?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

One question. I'm just curious:

Poll #159063 Word Preference:

Most Offensive:

Amen
3(17.6%)
Shit
4(23.5%)
Fuck
5(29.4%)
God
1(5.9%)
Pagan
4(23.5%)

Comments

( 37 comments — Leave a comment )
datamoon
Jul. 21st, 2003 12:43 pm (UTC)
yea you know, i think the ppl that chose amen are just upset bc it reminds them of christianity. well, i don't really find the pagan religion offensive [well, not all of it at least] but i read Most Offensive and when i looked at the word pagan that's the word that made me feel funny so i chose that.
huh...subliminal
digitalgoth
Jul. 21st, 2003 12:47 pm (UTC)
Well, I appreciate the honesty. :) And no, I chose amen as the most offensive becuase it really does bother me much more than fuck, shit, pagan, etc.
datamoon
Jul. 21st, 2003 12:53 pm (UTC)
Re:
amen! awe shit! didn't mean to offend any fucken pagans
datamoon
Jul. 21st, 2003 12:54 pm (UTC)
god that was dumb
thejew
Jul. 21st, 2003 03:31 pm (UTC)
i think the word pagan has a more offensive overtone than any of the others. whether you are a worship of a multitude of gods or not, being called a pagan is usually not a friendly thing.

and dont worry about offending the pagans, its the mud people you need to worry about...
digitalgoth
Jul. 21st, 2003 03:36 pm (UTC)
Lol. I think I'd rather have the word Pagan shouted at me than the word "AMEN!"
thejew
Jul. 21st, 2003 04:10 pm (UTC)
you obviously arent down with the madness of a baptist church. punk + jesus = baptists.
digitalgoth
Jul. 21st, 2003 04:19 pm (UTC)
Yah well..
ROFL. Well, I suppose that's one way of looking at it... Though I think it's amusing how a simple 1 question post can provoke this kind of response from some people.. and some other people that I don't even know. :)

-X
datamoon
Jul. 21st, 2003 04:12 pm (UTC)
you know, i don't think that's why i felt that. but you're right and you brought up something i haven't really thought about
digitalgoth
Jul. 21st, 2003 04:20 pm (UTC)
Gotta love the polls.
It's always interesting how my polls make people think about things that they normally wouldn't have... especially when it's not even my post or poll that actually did it... it's someone's comment about my poll. :)

-X
datamoon
Jul. 21st, 2003 04:24 pm (UTC)
Re: Gotta love the polls.
and my posts make ppl resort to senseless silliness
digitalgoth
Jul. 21st, 2003 04:45 pm (UTC)
Re: Gotta love the polls.
They sure do. :P

Love ya still hon.

-X
tymeschizm
Jul. 21st, 2003 04:04 pm (UTC)
as one of the two votes for "fuck" i think i should explain myself.

i don't find any of the above words offensive. it's what you do with them. so i just voted for my favorite word on the list =p.

however, intellectualizing this choice, i can say it is easily the most offensive word on the list.

Pagan is close - but consider how many people take that name for their religious views already.

god is merely a concept, and the word is NOT synonymous with the christian god. amen is merely latin for "again."

shit could be pretty offensive, but most people would probably consider excrement fairly disgusting anyway, and merely use politer terms for it.

however, "fuck" can be taken in the context of sexuality. i don't like using it as a term for sex, because i think it degrades what is basically a really good thing to be doing. to make an explative out of that particular act reletivly offends me.
digitalgoth
Jul. 21st, 2003 04:44 pm (UTC)
I think I answered "amen" mostly because it's what bothers me the most when someone yells it at me.

Being called a "pagan" (which, mind you, is a christian word meaning 'any faith or belief system that is not strictly christian') doesn't bother me as it's the truth.

Someone yelling "fuck" at me doesn't really bother me as it is usually more than enough proof that they have a limited grasp on the english language, or a limited intelligence and can't think of something more imiginative to yell.

"Shit" has never bothered me. So what? it's shit. Everyone has some, and some people are full of it.

"God" comes in a close second to "amen". Someone yelling "god wants this..." or "god will never..." etc etc etc in my face usually gets on my bad side rather quickly. I take my beliefs very seriously and get very very irritated at someone who can't respect me enough to not try and press their religion on me.

