Friday, June 22, 2012

Quote of the Day


"This is not what lawyers and judges do. Lawyers and judges deal with the real world. They deal with murder and greed and rape; they deal with enhanced interrogation and brutality and gruesome wounds; they even deal with vaginas (unlike some legislators these days). It is their responsibility as professionals to deal in a mature and straightforward manner with all sorts of unpleasantness. A lawyer representing a person accused of child sexual assault cannot refuse to confront the allegations because they make him squeamish. Like a doctor treating a mutilated child, they have to deal with the world as it is. Especially in a First Amendment case, lawyers and judges have to be willing to say the words out loud, even if it makes them uncomfortable. To do otherwise is to deny the realities of the case before them. It is to put their own sensitivities above their obligations to their clients and to the law. It is, in short, unprofessional."

-- University of Chicago Law Professor Geoffrey R. Stone on the fact that in a ruling yesterday in the FCC v. Fox Television Stations obscenity case, the justices of the Supreme Court refused to write out the actual on-air profanity that had been at issue, instead resorting to "f***" and "s***"

Fucking stupid.

4 comments:

Drew said...

This reminds me of the newscaster that had the guts to directly read a quote that had "nigger" and didn't substitute it with "n-word".

That sort of substitution softens the impact of the word. Oh, and really, it's 2012...most people have either shit or fucked (except for Romney since he's a robot) at some point in their life (and those who haven't probably have no interest in the SCOTUS). So typing and or saying the word in its context should be no biggie.

Anonymous said...

Expecting professionalism out of anyone in the US government these days is a little naive.

kanye said...

There's actually a valid reason why they had to do this.

Many workplace computer networks employ filters that automatically block internet content based on potentially objectionable elements (pornography, language, etc...)

Amongst those employing these filter-safe options are law firms, governmental offices and academia. There was a very high level of probability that many of the professionals who would need to access this information, in fact wouldn't be allowed to do so if they let the language stand, unexpurgated.

At least that's what I told everyone at this other joint I post at every once in a while.

Truth is, I made it all up.

a said...

Kanye,

You had me fooled. Keep it up.