I'm somewhat surprised this whole thing didn't break out earlier... I normally oppose pretty much every form of censorship. I think that those offended easily are weak-minded and need to toughen up. However, there is a case for "professionalism"... too many of the masses who could make use are excessively PC, PR-sensitive types. It's a tricky question, and with absolute rulings leading, as absolutes tend to, to insanity (see the postings where people's first names are called opinions), we have to find a sensible middle ground. I found 'Jesus is Lord!' a little much... but I dislike the name more for style than content. I don't like it, but don't know that ruling it out is a good idea. 'Drolsi Susej' works for me... subtlety goes a long way, and it becomes a unique identifier. 'Liberal' is fine. If someone new came in to use that, I'd have absolutely no issue. I strongly oppose people having multiple names, however... (Jimbo's the only one who I can see as having a valid reason to.) 'Non-liberals are stupid' is unacceptable. There is no question in my mind that if any username should be disallowed, this one should be. TMC and Saddam were both clear cases.
And LDan: Chronological age is no big factor (at least not to me, and I feel not to many), which is much of why I dislike when people call actions 'childlike', 'juvenile', or 'immature'... hell, I'm still a teenager (until Saturday).
-- Jake