Should Offensive Material be censored?

[jander12]

Overall some great discussion (funny stuff too!). Full disclosure, I'm a Christian, so I may be biased. BUT, with that being said, my first impression was something along these lines:

Less bitchin, more mission; or how I learned to keep my eyes in the boat.

My reaction is more of a "Really?!" This is so offensive it needs to me removed? I understand that there may have been a time where a particular religion may have been overly pushed, but, does a Bible verse really need to have a formal complaint and official action taken upon it's "public" display (not necessarily from an authority figure)?

...
I think that as long as the verse isn't explicitly or implicitly being used as a basis for attack on another group of people (e.g gays, blacks, women, non-believers), it's fine. Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater.

I think this verse does not fall into the above mentioned categories. I can understand how "All have sinned..." might be a bit confrontational, but a public display of a personal realization shouldn't offend our future leaders. If anything, they should be the most understanding.

When I was at the USNA, there were definitely more culturally offensive images/words posted on room doors than scripture. F* bombs, sex icon references and pictures, etc. (definitely would offend the religious types). But hey, it's the military, right? Not the PC department.

Funny story (sort of): the only time I remember a fuss being made after someone complained (at USNA) was when I posted the head gouge (bathroom reading material) with a picture of a sniper trained on an enemy combatant with the words, "Say hello to Allah for me" written above it. PC? Definitely not. Needless to say, I got a talking to and the head gouge had to come down.

*Edit: Thank you for fixing the thread title moderator(s)!

 

[707guy]

The phrase "A time and a place for everything" needs to make a come back.

 

[jmcquate]

When anything can be offensive........nothing is offensive. A religious verse, with the exception of the weird stuff mostly related to misogyny can be inspirational and comforting, no matter what religion it comes from. You don't have to be a believer to see this. The problem is the cult of the victim. Being a victim is as important now as being the best at what you do.

 

[nittany03]

Did I miss something, or did everybody just skip the step of actually talking to the cadet and asking him to move the quote somewhere else?

 

[Flash]

....My reaction is more of a "Really?!" This is so offensive it needs to me removed? I understand that there may have been a time where a particular religion may have been overly pushed, but, does a Bible verse really need to have a formal complaint and official action taken upon it's "public" display (not necessarily from an authority figure)?

Every person in the military is viewed as an authority figure by many in the public, a future officer especially so.

.....but a public display of a personal realization shouldn't offend our future leaders. If anything, they should be the most understanding.

And that is the problem, it was a public display.

When I was at the USNA, there were definitely more culturally offensive images/words posted on room doors than scripture. F* bombs, sex icon references and pictures, etc. (definitely would offend the religious types).

The prohibition of official endorsement of religion is covered in the Constitution, dirty pictures and bad language isn't.

I posted the head gouge (bathroom reading material) with a picture of a sniper trained on an enemy combatant with the words, "Say hello to Allah for me" written above it.

So you are start a thread when someone does something to offend your religious sensibilities but think it is funny to insult another religion. Okay.

Did I miss something, or did everybody just skip the step of actually talking to the cadet and asking him to move the quote somewhere else?

Maybe that did happen, only those there would know the whole story.

 

[Spekkio]

Did I miss something, or did everybody just skip the step of actually talking to the cadet and asking him to move the quote somewhere else?

You can't do that. You might offend him.

 

[sevenhelmet]

Wow.


We really are our own worst enemy these days, aren't we?

 

[jander12]

Every person in the military is viewed as an authority figure by many in the public, a future officer especially so.

Did you read the article? This public display I mention is only public to cadets at the USAFA. So sure, if it’s a senior posting this and a freshman walks by then he/she is an authority figure. But the staff that complained viewing a student as an authority figure? I think not. It’s not the company officer posting this.

And that is the problem, it was a public display.

I drive my car in public; can I not put a verse on my car? Could someone have me remove it? All I’m saying is that this is a dangerous path. Not just for Bible verses, but for anything.

The prohibition of official endorsement of religion is covered in the Constitution, dirty pictures and bad language isn't.

