Aspies For Freedom

Ugh.

But I've also got to laugh that they've apostrophised "***'s" incorrectly.

The dominant culture in Utah, which, if not Mormon, is informed by Mormonism, tends to emphasize a pathological, disgusting sort of conformity.

Wait, they can't remove it because it's not strictly a hate crime by law?

If I put a sign "Warning, *** in area" or "Warning, fags in area" [sic, I don't agree with either of those names, it's to raise the point] it'd be down in a flash and I'd probably be sued. "***" is just an abusive name for Autistics as "fag" is to gay.

Not to derail the thread, but yeah, our founding fathers thought it was really important that they could do that.

What term is universally offensive? If I put up a sign "Warning Negroes in the Area" it could be considered a statement of a fact. It is not a universally offensive term as several civil rights organizations still use it.
http://www.uncf.org/

I love when people make fun of other people's intelligence, but spell words wrong on their signs. (I will read the rest of the article and thread now).

I was always under the impression that the word '***' could be used correctly and be a statement of fact, but the word '***' was slang and offensive. You could factually say the boy 'is ***', but to call him 'a ***' is close enough to universally offensive in my mind. But, I don't know what kind of crazy things people accept in other parts of the world.

It's obviously a hate-crime. Disabled people just don't matter when it comes to this sort of thing.

--the apostrophe could be right if they mean "*** is", but I don't think that's what they mean, and so their error is funny to me.

Probably just too stupid.  I would be willing to bet money they have a fully-functional lock, maybe even a deadbolt, but think "It''s not the right area for a locked door.  Wouldn't want to stand out!"

We lock our door every night in this house and we don't even have burglars in the area.  

It's not a difficult concept to grasp--if you don't want people in your house, don't ALLOW THEM to come inside.  

But if you can exploit the situation to impress your friends with all the offensive terms you know, by all means.

I can see that, although to me the mere sound sequence has become offensive.  

Although I also think it would be considered at least rude to say somebody was "***."  One step above calling them "a ***."  References to mental retardation are different, clinical, but drop the word "mental" and you're at about the same level as a bunch of drunken college kids.  

Indeed

You would almost never see a complete sentence on a sign, no matter how simple.  

They probably put apostrophes before every final /s/ they see.

It's like coming up to the kid's lawn and burning a cross.  The ACLU would NOT defend that, nor should it.  

This amounts to incitement, it is not covered under free speech.  You have the right to express an opinion, you do NOT have the right to pick fights with people.

Oh, I agree with you. What I meant was in reply to Gareth's comment that they could possibly defend the sign as a statement of fact. I meant that '***' is not a fact, but '***' could be, even if I don't like it.

I apologize if that was clear, and I'm explaining things unnecessarily.

I'm pretty sure that cross-burning is de-facto illegal.  

Again, this is not "speech," it is incitement.  Fighting words.  They are banned as a means to keep order.  Agreeing or disagreeing has nothing to do with it.  

It is not fascism to demand that people don't incite eachother to violence.

Y'know, while this personally offends me, I'd rather see them permitted to keep the sign up.  I'd be just as offended by "Warning: Gook half-breeds in area".  Racist, probably directed against me, but I'd rather see that sign than live in a police state.

If it goes beyond just a sign, then law enforcement should intervene, but we do not have the right to not be offended.  "Hate crime" ought to be eliminated from our legal categories, altogether.  If assault occurs, punish it with extreme severity, regardless of whether or not it is a "hate crime".  If vandalism occurs, punish it with extreme severity, regardless of whether or not it is a "hate crime".  Don't reserve extra punishment for "hate crime".  Just make all the punishments more severe.

The US did not become a police state when the supreme court voted that incitement and intimidation were not protected speech.  The autism speaks video offends me too, but I wouldn't suggest legal recourse because it has political and opinion value and is protected speech.

The sign has no politcal, artistic, or expressive value and is constructed deliberately to upset, offend, and intimidate.  It is not protected speech, nor should it be, because the type of speech it occupies leads to violence and oppression.  The only reason bigotry has begun to decrease in this country is because we no longer tolerate it like we used to.  I'm discriminated against enough as it is.  I already have to deal with the possibility that if I move away, I will not be able to get another job and will starve to death, because nobody wants to hire someone who's "socially ***."  If verbal assault and dehumanization is allowed to run rampant, we will then face the possibility of mass murder of people judged "subnormal" in terms of socialization or intellect.  

This seems to be an extremely difficult concept for most people. Freedom of speech is not the absolute right to say whatever you want whenever you want and damn the consequences.  

This sign is exactly the sort of thing that can start fights and blood feuds.  It results in violence.  It is a deliberate verbal and emotional attack on a person.  It has nothing to do with the expression of opinion or frustration.  It is an attack.  It is assault.  The right does not exist.  

I must emphasize: This is not protected speech under the first amendment.  

Nobody ever decided there was a right not to be offended.  But one should not have to fear for one's life because one was born a certain way.  Police state or not, I don't want to face the possibility of being knifed because I'm "just a ***."  I don't want my sister to face that possibility either, nor should my clients face that possibility.  

I refuse to sacrifice my life and the lives of others so some bigot doesn't feel like he's being stepped on.

It's terrible that someone would put up such a sign, but it says more about their lack of character than anything else.

Many people in Utah are fairly intolerant of anyone who is different (ie. not Mormon). There is a strong sense of conformity, not diversity,  in this state.

This is very disturbing... Goodness, I'm lucky I live in a somewhat isolated suburb where my brother's not seen as a "***" he's just seen as a normal kid, albeit a little eccentric. But then again, I am too, and I'm supposedly an NT :wink:

And on the subject of Mormons, all the ones I've met (and I live in an area where's there's quite a few) have been so accomdating and very nice. I guess there's a dark side to everything...