I believe in battling censorship in music, tv, and some movies. Do you? Like in the case of the movie "Brokeback Mountain" on the commercials it NEVER shows any homosexual love scenes but it does show a Hetero love scene. Censorship of sexuality? YES!

I don't care much. If someone wants, they can get an uncensored version of much everything. I believe some things need to be censored anyways... for instance, children shouldn't see sex in a movie.

I'd rather kids saw two consenting adults making love than see two consenting adults blowing each other's heads off.

Well im not saying that PORN movies need to be uncensored thats just wrong i mean like censoring bands because they have something to say against bush or when a movie shows a homosexual scene and violence is really bad! i DO NOT PROMOTE VIOLENCE.

Me too. But it should be the parents' responsibility what their children see. There are already parental control systems for TV to block programs based on the TV parental guidelines.

One more thing.... When the film association or WHOEVER censors movie with homosexual scenes it just shows kids that its "wrong" to be gay/lesbian or bi. I don't believe in gay people being "wrong" as church groups and the government puts it

What does Bush have to do with censorship...? Nobody politically censors stuff in songs. I mean, the record companies would never agree. At least, not that I have heard of. Of course, if that is done, it is wrong.

And a homosexual scene is just as bad as a sexual one... I think violence is much better than sex. Sex just gets the kids all over talking about it and then they end up getting pregnant, etc. Violence on TV and games barely ever does anything, except in some rare cases contributes to actual violence.

They censor the words "fag" and "faggot" in music because it hints at homosexuality! and i said the "GOVERNMENT" not just bush they have seperate cabinets for stuff like this!

AND sex in movies should not convince a kid to have sex! its their choice. and ultimately movies should NOT influence stuff like that!

But unfortunately, it does.

well in some instances it does, but just because i see someone shooting someone in a video game or a movie doesn't mean i SHOuld pick up a revolver or something and shoot someone! Im just saying there is uneeded censorship (like editing the word fag out in a song) and needed censorship (porn movies EWWWWWWWWW sick and wrong!)

Due to the fact that I know the violence is not real, I would not care if I saw either. As long as it wasn't gay/lesbian/bi sex.



Bands should be censored. Not to the point where they cannot speak out against something though.



It is wrong to be gay/lesbian/bi. Our bodies were made to be heterosexual. Not all churchs believe it is wrong and not all of the government beleives it is wrong. Where are you getting your facts?



They should censor those words, who wants to listen to stuff like that? It has no place in music, and those who are actually talented in music know that it doesn't.

It's not a question of any person's preference, it's a question of which act does more harm. Sex, very little if any harm in a consensual relationship. Violence, plenty of damage.
Why should they be censored at all? Music has very deep meanings for those who write and preform it (regular ones at least). Who are you to judge what is an acceptable phrase to express a thought?
That depends on your definition of "wrong." Biologically, yes. Morally, no.

Again, who are you to judge what an acceptable phrase is to express a thought? Words of all colors are equally valid in any work of literary or musical art. To supress an artists ability to express his/her thoughts in the best way possible does nothing to enhance music in any way.

Ok. Let's have an example. I may be warned for this, but I do not care. Let's say Green Day puts out an album with nothing but profanity in it:

F--- the world and f--- everyone. This place is a s---hole anyway. Go f--- yourself.

Now how is that a song? What thoughts does that convey? Would you want to listen to a song with profnaity as every other word? And I mean every other word. Literally.

You still dont get it. You're right, that wouldnt make a very good song, BUT, not because of the abuse of profanity, but because of the lack of emotion behind the words. System of a Down is a great example of a band that uses profanity in such a way that it convey's very deep feelings. I just plain cant stand to listen to a censored version of any of their albums. It loses it's meaning without each and every syllable.

It isn't about using profanity for the sake of using profanity. It's about using profanity in conjunction with the rest of the language (as it should be, because it is just language) to convey a thought.

So tell me the name of a song by them where they use profanity to convey meaning.

