I would say anything other than something that actually does someone else harm, something actually disgusting (like taking a shit in public) or insulting to someone it is irrational to be offended by. Though for the breastfeeding I would say it shouldn't be allowed in public not covered up unless toplessness for women is allowed generally.

The feeling we get when we are offended is not rational.  It is too spontaneuous.  Very often, people are upset by something and they do not know why and just pin it on random things.  For instance, I know this is a silly example, I know a girl who simply does not like Mel Gibson.  To this day I do not know why becuase she can never give a clear answer as to why this is.  And she has felt this way about him before Pasion of the Christ and before his drunken tyraid.  All she can ever say is "I don;t know.  I just don't like him".  Clearly something about him offends her greatly but she has no freaking clue what it is.  I am sure many of you can come up with similar and less silly examples of such instances as well.

WHOOPIDEE-DOO!!!!

I only like dignified actors like Jim Carrey.

Whats the difference between being offended by a certain act and a certain actor when you think about it.

"Being offended" is not irrational. It's not rational, necessarily, but not irrational, either. It's just a reaction, an emotional response, and therefore often detached from the logical part of the brain.

Using it as an excuse to squelch others' behavior is irrational. Most laws that have to do with protecting people from "being offended" are just plain ludicrous, or discriminatory, or otherwise trample liberty -- flag burning, gay marriage, "indecency," prostitituion, etc, are all targets of irrational laws designed to keep someone from being offended.

Fuck that. Victimless crimes are not criminal, and it's irrational to believe they are.

As far as being offended having a rational place in society: yes, I believe it does. It helps keep us polite to those we like.

Granted, it's pretty hard to offend me. I take knee-jerk offense at two things: wilfull ignorance, and the idea that we are special (especially in the global species sense, but especially in the "I am a special person" sense).

As soon as you're good like me, you too can see just how much the world needs our help.  Jesus loves you anyway; he told me himself!

P.S. Remember, the meek shall inherit the Earth, Mr. "TheBold".

Conservative Christians pretty much wake up in the morning determined to be offended by something.

OH! oh! i got this one... its... uh...

2 letters!, O and R ^_^

*insert cookie into mouth now*

Well I think so. I would prefer that things I find offensive didn't exist at all. So I think it shouldn't, it oughtn't exist. But I don't think that it mustn't, because that's not for me to decide.

I think there is hardly a person in the world that can say there is nothing they find repugnant to their moral sense, good taste, or the like. So either everyone is irrational (they of course are, but that's another matter), or maybe just being offended isn't irrational in and of itself.

This can hardly be the case, since I'm sure even Bill O'Reilly is aware that there are individuals (like me), and groups of people (like probably half his own country) who think his behavior is offensive. I don't think he wants to be banned. So I think it's safe to say that what he and his ilk wants banned is what they find offensive, not what some people find offensive.

The fact that Bill O'Reilly is NOT forced to travel around the world, from city to city, stand in the town square and shout: "My name is Bill O'Reilly, and I'm a massive wanker. Please feel free to scorn me, and throw things at me", let alone the fact that he get's to have his own TV show in which to spew his bile, is offensive to me.

Does that make me irrational? Does voicing that oppinion in public, like I'm doing now, make me irrational? Am I not allowed to have that oppinion, and express it, without being considered irrational?

As far as I understand the RRS, it is about us being offended by people being irrational, and speaking out against it, to try and change that state of affairs.

Just to clarify, we find it repugnant to our moral sense when people's irrationality (mainly their religious ideas) is harmful to society, in one form or another, and we find it repugnant to our good taste, when people are just generally irrational, if otherwise harmless. We may be willing to tolerate people's irrationality, if it is particularly harmless, but we still find it reasonable to speak out against it, do we not?

None of these things are offensive to me, and maybe someone finding it offensive, maybe that is offensive to me. But exactly because my right to be offended at that needs to be protected, so that I am free to speak out against it, I can hardly say that they have no right to be offended at it. I can say they have no reason to be offended, or argue against it in other ways, but I cannot take away their right to be offended.

I live in Denmark, where we have been discussing the right to offend for a long time, for obvious reasons. This right is very very important. I need to be allowed to voice my oppinion, regardless of wether it offends someone, but they too, have the right to be offended, and speak out in turn. I was offended, that Muslims were offended at the Mohammed cartoons, and it is my right to speak out against it. You see how it works? You can't take away people's right to be offended, because it offends you.

You can however, adress specific issues and talk about wether or not it should be banned. Like breastfeeding in public: you can argue that it should be banned, but if your argument is "Because it offend me, and some others" then your argument is not good enough. because I will reply: "Well it offends me and some others, that it offends you when women do a perfectly natural thing. Your puritanism offends me. Maybe we should ban puritanism. And it also offends me that you want to ban it, so maybe banning things should be banned". See, now it has become irrational.

So, to conclude, arguing that something should be banned only because it is offensive to someone, that is the irrational part. But simply being offended, and stating it in public, that is an inalienable human right, and you can't take that away, not even from Bill O'Reilly.

I agree that they only want to ban the things they find offensive. I personally find Christianity offensive and I'm certain they don't want it banned.