"Amen", granted, being only latin for "again or another" or "Amen - Amon - The Egyptian god of life and reproduction, represented as a man with a ram's head." or "Middle English, from Old English, from Late Latin ãme˜n, from Greek, from Hebrew ãme˜n, certainly, verily, from ãman, to be firm. See ãme˜n in Semitic Roots.". etc etc etc
It still carries with it an unadulterated sense of Christianity and Catholocistic ways of thought. Those being things that I have detested all my life, for reasons that I'm not going into on here. Just say it that it's one of the things that will piss me off much much faster than almost anything else because it is just one more facet of christianity being pushed at people more than they ever wanted it. It's almost as disgraceful as the President saying "God bless America" in plain violation of the separation of Church and State that this country is supposed to have.

-X
wvwdarkladywvw
Jul. 21st, 2003 04:55 pm (UTC)
god
i agree, someone trying to use their religon against me will anger me a great deal.
A lot of times being hurt is the root reason of getting angry

wvwdarkladywvw
Jul. 21st, 2003 04:46 pm (UTC)
fuck is something that its most likely going to get a negitive responce out of me, i mean someone i cared about said fuck you i'd be down right vollatile.
amen is annoying, however someone calls me a pegan i'll laugh in their face becouse they dont know jack about me. then i'd prolly start spouting off random shit and threaten to curse them. well that is what i used to do in highschool. no wonder i couldnt get a date=P.
god is just kinda funny people who say jesus christ, or well christians and dont think of what they are saying.
if someone was to say, you shithead. its more degaratory then someone saying oh shit, but you'd prolly heard more people saying shit! normally when they get hurt, i guess there is also you little shit which is kinda both, depending on if someone is your friend or not.

kragen
Jul. 22nd, 2003 01:47 am (UTC)
none of these offend me
But how about these? They all make me a lot more upset than any of the words above.
  • nigger
  • inappropriate
  • free gift
  • overweight
digitalgoth
Jul. 22nd, 2003 02:12 am (UTC)
Re: none of these offend me
If none of them offend you, then the poll wasn't directed at you. :P

Your suggestions on offensive content/words will be taken into account for the next poll of offensive material that I do. :)

-X
tymeschizm
Jul. 22nd, 2003 02:51 am (UTC)
Re: none of these offend me
also remember:

Fag, slut, whore..

all of which are more offensive to me than the words on the poll.
digitalgoth
Jul. 22nd, 2003 03:00 am (UTC)
Re: none of these offend me
Yay! How many questions should be on the next poll, and what type of questions do you guys actually want to see the answers to?
mikela
Jul. 22nd, 2003 04:06 am (UTC)
For the record, none of the words offend me. The use of words is what makes them offensive. Taken out of context, they are without meaning (not without definition, but without meaning - big difference) and therefore harmless.
lostsoulslament
Jul. 22nd, 2003 04:05 pm (UTC)
Maybe the idea behind this poll should be explained...See, Rumour and I were having a discussion about Christians and were theoroizing that if we all began using "Amen" in place of "Fuck", then in 30 years or so "Amen" would be considered a bad word.
digitalgoth
Jul. 22nd, 2003 04:53 pm (UTC)
Apparently, however, we aren't the only 2 people that already take offense when someone screams AMEN! in your face. Thank you for your support. :)

-X
kayamackan
Jul. 24th, 2003 03:10 pm (UTC)
no offense
No offense honey but I have a question...why do ppl take so much offense over other people's beliefs, views, or lifestyle? I mean Im Christian and I could easily take that mindset and say that these posts offend me, but lets face it they dont. Yes they bother me because its slightly unsettling to hear people use your belief system for negative amusement, especially people you call friends...however, most people who take such strong offense to anything have a fear of something. At least that is something we are taught in our Psych classes but hey people can be wrong! But please tell me why people on both sides take offense to it?
digitalgoth
Jul. 24th, 2003 04:51 pm (UTC)
Re: no offense
Oh come on... Give me a hard question next time:

People get incensed about lots of things, for a variety of different reasons. Taking offense over other people's beliefs, views, or lifestyle is one of the most prolific things on the face of this planet. I can name numerous examples, ranging from even the early days of history in the form of the Crusades, on through the days of slavery and the settlement of africa by europeans, and on from there to the settling of Austrailia by criminals, etc etc etc. If you're looking for a more recent or local example, I can go with this: I have a very strong sense of self that carries with it an equally strong moral base and belief base. When someone else decides that it is their "god given right" to infringe on both my sense of self and my beliefs by telling me that I'm an amoral person because I don't follow the Bible... Well, I'm sure you can see how that would be offensive. You aren't one of the propagandists that try and shove your religion down everyone else's throat like
[Error: Irreparable invalid markup ('<lj-user="amenlover">') in entry. Owner must fix manually. Raw contents below.]

