Classic example of LDS prudishness

[_hermanuno]

I posted this on the SLTRIB's board, since it was a story in Saturday's paper. Thought it may be good for a giggle here. I've added a couple of other posters comments at the end.

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_5459078

State gets no kick from 'merlot' plate
Talk of the Morning
By Dawn House
The Salt Lake Tribune
Article Last Updated: 03/17/2007 01:16:22 AM MDT

It took 10 years, but one miffed citizen finally figured out the word "merlot," emblazoned on the license plate of Glenn Eurick's car, means wine.
Merlot is also the name of a widely planted red grape in France's Bordeaux region, famous for its wines. But the Utah Tax Commission has sided with an anonymous complainant that merlot is an alcoholic beverage - and intoxicant words are banned from vanity plates.
"People usually ask us what the word means," said Eurick, who was surprised last week when he received a letter from the Tax Commission ordering him to remove the offending plate from his dark-red 1996 Mercedes.
Eurick said most Utah bystanders wonder aloud if merlot is a family name or a foreign word. But when he and his wife stopped for gasoline in Green River on their way home to Salt Lake City, one man understood the significance of the word.
"He asked us if we chose merlot because there were too many letters in cabernet sauvignon," said Eurick.
Tax Commission spokesman Charlie Roberts said it's understandable that the offending word could have gone unnoticed for more than a decade.
"I'm a little rusty on my French, too," he acknowledged.
Roberts added that another Utahn has been ordered to remove a plate from his vehicle. This one spells out "chianti," although he said the owner will be given the option of picking another region from France less well-known for its wine. The problem: Chianti has been famous for its red wine for nearly 300 years, but it's located in Italy.
For his part, Eurick is protesting the state's decision that merlot is an offensive word, although he said that he and his wife also enjoy the drink.
"It's the color of our car," he said. "But if we lose, I'll suggest 'no merlot.' That way no one can say I'm promoting anything alcoholic."
If that doesn't make it past state censors, "burgundy" might be another option for Eurick's Mercedes. Or perhaps not. Burgundy might be doubly offensive, being both a wine region and an alcoholic beverage.

License plate no-nos

* In addition to its ban on intoxicants, the Utah Tax Commission also prohibits words that are vulgar, obscene, related to gangs or organized crime, promote illegal activity, identify certain body parts or functions, or show contempt of a race, religion, gender, or political affiliation.
* Also banned: Plates with the numbers six and nine, combined.


"It means black bird in French. It's a French word, that's the problem."

"That is the real reason for the offensiveness of the license plate. Why are blackbirds black? They didn't help the seagulls eat the crickets."

[_Sethbag]

I take it the state wouldn't appreciate this license plate either.

[_Mephitus]

I wonder if they would find it offensive if i wanted a plate that said THOR FTW or ODIN FTW its short enough!

wow, all S H words are blocked.

[_Coggins7]

Hardly an example of "LDS" prudishness, as LDS people in general aren't known for such sensitivities, at least none I've ever known or grown up with. This isn't even prudishness per se, its a high handed kind of whining oversensitivity to utterly subjective connotations one may have with words or imagery that eventually takes the form of an attempt to ban, restrict, or limit free speech. This is otherwise known as "political correctness" and although pioneered and perfected by the Left, has seeped into every nook and cranny of society.

The overwhelming need to meddle and control the lives of others has gone so far out of control that we are fighting over Indian mascots at colleges, mascots that a solid majority of Amerindians approve of but which are disapproved of by a tiny minority of offended malcontents, usually professional activists. The ban on racial terms, vulgarity, profanity, and the like, is perfectly reasonable, but French wines? This reminds me of some instances back in the eighties of fundamentalist Christians down in Texas who went on a book banning rampage in part of the public schools down there, doing things like objecting to The Wizard of Oz because it taught salvation by works, not by grace. Well, all Mormons aren't gold (as this forum makes more than perfectly clear) and this doesn't reflect on the Church. I don't know anyone who would condone such busybody hypersensitivity to something like that. To me, at a glance, the bottom line here is that this is a person who doesn't have a life. (without knowing the individual personally)

[_guy sajer]

Hardly an example of "LDS" prudishness, as LDS people in general aren't known for such sensitivities, at least none I've ever known or grown up with. This isn't even prudishness per se, its a high handed kind of whining oversensitivity to utterly subjective connotations one may have with words or imagery that eventually takes the form of an attempt to ban, restrict, or limit free speech. This is otherwise known as "political correctness" and although pioneered and perfected by the Left, has seeped into every nook and cranny of society.

