Expletives Should Never be Used

Now, to begin, I'll provide a definition for expletive, as defined by Dctionary. com: ex-ple-tive (n): an interjectory word or expression, frequently profane; an exclamatory oath. [1] Or, in more simple terms, I'll be considering an expletive to be a "swear word," or an obsenity in general, as that is the implication I'm receiving from Pro. To be clear, I am merely refuting the idea that expletives should not be used--NOT arguing that expletives should be used. I'll present my opening argument with my refutation of Pro's position first. Refutations of Pro's ArgumentsMost of Pro's arguments are centered around two central ideas, which I shall refute. Expletives are "extremely offensive," and "have bad meanings behind them. "Most of us would indeed agree that expletives generally have "bad meanings," as dictated by our society. However, what Pro seems to be suggestng is that the words themselves have bad meanings and are offensive, therefore they should never be used. My main refutation with this is in the subjectivity of language. To explain my point, I cite a two-plays-in-one play that I worked on, written by Tom Stoppard, entitled Dogg's Hamlet, Cahoot's Macbeth [2]. In the first play, Dogg's Hamlet, nearly every character speaks a "foreign," language called Dogg. I say "foreign," because, in reality, the language uses all English words, albeit with altered meanings. For instance, more polite or innocuous phrases such as afternoon and squire mean in Dogg "get stuffed," and "bas%@$#," respectfully. On the flipside, an insulting phrase, "cretinous git," which we could recognize as insulting, means in Dogg, "What time is it, sir? "The point of that reference is this--words only have the meaning which we give them. Theoretically, any phrase can be insulting, so why not use any words whatsoever? As you can see, the subjectivity of language makes it so that the offensiveness argument doesn't wash. Alternate ActivitiesMy opponent then moves on to argue that we can do alternate activities to deal with anger. The main two problems I have with this statement are thus: 1) the examples he cited are long term anger management, and 2) expletives are not used soley for anger--but I'll get to that second contention momentarily. Opening StatementsI'll be using two main points to defend that we should all be able to use expletives at will.1. We all have the right to expression. When discussing whether anything should be done or not done, we must take into account whether we have the right to do such things. And it is true that, generally speaking, we all have the right to expression. For Americans, the right to freedom of speech and expression is guarenteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution (or Third Article of the Bill of Rights) [3]. For any non-Americans, or Americans, for that matter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, in Article 19, "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression. " [4]. So, do expletives fall under the category of expression? Of course! Thus, it is established that we all have the right to use expletives for any kind of expression, whether it be anger, or artistic, or otherwise.2. Never use them? Ever? The second big point that I wish to make is that to suggest never using expletives is too extreme, and that there are appropriate and inappropriate situations for use. For example, if one were to stub his/her toe, would it be offensive to swear to his/herself? No, as either a) no one is around to hear it, or b) the aggression is not directed at any person, and is understandable in said situation. Another example of an appropriate situation is, in certain situations, in informal settings with informal friends. If no one takes issue with their use, why suggest a complete elimination of their use? Thank you, and I await my opponent's reply. References[1] . http://dictionary.reference.com...[2] Dogg's Hamlet, Cahoot's Macbeth, written by Tom Stoppard. [3] . http://www.constitution.org...[4] . http://www.un.org...