Oh come on... Give me a hard question next time:

People get incensed about lots of things, for a variety of different reasons. Taking offense over other people's beliefs, views, or lifestyle is one of the most prolific things on the face of this planet. I can name numerous examples, ranging from even the early days of history in the form of the Crusades, on through the days of slavery and the settlement of africa by europeans, and on from there to the settling of Austrailia by criminals, etc etc etc. If you're looking for a more recent or local example, I can go with this: I have a very strong sense of self that carries with it an equally strong moral base and belief base. When someone else decides that it is their "god given right" to infringe on both my sense of self and my beliefs by telling me that I'm an amoral person because I don't follow the Bible... Well, I'm sure you can see how that would be offensive. You aren't one of the propagandists that try and shove your religion down everyone else's throat like <lj-user="amenlover">. It's unfortunate for christians and catholics that so many people of their faith seem intent on pressing the religion on to others. Christianity is, in essense a good thing, and I would never say otherwise. People need something to believe in, and christianity is as good a thing to believe in as anything else. The problem is that with so many christians and catholics, and baptists, etc pushing the religion down other people's throats, people like me become very very agitated and shy away from even the nicest and kindest attempts at conversion
Most christians, catholics, baptists, etc, in this country seem to forget that my right to freedom of religion is a protected right. Freedom of religion means that I can actively practice any faith I choose, including the lack of faith and no one has the right to tell me otherwise. Freedom of religion does <b>not</b> mean that they are free to attempt to spread christianity wherever they can, especially to unsaved heathens such as myself, and then curse me when I decline the chance at redemption. That's what I find so offensive. I find it offensive that 60%+ of this nation seems to think that I need saving. I find it even more offensive that fewer than 5% of those people have even the slightest idea what my belief system is, or even care. All that seems to matter is that I have not found jesus, and therefore am in danger of eternal damnation.
You know what? I've heard it all. It's been yelled at me more times than I can count. To those of you out there that think that just because you are christian and the bible tells you to go forth and spread the word of god: That doesn't give you the right to even attempt to get me to see your god without first finding out if I'm interested, or even if it's a topic of conversation that I care to persue.

My best friend was a heartily devout christian for all 11 years that we were friends. We decided about 6 months into our friendship when I was about 11 years old, that we simply wouldn't talk about religion. And we spent 10 years being the best of friends and not talking about religion.

I do -not- have to believe in your god, gods, book, scriptures, verses, texts, angels, demons, saints, jesus, church, priest, pastor, virgin, or anything else for me to talk to you as a human being. And unless someone else brings it up, religion isn't something that I actively persue as a topic of conversation becuase of the simple fact that most people are too close-minded to even bother finding out what the 'infidel heathens' actually believe in, and whether or not it really is Devil Worship.

Jesus tought respect for your fellow human. He taught acceptance. Neither of those have I -ever- received, in any form from -any- Christian about my faith or set of beliefs.

You hypocrites. I am more christian than most of you.


-X
tymeschizm
Jul. 24th, 2003 06:58 pm (UTC)
Re: no offense
in high school, when i openly wore my pentagram to school, i recived more acceptance and faith from the mormons and the jehova's witnesses than i did from catholics, baptists, and prodestents.

i'm just pointing this out, because the two that i recived acceptance from were the ones that the rest of christianity seems to have thrown out.

acceptance and understanding are not actions that the christian church seems to view as a part of their religion. think i'm wrong? mother teresa wouldn't support birth control programs in calcutta, even though they would do SO much to alleviate the suffereing of humanity, just because birth control isn't the christian way. it's sorta-relavent, but the point is this - most christians cannot accept anything other than THE WAY tm, because they belive there is only one.

i live my life according to rules about my interactions with other people that are much more strict than most "christians" i've ever met. just because they don't fit the christian ideal, does NOT mean that i am amoral or unethical. totaly the opposite, in fact. i belive in the bill of rights, live by it, and defend the rights of others to live by it. i am a member of the ACLU. even if i don't like what they have to say, i let them say it.

i also stand by my earlier statement that i don't find any of the words above offensive... freedom of speech and all that jazz...
kragen
Jul. 24th, 2003 07:28 pm (UTC)
Re: no offense

This is kind of long and a little confrontational, but I trust that you will take the time to read it carefully and think about it, because while I disagree with most of the things you said, I know you think about these things carefully and feel them deeply, and I might have something to say you haven't heard.