The overwhelming need to meddle and control the lives of others has gone so far out of control that we are fighting over Indian mascots at colleges, mascots that a solid majority of Amerindians approve of but which are disapproved of by a tiny minority of offended malcontents, usually professional activists. The ban on racial terms, vulgarity, profanity, and the like, is perfectly reasonable, but French wines? This reminds me of some instances back in the eighties of fundamentalist Christians down in Texas who went on a book banning rampage in part of the public schools down there, doing things like objecting to The Wizard of Oz because it taught salvation by works, not by grace. Well, all Mormons aren't gold (as this forum makes more than perfectly clear) and this doesn't reflect on the Church. I don't know anyone who would condone such busybody hypersensitivity to something like that. To me, at a glance, the bottom line here is that this is a person who doesn't have a life. (without knowing the individual personally)

Wow, Coggins, I pretty much agree with this. Imagine that.

I agree that most LDS are not this sensitive, and this represents the overdeveloped sensitivities of a few not necessarily representative of the whole.

I also agree that political correctness can go to extreme, absurdist lengths (a good read on this is "The Dictatorship of Virtue”). I am inclined to agree that prohibitions of Indian nicknames can also be a bit absurd, although I do think that the name "Redskins" probably crosses the line. As long as the representations of Native Americans are respectful and avoid caricatures, I don't have a problem with it. But then, I'm not a Native American, so I perhaps lack some perspective on the matter.

[_richardMdBorn]

Hardly an example of "LDS" prudishness, as LDS people in general aren't known for such sensitivities, at least none I've ever known or grown up with. This isn't even prudishness per se, its a high handed kind of whining oversensitivity to utterly subjective connotations one may have with words or imagery that eventually takes the form of an attempt to ban, restrict, or limit free speech. This is otherwise known as "political correctness" and although pioneered and perfected by the Left, has seeped into every nook and cranny of society.

The overwhelming need to meddle and control the lives of others has gone so far out of control that we are fighting over Indian mascots at colleges, mascots that a solid majority of Amerindians approve of but which are disapproved of by a tiny minority of offended malcontents, usually professional activists. The ban on racial terms, vulgarity, profanity, and the like, is perfectly reasonable, but French wines? This reminds me of some instances back in the eighties of fundamentalist Christians down in Texas who went on a book banning rampage in part of the public schools down there, doing things like objecting to The Wizard of Oz because it taught salvation by works, not by grace. Well, all Mormons aren't gold (as this forum makes more than perfectly clear) and this doesn't reflect on the Church. I don't know anyone who would condone such busybody hypersensitivity to something like that. To me, at a glance, the bottom line here is that this is a person who doesn't have a life. (without knowing the individual personally)

Wow, Coggins, I pretty much agree with this. Imagine that.

I agree that most LDS are not this sensitive, and this represents the overdeveloped sensitivities of a few not necessarily representative of the whole.

I also agree that political correctness can go to extreme, absurdist lengths (a good read on this is "The Dictatorship of Virtue”). I am inclined to agree that prohibitions of Indian nicknames can also be a bit absurd, although I do think that the name "Redskins" probably crosses the line. As long as the representations of Native Americans are respectful and avoid caricatures, I don't have a problem with it. But then, I'm not a Native American, so I perhaps lack some perspective on the matter.

According to some Indians you are. Some Lakota were talking with Ed Bearrs, former chief historian at the National Park Service. They preferred to be called Lakota but their second choice was Indians. They didn't like the term Native American because we are all Native Americans except for first generation immigrants. Native American was a made up white American term which they rejected.

[_gramps]

Hardly an example of "LDS" prudishness, as LDS people in general aren't known for such sensitivities, at least none I've ever known or grown up with. This isn't even prudishness per se, its a high handed kind of whining oversensitivity to utterly subjective connotations one may have with words or imagery that eventually takes the form of an attempt to ban, restrict, or limit free speech. This is otherwise known as "political correctness" and although pioneered and perfected by the Left, has seeped into every nook and cranny of society.