This is not official endorsement. As the article said, this was a student posting the verse, not the company officer or an instructor teaching it to a class.

So you are start a thread when someone does something to offend your religious sensibilities but think it is funny to insult another religion. Okay.

The purpose of the thread is more than to discuss the separation of church and state. If they censor scripture because people feel like Christianity is being forced upon them or that it's offensive, then what’s next?

If it said, “say hello to God for me,” would I be offended? No! I would imagine that Muslims believe that Allah is God; therefore, wouldn’t they also believe that all men face judgment from Allah when they die? The posting didn’t say, kill all Muslims. It shouldn’t have been offensive and I wasn’t trying to insult a religion by the posting. Please tell me how the caption/picture insulted a religion.

Maybe that did happen, only those there would know the whole story.

True to some extent in any instance. You’ve never discussed an event you weren’t there to actually witness?

 

[jander12]

then what’s next?

We'll see public schools ban students from wearing t-shirts with American flags on them on Cinco de Mayo because it offends the Mexican students. We'll see cross memorials for vehicle accident victims removed from public streets because it offends the atheists. Yes, both examples are in public areas or government owned areas, but it's still getting ridiculous. It's not just religious displays. It's becoming much more.

 

[Flash]

Did you read the article? This public display I mention is only public to cadets at the USAFA. So sure, if it’s a senior posting this and a freshman walks by then he/she is an authority figure. But the staff that complained viewing a student as an authority figure? I think not. It’s not the company officer posting this.

Public enough, USAFA cadets and staff are people too aren't they? And it wasn't just staff that supposedly complained, cadets did too.

I drive my car in public; can I not put a verse on my car? Could someone have me remove it? All I’m saying is that this is a dangerous path. Not just for Bible verses, but for anything.

Big difference between a government building and your POV. And yes, there are even limits to what you can put on your car on a military base, just check out this out.

This is not official endorsement. As the article said, this was a student posting the verse, not the company officer or an instructor teaching it to a class.

This was a US government employee using a publicly visible space, at least to his fellow cadets and the staff, to proclaim his religious belief and thus could constitute the 'endorsement' of a particular religion.

The purpose of the thread is more than to discuss the separation of church and state. If they censor scripture because people feel like Christianity is being forced upon them or that it's offensive, then what’s next? We'll see public schools ban students from wearing t-shirts with American flags on them on Cinco de Mayo because it offends the Mexican students. We'll see cross memorials for vehicle accident victims removed from public streets because it offends the atheists.

Because while you may think it is harmless what about those who don't have the same religious beliefs as you? Would you be so open to a verse from the Quran? Or how about Dianetics? And then you have the ididots who you give an inch and then they take a mile only to claim they are 'persecuted' for their beliefs.

As for the kids in California, they are students and teh school can do as it wishes. Crosses on the side of the highway, I still see them every week so they aren't going away anytime soon.

Don't worry, Christianity isn't going away in the US anytime soon.

If it said, “say hello to God for me,” would I be offended? No! I would imagine that Muslims believe that Allah is God; therefore, wouldn’t they also believe that all men face judgment from Allah when they die? The posting didn’t say, kill all Muslims. It shouldn’t have been offensive and I wasn’t trying to insult a religion by the posting. Please tell me how the caption/picture insulted a religion.

Don't be so puerile, while the literal translation may be 'God' pretty much everyone in this country knows that the term Allah is particular to Arabs/Muslims.

 

[jander12]

… Because while you may think it is harmless what about those who don't have the same religious beliefs as you? Would you be so open to a verse from the Quran? Or how about Dianetics? And then you have the ididots who you give an inch and then they take a mile only to claim they are 'persecuted' for their beliefs.

If by “open” you mean would I complain? Absolutely not. I may not agree with it, but I wouldn’t complain just because I can see it walking to my room after class. I’m not so easily offended that someone saying they believe something is going to affect me to the point of reporting the act. If on the other hand I was required to take a course on the Quran or Dianetics, I may object. But in all likelihood, I’d personally let someone else. Why? Because while I don’t feel I should be required to learn those things, it’s not going to hurt me. If anything, it’ll further educate me to differing views – a knowledge base I should have as an aspiring leader.