The episode with the money-changers is more than just "acceptance"; the criticism of those who pray publicly is more than just "respect".

You may think freedom of speech and religion doesn't extend to the freedom to evangelize to you, but the US courts disagree with you.

The courts have held that freedom of speech means everybody has the right to tell you anything they want, including that you are wrong, even if you don't want to hear it; and that freedom of religion does indeed mean freedom to evangelize.

See e.g. US vs. Eichman, 496 US 310, 1990 --- "While flag desecration - like virulent ethnic and religious epithets, vulgar repudiations of the draft, and scurrilous caricatures - is deeply offensive to many, the Government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable. Pp. 313-319." See also HUSTLER MAGAZINE v. FALWELL, 485 U.S. 46 (1988), in which the Supreme court held that even very offensive speech was protected by the First Amendment:

Generally speaking the law does not regard the intent to inflict emotional distress as one which should receive much solicitude, and it is quite understandable that most if not all jurisdictions have chosen to make it civilly culpable where the conduct in question is sufficiently "outrageous." But in the world of debate about public affairs, many things done with motives that are less than admirable are protected by the First Amendment. In Garrison v. Louisiana, 379 U.S. 64 (1964), we held that even when a speaker or writer is motivated by hatred or ill will his expression was protected by the First Amendment:

"Debate on public issues will not be uninhibited if the speaker must run the risk that it will be proved in court that he spoke out of hatred; even if he did speak out of hatred, utterances honestly believed contribute to the free interchange of ideas and the ascertainment of truth." Id., at 73.

I think there are also some cases in which begging for money was held to be protected speech. I think that's probably the most similar caselaw; but I can't remember any of the cases specifically. That's very closely analogous to evangelism --- begging is bringing up the subject of giving you money with a lot of people who don't want to talk about it in order to find one or two who are willing to give you a bit.

Anyway, you certainly have the right to disagree with the Supreme Court about what other people's freedoms mean, but you should at least read what they have to say on the subject and consider the consequences that would ensue if they were to accept your interpretations.

digitalgoth
Jul. 24th, 2003 07:38 pm (UTC)
Re: no offense
I appreciate your comments, however:

Begging is not similar to evangelism in one very specific respect. Me being allowed to keep my money is not a right protected by the constitution like me being allowed to keep my religion is.

I am not disagreeing with the Supreme Court on what other people's freedoms mean, I'm simply saying that one of my freedoms, that of religion, is not as protected as it should be.

It basically comes down to the simple fact that while even aggressive or offensive speech is protected by the first amendment, that protection does not go so far as to protect that speach that otherwise is prohibited. Things such as saying:
"I'm going to assisinate <insert name here." "Sorry officer, I can't do that, you're an idiot." "No Judge, I won't serve jury duty." All of these things you can say all you want, but they all have some sort of punishment attached if you do. I think that someone saying: "You are damned to go to hell and burn for eternity because you are an unsaved heathen." should have a similar punishment simply because it violates my freedom of religion. -X
kragen
Jul. 24th, 2003 08:02 pm (UTC)
Re: no offense

I think the court would agree with you if some Christian forced you to believe that you were damned to hell, but they can't. Our system of government protects your right to hold your own opinion, not to be insulated from other people's opinions. To me, it seems that someone saying, "You are damned to hell because you haven't accepted Jesus," is a lot like saying, "Your marriage will fail because you treat your wife badly." (Or, "Your relationship with your brother will suck because you aren't sensitive to his feelings." Or even, "Your life is going to suck because you're an oldest child.") I might disagree with these statements; I might be offended by them; I might learn something from them; or they might not affect me at all. Our system of law protects your right to make any and all of these statements to me, and I'm glad it does.