F*** the System is a pretty good one. I-E-A-I-A-I-O, Mr. Jack, Prison Song, BYOB, Violent Pornography, Kill Rock n Roll, Vicinity of Obscenity (not really profanity, but suggestive themes), She's Like Heroin... I'm not very familiar with their self titled album, but I'm sure theres more there, and I'm sure any die-hard SOAD fans can throw in anything I've missed.

Lol, I like Kill Rock 'n Roll. Did you know that it was supposedly written about a rabbit that the writer accidentally killed?


-----Edit-----

Oh yeah, and if someone likes profanity in their songs, can you really say that's wrong and stop him/her from listening to it? That can only be done under the assumption that your way is the only right way, and nobody can ever be sure of that.

lol, that's interesting.

The other day they played the song on the radio, and I was singing along, and it caught be completly off-guard when the a-word was silenced. I couldnt figure out what had happened!

I think they sensor those because they are derogatory terms, not because they have to do with homosexuality. Calling someone a faggot is an insult, not a neutral term having to do with homosexuality. It might be a insult regarding homosexuality, but that doesn't matter. They are just looking to filter the insultive lyrics.

The song played by anyone else would completely lose its meaning... hehe. It'd be pretty funny to hear a censored version of that... all you could understand would be the nonsense part, which you can't understand anyways

But yah, I agree with HerLoss. Swear words are words just the same, just insultive. They can convey an intelligent meaning just as much as any other words can.

LOOK HERE!!!!!!!! now that i have your attention pay close attention to what im saying. ANTI-FLAG (A POLITICAL PUNK BAND) IS NOT SOLD IN MEIJER STORES, YOU KNOW WHY? BECAUSE THEY DO NOT LIKE BUSH AND SPEAK OUT AGAINST HIM. NOW TARGET STORES ON THE OTHER HAND CARRIES ANTI-FLAG CDS!!!!! AND MEIJER DOES NOT SELL GREEN DAY AMERICAN IDIOT EITHER BECAUSE OF THE POLITCAL CONTENT!!!!! IS MY POINT CLEAR ON WHAT I MEAN BY BATTLING CENSORSHIP IN MUSIC? AND ABOUT "FAG" OR "FAGGOT" THE WAY GREEN DAY USES THEM IS THAT SINCE THOSE ARE THE TOP INSULTS OF OUR NATION RIGHT NOW WHENEVER SOMEONE IS WRONG ITS USUALLY "UR A GAY FAGGOT" "FAGGOT". IF SONGS SAY SOMETHING LIKE: IM GONNA KICK THAT FAGGOTS *** THEN I DON'T SUPPORT UNCENSORING THAT!

You're really hard to understand why you make a post like that. Trying using correct grammar.

Anyways, Meijer's or whatever has the right to do whatever they want. They may be politically slanted, so that explains why they don't have those albums. Personally, it's their store, let them do what they want. You can boycott Meijer's or whatever, up to you.

As for faggot, it is primarily an insult. The filters block insults. That's why the word faggot is censored in songs like "American Idiot." That song has absolutely nothing to do with homosexuality.

DJBOB that is so sad that you have to insult my grammar skills, they are actually very developed, I was angry when I wrote that post. So now I am using correct grammar. Well there are many insults in rap songs that are overlooked.

Very developed, eh?
Mistake #1: Capitilized my name.
#2: Missing a comma after "sad." Best fix for sentence fluency would be to restructure sentence with one of the "that"s.
#3: Comma slice after "skills" (means you have to seperate into two sentences, as joining two with a comma is not allowed).
#4: Comma slice after "developed."

Yes, the system they use to know what to censor confuses me. But I doubt they are being easy on rap... middle-aged white people are probably the ones making the decisions.

Who do you think you are? An english teacher? Well sorry to inform you, but you are not. Most of the time you can hear the profanity in rap, it is uncensored because it would be to hard to catch. I'm so sick of the personal attacks about grammar. Oh, Mr. English Teacher, "eh?" is not a word it is a sound. One thing I am seriously sick of is people who think they know it all, just like you.