The overwhelming need to meddle and control the lives of others has gone so far out of control that we are fighting over Indian mascots at colleges, mascots that a solid majority of Amerindians approve of but which are disapproved of by a tiny minority of offended malcontents, usually professional activists. The ban on racial terms, vulgarity, profanity, and the like, is perfectly reasonable, but French wines? This reminds me of some instances back in the eighties of fundamentalist Christians down in Texas who went on a book banning rampage in part of the public schools down there, doing things like objecting to The Wizard of Oz because it taught salvation by works, not by grace. Well, all Mormons aren't gold (as this forum makes more than perfectly clear) and this doesn't reflect on the Church. I don't know anyone who would condone such busybody hypersensitivity to something like that. To me, at a glance, the bottom line here is that this is a person who doesn't have a life. (without knowing the individual personally)

Wow, Coggins, I pretty much agree with this. Imagine that.

I agree that most LDS are not this sensitive, and this represents the overdeveloped sensitivities of a few not necessarily representative of the whole.

I also agree that political correctness can go to extreme, absurdist lengths (a good read on this is "The Dictatorship of Virtue”). I am inclined to agree that prohibitions of Indian nicknames can also be a bit absurd, although I do think that the name "Redskins" probably crosses the line. As long as the representations of Native Americans are respectful and avoid caricatures, I don't have a problem with it. But then, I'm not a Native American, so I perhaps lack some perspective on the matter.

According to some Indians you are. Some Lakota were talking with Ed Bearrs, former chief historian at the National Park Service. They preferred to be called Lakota but their second choice was Indians. They didn't like the term Native American because we are all Native Americans except for first generation immigrants. Native American was a made up white American term which they rejected.

Hi richardMdBorn. I've been so long out of the country, I've lost track of what is acceptable, or what is not. Are you saying that for most "Native American Indians", they would prefer to be called "Indians?" I'm just asking because I really don't know what would be considered racist or not. Can you help me out?

[_hermanuno]

I do not buy the bit about it being political correctness gone wild. Simply because the license plate in question was 10 years old and the policy of the state predates that and much of the hyper sensitivity about Indian named mascots, etc. The policy has been on the books as long as Utah has offered personalized license plates (30 plus years). The fact that it was issued in the first place just shows that those in charge didn't know all the evil things to look out for.

Well I guess it is OK. After all, I'm sure the policy is only to "protect our children." Except that if I had loads of money and time, I'd fight it on first amendment issues and if that didn't work, I'd legally change my last name to Tequila, Whiskey or Boozer and then demand that plate. Or maybe I could call Carlos and ask him to fight it for us and for truth, justice and the American way!

Other plates I'd think about, just to annoy.......
SATAN
DEVIL
GARMENT
WICKED
BYUSUX
FMORONI
FBRIGGY
TAXLDS

A plate I have seen
NOMOMO

[_Runtu]

I do not buy the bit about it being political correctness gone wild. Simply because the license plate in question was 10 years old and the policy of the state predates that and much of the hyper sensitivity about Indian named mascots, etc. The policy has been on the books as long as Utah has offered personalized license plates (30 plus years). The fact that it was issued in the first place just shows that those in charge didn't know all the evil things to look out for.

Well I guess it is OK. After all, I'm sure the policy is only to "protect our children." Except that if I had loads of money and time, I'd fight it on first amendment issues and if that didn't work, I'd legally change my last name to Tequila, Whiskey or Boozer and then demand that plate. Or maybe I could call Carlos and ask him to fight it for us and for truth, justice and the American way!

Other plates I'd think about, just to annoy.......
SATAN
DEVIL
GARMENT
WICKED
BYUSUX
FMORONI
FBRIGGY
TAXLDS

A plate I have seen
NOMOMO

I had a high school teacher with the California license plate UCK YO, and then he had an F and a U painted on either side of the plate. I think he thought that was pretty cute.

[_Bryan Inks]

I have a friend who's plate reads: 1000101

Pretty damn clever if you ask me.

It's the perfect way to dodge the stupid rules.