[lit-ideas] Re: Revisiting Judy's World
- From: wokshevs@xxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Robert Paul <rpaul@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:08:36 -0230
Quoting Robert Paul <rpaul@xxxxxxxx>:
> Walter wrote
>
> > Profanity is rarely to be condoned, and not in this case.
RP:
> The Villge Grammarian, while granting that 'profanity' is now used to
> describe any coarse or vulgar speech or writing, suggests that members
> of lit-ideas should be held to a higher standard and restrict their use
> of that term to speech or writing that profane sacred things, i.e.,
> words or expressions that 'express a disregard or contempt' for them,
> and are 'irreverent, blasphemous, and impious.'
>
> Thus, while 'God damn it,' is profane, 'Fuck you,' is not
>
> Mr. Geary, although strongly cautioned, is found not guilty. Professor
> Okshevsky is to pay court costs of one Canadian five-cent piece, on
> which a beaver is shown buggering a rock.
>
> Robert Paul
> The Reed Institute
WO:
Let it be known to all men (and some women) that I hereby inform RP that my
attorneys intend to appeal this verdict on grounds of illegitimate stipulative
definition and grievous linguistic coercion. My alleged and putative failure to
accord with "higher standards" is in fact but a principled and benign
commitment to a *different* standard. In a secular universe, such as the one I
and my tribe inhabit, "sacred" is a meaningless term having no cognitive
significance, denotative reference, or even intelligible connotation. Hence, my
de-divinized understanding of "profanity" is fully justified from the moral
point of view, and may even possess a certain degree of democratic legitimacy.
Let it also be known that both the Canadian Charter, the American
Constitution, and whatever it is that they have in Great Britain, secure my
rights to the pursuit of such semantic diversity and
serve to impugn all attempts by self-appointed officials of the Englisch
language to coerce conformity with an unwarranted stipulative definition that
transgresses my rights to 1) the enjoyment of a reasonable
conception of authenticity and the good life, 2) bear arms against a sea of
trobles and 3)not have to compete with illegal Mexicans for
positions of employment I would never seek in the first place.
Let it now, forthwith and hereby also be known that a counter-suit will be
launched, upon my advisory, by the Canadian Ministry of Cultural and Animal
Affairs inditing RP on charges of gross defamation of a cultural symbol of the
Canadian nation: the beaver. It will be alleged and proven beyond reasonable
doubt that RP's words constitute egregious hate speech directed at a species
protected by the Canadian Autobahn Society (roadkill notwithstanding).
Compensation and restitution will be determined at a future time subsequent to
the liquidation of RP's total final estate.
Let it not go unsaid that consequences of successful litigation against RP will
bear significantly upon Mr. Mike Geary's future financial, housing and sailing
freedoms.
Walter O.
Through representation by
Rabinowitz, Rabinowitz and McCarthy
Attorneys at Law and Morality
Red Bay, Labrador
Canada
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
>
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
