framers created.

IF, within the narrow constraints of what the Constitution permits the Federal Government to address our Congress happens to pass a law making English the official language of the United States, I wonder what conflict that would have with anything I have addressed here?

Since you are pitiably ignorant, let me clue you in on something. It is ALREADY the case that to pass our Nationality test, and achieve citizenship, an immigrant alien is required to know English.

ZOMG! This must cause you to lie awake at night!

 

[IlarMeilyr]

I just said reading is a lost art, so thanks for the affirmation.

If you DO NOT have the right to NOT be offended, then your only option is TO BE offended. You have no other choice.

Thanks for playin'.

False. If you have no right to not be offended, then you may be left either unoffended or offended. And either way, since you have no right, you ignorant silly twit, no "right" of yours is implicated in any way whatsoever.

Damn you are silly and ignorant.

It's not that reading is a lost art. It is that you are saddled with a piss poor ability to comprehend.

You don't have the right to be offended either. Or offend others. Not if there is a governmental authority with proper authority and jurisdiction to prohibit it.

I don't SEEK the "right" to be offended. What a stupid comment from you. Not unexpectedly.

I DO have a right to offend others however. To deny that is stupid and ignorant of you.

There is no government authority to prohibit me from offending you. You are a dickless asshole bitch motherfucker. Hypothetically, if that offends you, you remain powerless to do jack shit about it. Why? Because I am not prevented from offending you and you have NO right to NOT be offended.

 

[Moonglow]

Oh for Gods sake. Suck it up people, and stop turning an every day item into something racist!

Noomi, why is American politics so important to you?

Can't you mind your business? Are Americans getting involved in your countries politics?

What do you even do with your life? Is it that boring? Too bad they took away all your guns. At least you'd have some recreation down there.

I agree with your sentiment of course, but still...

Who died and made you God?

 

[NYcarbineer]

False. If you have no right to not be offended, then you may be left either unoffended or offended. And either way, since you have no right, you ignorant silly twit, no "right" of yours is implicated in any way whatsoever.

Damn you are silly and ignorant.

It's not that reading is a lost art. It is that you are saddled with a piss poor ability to comprehend.

You don't have the right to be offended either. Or offend others. Not if there is a governmental authority with proper authority and jurisdiction to prohibit it.

I don't SEEK the "right" to be offended. What a stupid comment from you. Not unexpectedly.

I DO have a right to offend others however. To deny that is stupid and ignorant of you.

There is no government authority to prohibit me from offending you. You are a dickless asshole bitch motherfucker. Hypothetically, if that offends you, you remain powerless to do jack shit about it. Why? Because I am not prevented from offending you and you have NO right to NOT be offended.

Try saying that to a judge during a judicial proceeding and let us know how that works out.