okay, originally i was going to do a post about this story taking place just down the road from me in topeka, kansas. a state worker was threatened with being fired because of a ‘fuck war’ bumper sticker on her car, but kansas governor kathleen sebelius stood up for this worker’s free speech rights by saying she shouldn’t be fired for expressing her opinion. very cool.
as i am writing this, i am at work, which is in a public library. i had planned to link to a photo of the bumper sticker, as i’ve previously seen it in a number of online shops. however, the child protection filters won’t let me open the actual item, in order to link to it. i do understand the need for filters in a library, especially when it comes to p*rnography, even though the word in this case is not being used in a p*rnographic sense. i also understand that filters of course cannot differentiate what is a p*rnographic meaning and what is not. however, i am bit disturbed that within this institution that champions free speech i’m finding it nearly impossible to open this link that has more to do with political expression than of something dirty.
for me, the issue goes even deeper than that. i find it very interesting that to the general public the word ‘fuck’ is unacceptable, but ‘war’ is okay, even acceptable, even promoted. ‘fuck’ can have some very good meanings (which would be considered p*ornographic, especially if done right), but when used in the context as with this bumpersticker, it’s clearly meant as an expression of abhorrent distaste for war in general. on the other hand, ‘war’ can never be good. i’m not saying that there aren’t times when it’s not necessary. defense of our country is legitimate reason to fight a war, although don’t get me started on the idea that 9/11 was an attack on our country from the outside, let alone that iraq had anything to do with it. frankly, the war in which we find ourselves currently entangled did not have to happen. still, even the winning side in a war has its share of losses, not to mention the innocent bystanders affected, yet the concept of armed conflict between two states at whatever expense in lives and money seems to be something we can live with (as long as the conflict is not taking place on our soil, of course).