Quote Originally Posted by SuperMillionaire View Post
Quote Originally Posted by TrollHunter View Post
Quote Originally Posted by Sephex View Post
Quote Originally Posted by SuperMillionaire View Post
There is nothing offensive about seeing religious t-shirts (at least in most cases), or bare feet (also at least in most cases, which vary from culture to culture), but there IS something offensive about drugs (unless it says "no drugs allowed," but some would rather do away with drug references altogether). In terms of bare feet, in this culture, we're not offended by it in itself, but there are "no shirt, no shoes, no service" ordinances put up everywhere; the "no shoes" part is presumably for sanitary reasons.
Well, my flip flops example was to illustrate that enforcing an overbearing rule over something that could be perceived differently, in a specific or quirky manner, by others is silly.

Get out of under the bridge. OUT!!!
Precisely this. You may not find religious shirts offensive, I may not find shirts with vulgar language offensive. Some may find these things offensive, but people can be offended by anything. People perceive things differently and as such we cant just ban everything that may offend someone. It's already difficult enough restricting the obvious offensive things, I really dont see tshirts being big priority.
This also isnt to say that I really care about the banning of vulgar tshirts in that area as those shirts are usually stupid and tasteless anyway, but I just find the banning of them silly and unnecessary.
True, and that was, in fact, part of the debate that took place in Orange Beach after the mayor brought the topic up to them. The thing is, shirts with vulgar language should be for adults only.

Now, in most cases, stores and businesses will still allow people wearing these shirts to go in. However, in a select few cases, presumably if the place one is going to is meant to be "family friendly," then they would probably turn people away for wearing such shirts.
Then it's the rights of the business owner to allow or disallow whatever they want in their business, which is fine. But a city/state-wide ordinance that you can't wear or buy a certain type of trout?

The problem with the "I have the freedom to not be offended" argument is a dangerous one. For you, it might just be that you don't want to look at a t-shirt you don't like. But where does it stop? At what point is the rights of freedom of speech more important than the rights of someone to not be offended?

That's why we have the freedom of speech in the first place. I'm sorry you don't like shirts with stupid things on them. I think they're stupid too. But if I don't like looking at them, I won't. Simple as.