In "The Case Against Banning the Word 'Retard'" a law professor at Ohio State University's Moritz College of Law named Christopher M. Fairman, writes of those under the power of "fetishism of the word" are not satisfied until they stop others from using the word. In today's society, approximately 60,000 people pledged to support the banning of the word retard, also known as the "R-Word", on a website called www.r-word.org because they believed that the use of this word was "derogatory". Fairman believes that we should not ban words for two reasons, the first is that banning words leads to language control by the government that institutionalizes word taboos, and the second is that the words themselves are not the problem because of the evolution of meanings and uses. Fairman also fears that banning any word could lead to increased government control of language. In New Zealand the Special Olympics had already attacked the Broadcasting Standards of Authority to ban the use of the word retard from being broadcast to the public. This is significant because it is known that the Broadcasting Standards of Authority are quite similar to the Federal Communication Commission which regulates interstate and international communications such as radio, cable, and television. Over time, the idea of ​​banning a certain word evolved and spread to the point of being censored in private organizations. For this reason, the idea of ​​banning or censoring words has already spread. During the 1980s and 1990s, many colleges and universities developed speech codes that consisted of a set of do-nots to reduce discrimination. The key idea being conveyed here is that even the largest federal departments such as education have already been ce...... middle of paper ...... society has changed over time and the meaning of the word the delay depends on where the word is used, both professionally and generally. This idea is significant because Fairman provides historical context for how the word retard was first used and reveals how the meaning of the words evolved. Last but not least, Fairman's suggestion about how the meanings and uses of a word change over time has proven credible, so there is no need to "censor" the word retard. In conclusion, Fairman concludes his article by saying that the Special Olympics' plan to ban the word retarded and protect people with intellectual disabilities from using the word will not succeed because new words will be formed to replace the old ones, he further concludes by saying that the freedom to express words is very important and precious so consequently, banning a word is not worth it.