You left? Hurr hurr durr!

:monster:

Okay. Maybe not so missed.

STM, you betrayed me (again)!

I betrayed you before? And I keed don't worry, it's very nice to have you back! In all your anti-sweariness.

Almost fell for it.

Next time.

I'm still generally anti-swear...I did include ONE swear word in the latest chapter of "Odd of War," which I have posted in the last few hours. Just to make Abe an extreme bad boy.

I'm curious as to what age you are seeing as you're anti-swear.

Age is no measure of wisdom, or tolerance. I believe that cussing is a fallen impulse of man, a desire to make pure things cursed through words. Ex: f-ing, s--t, b--ch. They all make things a curse.

I pride myself in having a huge amount of tolerance for trivial things.

They also happen to get a point across really quickly. They're effective like that, and you should use them where necessary.

There are ways to get points across without them that are MUCH less offensive. I've done it for years. You should try it sometime.

Like using capitals?

Who takes offence to swearing unless they're old men or Christians, or unless they are being sworn at?

I'm a Christian, and proud of it.

As for anti-swearing, that's why I take offense every time you post, due to your signature. It's nothing against you personally, it's your swearing habit. Not trying to poke you when I have my own flaws, but I believe this world would be a better place without swearing.

Ridg3: Exactly!

I wasn't talking about Christians specifically, and I have no problem with Christians. I just do not understand and never have understood why, unless a word is serving a malicious purpose, any kind of word, be it "love" or be it "cunt", should cause any offence without having some sort of a context in which it can be offensive.
Then you are a fool. It is a joke about a dog's name and a bad zoo, and, even though it does make reference to the fine word "shit", it is not presented in a context what any mentally healthy person could find offensive.

Thank you for being one of the few people on this forum who don't immediately start flinging swear words at me for being a Christian.

As for the word c--t, its own primary definition is "a vulgarism." That's strike one. For strike two, using words that compare a person to another person's private parts are (or at least ought to be) highly inappropriate and offensive to the person on the receiving end.

What's wrong with making reference to human anatomy, God's creation? You should embrace your Lord's creation.

And in fact, I said that a word cannot be offensive to any sane, secure person if it is not put in a malicious context.

It's a matter of propriety. If a word is used in the right context, it may be used. But words should not be used flippantly, such as calling someone a c--t.

Allow me to reiterate with an old iteration:
Do you understand the word "malicious"? Because this is vital.

Actually, my last post was entirely agreeing with you.

Wait a minute, I though that you thought that "vulgarisms" should never under any circumstances be used. I thought you said that a vulgarism being a vulgarism is "strike one".

Some words, like c--t, shouldn't be used at all. There are other, less vulgar, words that mean the exact same thing. Like how "crap" relates to "s--t."

Wait, what's the criteria if that's the case, then?

Words like s--t, c--t, f--k, b-----d, b--ch, I don't think they should ever be used. They're just too negative. I have no idea how words become vulgarities, but since these are currently the most powerful, they should be the ones we stop first.

Words like 'hell' aren't as bad, but I don't think they should be used, unless they are referring to the place. The word 'damn' is the only acceptable one, I think--not to use all the time, or if you accidentally spill your cheerios--it carries a lot of weight.

I think you still need to understand that powerful words are good, because they convey a point well.
I also believe that there are enough grammatical rules in the English language. I don't need some sterile-minded imbecile to show me some English words and tell me "you can't use those. They convey things I don't like" after I've finished learning how to use them. That's undemocratic.

I think we could just limit it to the word "Damn" when we need it. We still have words like dang, darn, crap, shoot, and the old favorite dagnabbit.

Wow. I really didn't mean to reference crapshoot.

I find this word offensive. For me, it connotes the imposition of stuff I disagree with on me.

Sarcasm is one of the tools that can be used instead of expletives—you just proved it! Thumbs up!

I wasn't being sarcastic at all.