system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: Using substitutes or censors for profanity is no better than using the corresponding profane word.

I believe that when people try and circumvent the whole "no swearing" rule by using substitutes, it isn't any better. The same general idea is there and everything knows what word they really mean. Even in television when they bleep the word out, it is relatively simple to figure out what works they meant, thus serving no purpose. If anything it makes it worse as people think more about the word than if it were not censored or substituted. 

For clarity, I am talking about when television shows bleep out swear words or when people use words such as "shiz", "darn", "gosh", "fudge" in place of the words "shit", "damn", "god", and "fuck" respectively.
gpt
Conventional wisdom is that the aim of censoring 'bad words' is for the sake of younger or more immature viewers. Even if they know what the word mean, it reinforces the taboo of the word and tell them that they should not be saying the word carelessly. 

Whether or not its a good idea to shield young people from things like that is another debate, but the practice at least serves some point.