As for the kids in California, they are students and the school can do as it wishes. Crosses on the side of the highway, I still see them every week so they aren't going away anytime soon.

I’m not arguing the validity of the action. I’m arguing the nonsensicality. Sure, the Mexican students were violent in the past, so no American flags allowed. But again, where does it stop? Will the military one day not be allowed to wear the uniform because it makes people feel uncomfortable? A stretch? That’s what everyone would have said a few decades ago about legal same-sex marriages.

Maybe the crosses aren't being officially removed yet, but that isn't stopping people from complaining about the public display of Christianity that they are.

Don't worry, Christianity isn't going away in the US anytime soon.

I’m not worrying. Once again, this is not about Christianity. Sure, that’s how the conversation started, but it’s not the underlying issue I was trying to foster discussion regarding. I’m not looking for sympathy; I’m looking for common sense discussion related to censorship.

Don't be so puerile, While the literal translation may be 'God' pretty much everyone in this country knows that the term Allah is particular to Arabs/Muslims.

Using the name Allah, if you’re not Arab/Muslim, is not an insult (pending usage).

I respect your viewpoint and I realize you have much more life/work/military experience than me; however, I’d ask you refrain from making your arguments personal attacks. This is a discussion. Let’s keep it at that. I may only be 24, but my arguments aren’t childish.

 

[Spekkio]

I’m not arguing the validity of the action. I’m arguing the nonsensicality. Sure, the Mexican students were violent in the past, so no American flags allowed. But again, where does it stop?

I was 16 once, too. Can you tell me with 100% certainty that these students didn't wear shirts with American flags in order to just get a rise out of Latino students? And in order to stop a potential fight, the school made them cut out their antics? And then in order to avoid 'losing,' the students cried free speech to the media who got a juicy headline for a school in Commiefornia being anti-American? Because if I had to take a bet on the situation, I'd bet that's what actually happened.

Pro-tip: It's actually against flag code and disrespectful to even wear an image of the U.S. flag, with the exception of a lapel pin and an arm patch. So the school would be correct to ban such attire every day of the year.

If by “open” you mean would I complain? Absolutely not. I may not agree with it, but I wouldn’t complain just because I can see it walking to my room after class. I’m not so easily offended that someone saying they believe something is going to affect me to the point of reporting the act. If on the other hand I was required to take a course on the Quranor Dianetics, I may object. But in all likelihood, I’d personally let someone else. Why? Because while I don’t feel I should be required to learn those things, it’s not going to hurt me. If anything, it’ll further educate me to differing views – a knowledge base I should have as an aspiring leader.

You're not getting it. If you were a non-Christian religion, and you had Christianity shoved in your face at every turn at an institution that is supposed to be religiously neutral like a military academy, you'd probably get sick of it. Maybe you wouldn't be sick of it enough to bother complaining, but you wouldn't like sitting in classrooms where your professors openly refer to God, you wouldn't like walking through hallways with scriptures of the Bible being posted all over the place, and you might -- just might -- feel a little uncomfortable posting whatever religious phrase you want on your door for fear of not being accepted by all of your fellow Christian cadets. Some people might not complain, but instead they might be uncomfortable enough to drop out of the school. Does the USAF want to lose potential officers because their image of the AF was an organization that posts Bible scripture all over the place? No.

 

[jander12]

I was 16 once, too. Can you tell me with 100% certainty that these students didn't wear shirts with American flags in order to just get a rise out of Latino students? And in order to stop a potential fight, the school made them cut out their antics? Because if I had to take a bet on the situation, I'd bet that's what actually happened.

No I can’t tell you with 100% certainty and have never claimed the contrary.

Pro-tip: It's actually against flag code and disrespectful to even wear an image of the U.S. flag, with the exception of a lapel pin. So the school would be correct to ban such attire every day of the year.

