After all, that is what this law would have amounted to -- because it is usually the speech that offends that really needs Constitutional protection.

It's still going to be legal in Arizona for trucks to have splash guards with racist terms and silhouettes of naked women.

The House on Thursday rejected a Democratic amendment that would have banned splash guards with "images that are obscene or hateful."

The amendment's sponsor, Rep. Ed Ableser of Tempe, said he'd seen a splash guard that used the word "pickaninny" — a derogatory term for black children — and said his proposal was intended "to make sure those individuals that have hateful motives don't express or push those images upon others in our communities."

On the other hand, coat religious image in urine or feces, and Democrats like Ableser will not only defend them, but also support NEA grants for them.

For what it is worth, I share Ableser's disgust with the messages appearing on mud-flaps -- but I am more disgusted by his attempt to engage in censorship of speech.

And I'd like to comment on one other DemocratICK legislator as well.

Rep. Theresa Ulmer, D-Yuma, supported the amendment and said it fit with lawmakers' other efforts to crack down on pornography and sexual predators.

"I personally am tired of explaining to my 11-year-old son why they (women) are depicted on mud flaps, but not all women are 36Ds. He's very confused by that," Ulmer said. "But seriously, this is about family values — what are we going to send out as a message to our children."

I'll agree with you, Re. Ulmer, that racism and sexism are not family values -- but neither is government censorship of speech in violation of the US Constitution.

Posted by: Greg at 11:16 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 305 words, total size 2 kb.