FWIW, all three of the statements you propose as exceptions to the First Amendment are, in fact, legal. You might be required by law to serve jury duty or obey a policeman, but the law doesn't require you to promise to serve jury duty or obey a policeman (or even refrain from insulting his intelligence); and, unless the assassination statement actually constitutes a threat --- meaning that you plan to carry it out --- you're protected. I wouldn't advise trying any of them out, though, because proving that you weren't engaging in prohibited conduct would probably take a lot of time and effort, and probably a fair bit of jail time before you got to trial.

Oh, and the fourth, fifth, and eighth amendments to the constitution protect your right to keep your money.

kragen
Jul. 24th, 2003 08:13 pm (UTC)
Re: no offense
Oh, see Chaplinsky v. NH, 315 U.S. 568 (1942), in which a Jehovah's Witness was convicted (and his conviction upheld by the Supreme Court) for calling a policeman a "damn Fascist" and a "damn racketeer" --- although not for distributing literature inveighing against other faiths.
digitalgoth
Jul. 24th, 2003 08:25 pm (UTC)
Re: no offense
And you should note the law that he was convicted of breaking:
'No person shall address any offensive, derisive or annoying word to any other person who is lawfully in any street or other public place, nor call him by any offensive or derisive name, nor make any noise or exclamation in his presence and hearing with intent to deride, offend or annoy him, or to prevent him from pursuing his lawful business or occupation.'

Last I checked, telling someone that they were "dammned to hell as a heathen" would be defined as offensive, and calling them a derisive name. Yet you'd be -real- hard pressed to get a case won on those grounds.

-X
digitalgoth
Jul. 24th, 2003 08:18 pm (UTC)
Re: no offense
For note: The act of saying "No officer, I won't do that, you're an idiot" is in fact, a crime in most states. It is considered verbal assault of an officer an is punishible with a jail sentence in most cases. If you were to rephrase it as "No officer, I won't do that because I think you're an idiot." the words themselves will not get you in trouble.

I would consider someone screaming at me: "You're damned to burn in hell for approving of abortion!" over and over a plain violation of the same law. It's verbal assault and should be punishible under the same laws, but due to the fact that the evangelist is talking about religous issues, his words, despite the verbal assault, are protected by the very thing that is being violated in me.

Saying the words: "I'm going to assisinate the President." Is a punishible crime. It amounts to treason, last I checked. I haven't looked up the laws on it recently, but with all the "Homeland Security", I'd imagine that things are even more strict now.

Keep in mind also, I would be as willing to say that I'm going to assisinate the president just as much as I would be willing to say that I don't think he should be christian... Which is to say that I'm not likely to ever say either one of them.

-X
kayamackan
Jul. 24th, 2003 09:28 pm (UTC)
Re: no offense
you arent being forced to give up your religion perhaps that is where you may have the problem.

I have the right to ask you if you want a beer, I may even have a right to keep begging...its all good, but if you dont want that beer then you dont have to take it. Just a lame example
digitalgoth
Jul. 24th, 2003 09:31 pm (UTC)
Re: no offense
The example of beer is a false analogy becuse me staying sober is also not a right that's protected by the constitution like my freedom of religion is.

-X
avatarofblood
Jul. 24th, 2003 10:03 pm (UTC)
Re: no offense
I was raised in a Jehovah's witness family, my mother taught me to respect people and accept them for what they are inside, but she also said don't talk to fags and jesus hates you if your gay. ya..that helps my views on life...thanks mother. I eventually came to the conclusion that no single religion can confine my own belief structure. These religions are mearly a guideline to forming an idea that you can make your own.

I finally realized that trying to discuss such matters as religion with people will only make enemys. It's too touchy a subject for most, and while they are all hypocrites it's just best to ignore them...they'll all pay when I rain my doom time apon them! MAWHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA.
mikela
Jul. 24th, 2003 08:09 pm (UTC)
Jesus tought respect for your fellow human. He taught acceptance. Neither of those have I -ever- received, in any form from -any- Christian about my faith or set of beliefs
Not true, not true. I know of one Christian who has complete respect for your right to have any or no faith/beliefs and accepts your belief system (whatever it is - I think you've told me some of it at some point, but my memory is nil) right along with the rest of you.
I would very much like to hear your views. Email me?
digitalgoth
Jul. 24th, 2003 08:20 pm (UTC)
Well, you've just proven me wrong on that one. :P

I guess I should restate it to say that I've rarely, if ever got full respect for my relgious beliefs or religious privacy from a christian of any denomination.

-X
( 37 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

November 2008
S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30