Agreed. If the story is getting national attention, then they should explain their actions instead of letting childish people like me believe everything Fox News dictates.

You're not getting it. If you were a non-Christian religion, and you had Christianity shoved in your face at every turn at an institution that is supposed to be religiously neutral like a military academy, you'd probably get sick of it. Maybe you wouldn't be sick of it enough to bother complaining, but you wouldn't like sitting in classrooms where your professors openly refer to God, you wouldn't like walking through hallways with scriptures of the Bible being posted all over the place, and you might -- just might -- feel a little uncomfortable posting whatever religious phrase you want on your door for fear of not being accepted by all of your fellow Christian cadets. Some people might not complain, but instead they might be uncomfortable enough to drop out of the school. Does the USAF want to lose potential officers because their image of the AF was an organization that posts Bible scripture all over the place? No.

I am getting it. If the above happened, I would get sick of it, I may think twice about attending such an institution, I may drop out. But this isn’t what’s happening today. Military Academies do not push specific religions.

 

[Flash]

.....the Mexican students were violent in the past, so no American flags allowed.

The school has an interest in keeping order, and in the case of schools they can limit free speech to do so. According to Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Comm. School Dist schools can restrict free speech if the speech "materially and substantially interfere with the requirements of appropriate discipline in the operation of the school".

Maybe the crosses aren't being officially removed yet, but that isn't stopping people from complaining about the public display of Christianity that they are.

I complain about stupid people all the time and yet they still exist and haven't been banned. Your point?

I’m not worrying. Once again, this is not about Christianity. Sure, that’s how the conversation started, but it’s not the underlying issue I was trying to foster discussion regarding. I’m not looking for sympathy; I’m looking for common sense discussion related to censorship.

Welcome to the military, where censorship exists and is legal in many cases. Get used to it.

Using the name Allah, if you’re not Arab/Muslim, is not an insult (pending usage).

Using Allah and not God in the context used was an obvious and blatant reference to Muslims, who else uses that term to refer to God? Jews? Bhuddists? Southern Baptists? The only reason to use that term here is to refer to Muslims, period.

I respect your viewpoint and I realize you have much more life/work/military experience than me; however, I’d ask you refrain from making your arguments personal attacks. This is a discussion. Let’s keep it at that. I may only be 24, but my arguments aren’t childish.

I am not personally attacking you, I am calling your arguement as I see it.

 

[Spekkio]

No I can’t tell you with 100% certainty and have never claimed the contrary.

No, you argued that the school's action was 'nonsensical.' I simply posted two scenarios in which the school district's actions were very sensible 1 - to keep order among students and 2 - because schools, as government run institutions, ought to follow the flag code. In order for you to believe that the school acted nonsensically, you must believe any scenario where the school acted sensibly is false.

In other words, you shouldn't be using this example to support a 'nonsensical' restriction on speech unless you know with 100% certainty that it was actually 'nonsensical.'

Agreed. If the story is getting national attention, then they should explain their actions instead of letting childish people like me believe everything Fox News dictates.

Court records are public documents. They explain themselves. Quite frankly, that school district works for and answers to its district, not people elsewhere in California and certainly not anyone in another state. They don't owe you an explanation for anything.

Also, what makes you think that if the school publishes a statement, cable news stations won't have a pundit read it, give his obnoxious opinion about it, then call two guests on his show to argue about it for 10 minutes? You really think that's going to convince anyone who refuses to look further into a story than a headline, including you apparently, that the school acted sensibly? The only thing people will hear is "blah blah blah BAN AMERICAN FLAGS blah blah blah BAN AMERICAN FLAGS blah blah blah SCHOOL DOESN'T SUPPORT FREEDOM OF SPEECH!"

That is why, if you ever do commission, you never ever ever talk to the media without consulting a PAO first.

I am getting it. If the above happened, I would get sick of it, I may think twice about attending such an institution, I may drop out. But this isn’t what’s happening today. Military Academies do not push specific religions.

How do you know? Did you attend one? Did you read a poll of non-Christian military academy graduates who said they felt their institution was religiously neutral?