Thank you for reminding bloggers that if they can't express their thoughts without using offensive language, they are not welcomed at RK.

Lowell:  I'm conflicted - can you elaborate?  On NLS tonight, for example, I said I was "pissed" and used the word "damn." 

I guess you wouldn't be put out by that, but I can't be sure. 

Are there fewer or more than seven words which shouldn't be used?

Look, my point is you guys own the blog.  When someone steps out of line, delete the comment and be prepared to justify the deletion.

Don't go all Jack Valenti on us.

We're not going to go "all Jack Valenti," but we all can figure out when someone is using profanity to an excessive and unwarranted degree.  Like pornography, "you know it when you see it."

but if you're going to invoke the most notoriously circular and subjective test ever to come from the Supreme Court, I must retort:

"To many, the immediate consequence of (free speech) may often apear to be only verbal tumult, discord, and even offensive utterance.  These are, however ... in truth necessary side effects of the broader enduring values which the process of open debate permits us to achieve.  That the air may at times seem filled with verbal cacophony is, in this sense not a sign of weakness but of strength."

"[T]he principle contended for by 'the State' seems inherently boundless.  How is one to distinguish this from any other offensive word?  Surely 'the State' has no right to cleanse public debate to the point where it is grammatically palatable to the most squeamish among us.  Yet no readily ascertainable general principle exists for stopping short of that result..."

"... we cannot indulge the facile assumption that one can forbid particular words without also running a substantial risk of suppressing ideas in the process." 

Harlan, J., Cohen v. California 403 U.S. 15 (1971)

Now, I know what you're going to say - you aren't the government.  But the arguments apply here as well.  Not to mention the chilling effect. 

That said, rest assured, I never use language here that my grandmother wouldn't like. 

Sorry, I just can't resist a censorship debate.

anyone can feel comfortable reading.  Each blog sets its own rules - some much tougher than this one, some much looser.  I'm shooting for a middle, reasonable ground, and simply requesting that people make their points without profanity or ad hominem attacks.

JD, when you don't use foul language around your grandmother, is she censoring you? Do you give her a lecture about First Amendment rights?

Different environments expect differ behavior. When a restaurant won't let you it when you're wearing sweats, that's not a violation of your rights. Lowell is trying to set the expectations for this environment.

My grandma's house is not a forum for political discussion, as my parents have made VERY clear to me from a young age!  Thus, censorship there doesn't have the effect of quelling political discussion at one of the heretofor best progressive blogs.  And as I said, I realize that raisingkaine is not the government, and that therefore I have no constitutional claim - that wasn't the point.  I don't contest Lowell's right to do it - just the wisdom/necessity of the policy.

The point was that censorship, in any forum, has a chilling effect (such as now - I'm feeling slightly worried that I'm going to lose my raisingkaine privileges), that "profane" is an inextricably subjective and ambiguous concept, and that words are ideas - you can't censor one without the censoring other. 

I'm sorry to be the lone dissenter on everything as of late, but hope that my opinions at least promote interesting/intelligent discussions.

Lowell, just an academic question....does RK not post a blog that is very negative about a Democratic candidate?

Never been censored.  Of course, I am more positive on Edwards and Obama.  That's because they would make better Presidents and are friends of labor ;-)

RK is a pro-Democratic blog. What do you mean, "post a blog that is very negative about a Democratic candidate?"  Obviously, the community is free to post whatever it wants.  But generally speaking, the "front page" of RK is for promoting Democrats, not tearing them apart.  With regard to the Presidential primaries, we have mainly been staying out of them, in large part because we're focused on the Virginia elections this November.  After that, we'll see what people are thinking.  Personally, I'm still wondering if Al Gore will throw his hat in the ring.