: words are the tools by which we use speech to express ourselves, therefore the words carry more than just the letters that spell them out. we must not overlook that words all carry good, bad or neutral connotations, and that the word 'fuck' carries very strong and very hateful connotations.You find the connotations of the word "fuck" to be "hateful?" (I suggest that you might be doing it wrong!) If the man fell out of his canoe and began shouting "kill" instead of "fuck," he would have been much more intimidating, but would not have technically violated that particular anti-obscenity law. The word "kill" is not considered obscene, but the word "fuck" is. To me, that's completely backwards. Picture yourself in a situation where a good looking stranger approached you and said "I'd really love to ____you." Which of the two words, "fuck" or "kill," would you prefer in that blank? (Admittedly, both phrases could be offensive, depending on the circumstances, but "I'd really love to kill you" can not, in my opinion, ever be taken as a compliment, whereas the alternative sometimes can.)
: while no physical harm befell these children, it is an example of how in our society, we have become jaded to the words and images that represent hatred to us. so much so that we do not think it nessessary to protect children from them.
I really think you're mistaking the word for the thing it represents. The sound of the word, and the symbols (letters) we use to represent that sound are not equivalent to the non-verbal event that is labled with the sounds/symbols. (i.e. You can't get pregnant when someone says "fuck" at you. You don't get full from reading the menu.)
I guess my biggest problem with your observation is that I really don't understand why you consider sex to be hateful; it seems exactly the opposite to me.
I admit that I feel no need to "protect children" from words that refer to sex. If anything, I'd want to protect children from images of violence and hypocrisy, but I don't even want to "protect" anyone from that. Violence and hypocrisy are much more offensive to me than sex will ever be, but they exist in this world, and kids are going to be exposed to them sooner or later. I'd rather explain to my child what is going on when people experience powerful emotions, than try to limit someone else's verbal response to an internal emotional state. The law, as it stands, attempts to legislate "proper" responses to emotionally powerful experiences. Since humans are a very diverse group of people, the way we experience emotions is unique and should not be expected to be uniform.
I don't use "profanity" myself, at least not very often, but only because I find it generally uncreative and insufficient, not because it's somehow inherently bad. If a "swear word" or two is the best someone else can come up with to explain his/her inner state, more power to them, I say. I have neither the authority, not the right to impose my ideas of appropriate self-expression on anyone else, and no one else has this authority or right either. There is no moral or ethical justification for a law prohibiting the freedom of expression.
-Floyd