Not many people take you seriously if you type in all caps.

Is complaining about it on a small forum board really going to help your case? If you think so, then even though people are against you, why do you persist on trying to prove something? If you want to battle censorship, you can't do it online, since the higher-ups don't take net petitions and protests seriously, and if you want to win, you can't waste your time on a small board, with people that are against you. That's not efficiency.

Just a side note, why do people on this board put so much emphasis into sentence structure in the middle of an argument?

I was not "complaigning" as you put it I was asking for people's opinions, and I get attacked by djbob.

I don't know I think that djbob was just trying to attack me.

Thanks for double posting.

djbob wasn't attacking you. If anything, you attacked him.

To me, that sound alot like someone complaining.

So does that.

That isn't censorship, that is the store's right to sell what they want. I bet there are tons of things out there that don't sell in stores. Let's look at an example:

Does Wal-Mart sell pornography? Nope. Do they sell Green Day? Yes.

I think you need to read up on your facts before you barge in and start making false accusations. Do you have any facts to support what you are saying, because all I'm seeing is opinion here? Which is fine too. Opinions are good when they are meant to be given. This is a FACTUAL argument. Opinion can be given, but it cannot be used to argue with.

I agree with djbob on one thing, you may want to make your posts more understandable.

okay guitar freak my posts are very clear and legible. The ONLY reason meijier doesn't sell anti-flag (is my post readable for you?) is becauses they dislike bush. Got it, or do i need to repeat myself?

Well, actually, that's an interjection. Words that are meant to represent sounds ("buzz" for example) are called onomatopoeia.

We must be suffering from OCD or something.

And some good points have been raised. It's not really censorship if a certain store doesn't want to stock a certain album. You can still get any Anti-Flag album many other ways, and completely legally. You can easily get uncensored versions if you want.

Maybe. It's quite a possibilty.

Don't flatter yourself.

Well... most of the post are pretty easy to understand. But some..... I don't know.

Thank you serebi. I am no longer posting on this topic.

You still don't have any proof that they do not sell anti-flag because of that reason. You need proof.

Ummmm.....uhhhh.....huh? I think you need to repeat yourself, lol.



Why? Because you cannot support your statements with factual evidence? You had just made you posts understandable.

No Im just sick of being insulted.

Then stop insulting others.

Look, I only insulted him because he insulted me.

So....where is the insult in this post? It looks to me like you insulted him first. All he said was that you are hard to understand when you make a post like that. Which means, hey, could you make your post more understandable? And then he says "Try using correct grammar." This means hey, if you try using correct grammar, the post might make more sense.

I fail to see where you were insulted.

GF_22 is very ignorant. He doesn't believe he's insulted you in any form or fashion. If you took the time to learn that, then you would know. You, on the other hand, intentionally insulted him.

Who are you talking to?

No need to be sorry. English teacher doesn't sound like that exciting of a career.

I don't know it all, but I do believe I know quite a bit more than you.

Exactly! Look people, the only reason I complain about grammar so much is because if you have horrible grammar, nobody takes you seriously. If you go to a professional forum that is for the most part dominated by adults, all caps and stuff like that can easily get you in trouble. In fact, it should've got you in trouble over here, if not for a slight technicality in the spam rules (the post must all be in caps for it to break the rules).

I can almost always tell the age of someone just by paying attention to the grammar they use. And if not the age, the maturity. I don't mean to be insulting, but nobody will take you as an intelligent and respectable person if you don't even spell correctly! Comeon people, learn

As I said, I'm trying to get people sounding more mature and respectable so others take their words seriously.

Still, complaining about sentence structure in the middle of an argument detracts from the current argument and only ticks people off.

Bush is a redneck that likes to say [bleeped!] to a minister mmm.

That was almost funny.

almost but not quite.

There's so little to detract from such an argument, it's worth it. And the ticking people off... anywhere else, they would be ticking other people off.

0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000001% not funny.

Then it must be 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999% funny.