Well said John, although obscene words fall under the definition of
obscenity, or "offensive to the average person" (my pre-law
classes).   Cute plays on words, I'm contending, aren't offensive to the
average person.  If they were, then many advertisements would be ruled
obscene.  Seen many commercials lately that don't use sexual innuendos?

  We all know why schools are trying to control certain behaviors and maybe
even reverse some trends (my wife works for the school district..in fact,
she's a wheel).  But we have to be very careful when we begin regulating
what can or can't be put in print and/or publicly displayed.  Checks and
balances, open debate, the heart of a democracy!!

Have a good weekend everyone.

John Lee


At 02:04 PM 6/3/05 -0700, John Clogg wrote:
>Free speech (about promiscuity or anything else) is protected by the
>constitution, but that does not mean that schools can't regulate speech
>within their premises.  As an example, how would you react if your
>child's first grade teacher greeted the class each morning with "F**k
>you, you little s**ts!" and the school's administration responded to
>complaints with "The teacher has a right to free speech?"
>
>This is an extreme example, of course, and I agree that the school
>administrators overreacted to the t-shirts, but this is not a
>constitutional matter, and it's not a matter of promoting homosexuality
>over heterosexuality.  Debate about such questions is not helped by such
>hyperbole.
>
>John Clogg
>
>My opinions are my own, not my employer's, etc.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
>Behalf Of John Lee
>Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 1:16 PM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: OT: More Evolution
>
>So is promiscuity illegal?  Dangerous?  Profane?  Pornographic?  Why is
>it
>not protected under the constitution?  What is unique about it that it's
>not protected as freedom of speech?
>
>I understand that most of us don't want our daughters or sons to be
>promiscuous, but should the State be involved in that?  Most of America
>doesn't want their kids to be gay, either (according to polls), but
>should
>the State be regulating that?  That's my problem with this.  If it's
>promiscuity today, what will it be tomorrow?  It's exactly why the law
>protects speech.
>
>John Lee
>
>* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
>* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *