Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

California Legislature Declares "Cuss-Free" Week 262

shewfig writes "The California legislature, which previously tried to ban incandescent light bulbs, just added to the list of banned things ... swear words! Fortunately, the measure only applies for the first week of March, and compliance is voluntary — although, apparently, there will be a 'swear jar' in the Assembly and the Governor's mansion. No word yet on whether the Governator intends to comply."


This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

California Legislature Declares "Cuss-Free" Week

Comments Filter:
  • God damn idiots (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26, 2010 @04:23PM (#31290034)

    The motherfuckas in CA legislature, and I apologize all the genuine mofos for the insult of comparison, cannot pass a budget or anything minutely useful.

    Just the other day, they were passing (passed?) setting up a registry for "animal collectors" - people who collect large number of stray cats and such.

    God damn state is going down the drain with 12% unemployment rate, and these are the things the fuckers fiddle with.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26, 2010 @04:41PM (#31290274)

    This is probably a jab back at Governor Arnold's letter [techcrunch.com] to them from a few months back. Note that they went out of their way to put a swearing jar in his mansion.

  • by ElKry ( 1544795 ) on Friday February 26, 2010 @04:42PM (#31290294)
    Coincidentally, the very same movie that talks about President Schwarzenegger and the amendments to the Constitution made to allow him to run for President of the USA.
  • Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday February 26, 2010 @04:44PM (#31290318)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by weston ( 16146 ) <westonsd&canncentral,org> on Friday February 26, 2010 @05:21PM (#31290810) Homepage

    Profanity often can nudge interaction towards less restrained and thoughtful expression. The budget didn't spiral out of control by itself; it broke down because of (a) the laws surrounding how budgeting is to be done (b) the fact that the two parties couldn't work with each other.

    Discouraging profanity won't fix problem (a), but it might make problem (b) somewhat more tractable.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 26, 2010 @07:00PM (#31291858)

    LoL, ok, i'm just playing devil's advocate here, but what if I am talking with a group of my peers who have no problem with cussing and then someone offended comes into the group. Does that mean we all (the originating group of non-offended people) have to quit cussing because the newb can't hand the language?

    Wait, this sounds familiar... i think i saw this in a sexual harassment video one time. A group of people are standing around telling dirty jokes and a woman joined the group and became offended and reported them for sexual harassment.

    Great... whats next? No smoking outside? oh wait, they did that...well shit.

  • by BaronHethorSamedi ( 970820 ) <thebaronsamedi@gmail.com> on Friday February 26, 2010 @07:30PM (#31292202)
    I'm glad you brought this up. Let me turn this question around a bit.

    I'm not actively offended by profanity. I grew up with it, hear it at work, in the media--about like we all do, I suppose. But even if I'm not actively offended by it, I'm not actively impressed by it either. Are you?

    I suppose I may have had a bit of a "brainwashed upbringing" in that I had parents who were concerned that I learn to speak English well and communicate effectively. English is a language with an extraordinarily broad and varied vocabulary--in part because it's borrowed so heavily from so many other languages. When I hear a person who seems unable to construct a sentence without using four letter words--for whom "fuck" and its variants act as noun, adjective, pronoun and/or verb without any apparent notion of what that word actually denotes--I admit that at first blush I'm probably going to have a low opinion of that person. If I were an employer, I wouldn't hire him or her. I wouldn't want him or her dating one of my children.

    I share your sentiment on "like" as a placeholder (I'm not too impressed by that either), but feel that even that is probably preferable to pointless (and invariably grammatically incorrect) references to sexual acts, excrement, and religious figures. And if you're making those references with a purpose to offend, are you really trying to communicate anything useful anyway?

"I will make no bargains with terrorist hardware." -- Peter da Silva