200
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 5:
Line 5: + +
no edit summary
I think that information like this is interesting and of good educational value. Are there any objections? [[User:Eoinc|Eoinc]] 17:01, 4 June 2008 (EDT)
I think that information like this is interesting and of good educational value. Are there any objections? [[User:Eoinc|Eoinc]] 17:01, 4 June 2008 (EDT)
:NO! There are objections to it, and chief among them is the fact that Conservapedia is ''family-friendly'', and we are not going to have a child sit here and read the garbage of a four-letter-word obsenity dictionary. We have stated that postition many times in the past, and as far as we're concerned, discussion about it is terminated. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:06, 4 June 2008 (EDT)
:NO! There are objections to it, and chief among them is the fact that Conservapedia is ''family-friendly'', and we are not going to have a child sit here and read the garbage of a four-letter-word obsenity dictionary. We have stated that postition many times in the past, and as far as we're concerned, discussion about it is terminated. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:06, 4 June 2008 (EDT)
::Thank you. I understand your objection. Similarly, though, I hope you can see where I'm coming from. I do not for a moment advocate creating an obscenity dictionary, or tacking on a long list of offensive words to the article. But would you not agree that the refusal to utter certain words is exactly what makes them offensive? By discussing them in a mature, sober manner, they lose their power to shock and offend. By treating the words as if they were dangerous, we exacerbate the problem. [[User:Eoinc|Eoinc]] 17:46, 4 June 2008 (EDT)