NationStates Jolt Archive

Poll :cool:

Nope.
EDIT: NM, see you got it up.

No option for "boogeyman often innaccurately attributed by someone with out a solid criticism?"

PC is madness.

Freedom of speech.

NewSpeak.

REAL tolerance isn't just about skin colour.

As long as the non-PC don't brake the law.

If it it the law it's NewSpeak.

END RANT
BEATCH

the main attack by the political correctness snake is christianity, or any other religion for that matter
why do we have to please every single person by not having the 10 commandmets at a courthouse?
was this [America, England] not founded on christian principals? why shy away now whe we need him most!

the main attack by the political correctness snake is christianity, or any other religion for that matter
why do we have to please every single person by not having the 10 commandmets at a courthouse?
was this [America, England] not founded on christian principals? why shy away now whe we need him most!
No, it was actually founded largely on the notion that for the good of both the church and the government the two should stay seperated.

And that we shouldn't have to pay a tax on stamps to pay for protection against aboriginal people, but the first is more relivent to the discussion at hand...

The only thing I sort of like to be PC about is Indians and Native Americans. It's blantantly wrong to mix them up.

No, it was actually founded largely on the notion that for the good of both the church and the government the two should stay seperated.

And that we shouldn't have to pay a tax on stamps to pay for protection against aboriginal people, but the first is more relivent to the discussion at hand...
yes but nearly all the founders were christian and there is some influnce in there...

yes but nearly all the founders were christian and there is some influnce in there...
Many of them where diests or out right athiests, but regardless of where their beliefs lie, they understood that it should have nothing to do with government.

its kind of funny

somethings that are said out of political correctness will later down the line of history be said to not be pollitcly correct anymore.

ex. negro, black person, african american person, person of darker skin, black person

which one is it

i hate people that get to wrapped up in pollitcal correctness. its just insane to tip toe around everyone in case you make them cry. too damb bad, learn to live in the real world, not everyone is going to try and be your best friend. and they dont have to

the main attack by the political correctness snake is christianity, or any other religion for that matterpersecution complex much?
why do we have to please every single person by not having the 10 commandmets at a courthouse?Because the 10 commandments are not our law. And ironically, by placing them around and making them so high and untouchable, you break one of them.
was this [America, England] not founded on christian principals? why shy away now whe we need him most!England was founded out of pagan belifes, then Roman. America was founded upon the concept of it being beneficial to both church and state to remain separate. You know how religion can't be taxed? Yeah, it's because of that separation you are complaining about.

And we need alot of things. Religion is not one of them...esp. having it forced upon us.

And that we shouldn't have to pay a tax on stamps to pay for protection against aboriginal people, but the first is more relivent to the discussion at hand...
And the French damn it! Don't forget the French!

I hate political correctness of all kinds. Both liberals and conservatives have their own brands of it and they can shove them up each other's asses.

Political correctness is merely politeness taken to the point that it is no longer helpful and at times probably harmful. Politeness is at it's root the best way of dealing with problems between people, that is to avoid them before they occur by communication and diplomacy. Avoidance is only at its best before a problem arises. Political correctness is an avoidance tactic used after there is already a problem. To solve problems between people you do still need diplomacy and communication, you do not need constantly changing definitions and verbage describing the problem. Describing a dwarf as vertcally challenged does not make her taller or more easily employed. So while political correctness has few useful effects in dealing with issues it does have a purpose. It is useful for politicking. Hence the name.


Avoidance of issues and smoothing of ruffled feathers by giving fancy-but-meaningless new titles does however work to get a candidate elected. Most candidates for representative or governor or senator will need votes from diverse groups of people with opposing interests. To accomplish this they usually need to call sewers rose gardens and pretend like they care deeply about aromas. This is best done by baffling the voters and stroking their egos and telling them what they want to hear. Changing the language to fit the situation has proven easier and more effective at accomplishing this end than changing the situation has ever been.

No option for "boogeyman often innaccurately attributed by someone with out a solid criticism?"

that's far too sensible and accurate

If "political correctness" is going to be grouped with the ACLU, I'll vote for it any day. Merit by association.

If "political correctness" is going to be grouped with the ACLU, I'll vote for it any day. Merit by association.

What office should it run for to get your vote?

What office should it run for to get your vote?

Plurality Victor in NS Poll.

Plurality Victor in NS Poll.

Twice as many chose your poll option as chose either moderate option so far. Good luck.

Only with ranch dressing.

Twice as many chose your poll option as chose either moderate option so far. Good luck.

I don't tend to vote for popular candidates.

I don't tend to vote for popular candidates.

I vote in popular elections. Whats your sign?

necessary evil

its important to respect other people, and what matters to them

its a very minor inconvinience to have to change what words you use, so you dont end up offending someone.

but its stupid when it goes overboard, especially him/her distinctions [mankind, fireman, etc.]

Hey, if what the ACLU does is PC, then I am a PC-Nazi. The ACLU fights for the rights of Americans and fights to protect the state from the Church and the Church from the state.

I couldnt be prouder to be pro-PC. :rolleyes:

Depends on how far the "PC" is the OP is talking about. If it's just a bit of good manners to ensure you don't inadvertently (or intentionally) give someone reason for embarassment or insult, then it's not a problem.

Of course, the anti-PC hyperbole about banning Black Coffee or Manhole is ridiculous, but we don't need them ranting about it to us.

Because the 10 commandments are not our law. And ironically, by placing them around and making them so high and untouchable, you break one of them.

I suggest you bring that up with your friendly Texas State legislator. Could be a giggle.

Let's see if I can do this from memory...

Commandment I: Thou shalt have no other Gods before me.
Nope, no law enforcing this one. In fact, the First Amendment says you can have any God you want or no God at all. Frankly, if nothing can come before God, Webster's in hell for putting everything starting from A-F and most stuff starting with G before God.

Commandment II: Thou shalt not worship any graven images.
Nope, again no law against this. Hollywood would go out of business. Again, though, the separation of church and state kicks in here.

Commandment III: Thou shalt not take the Lord's name in vain.
We're 0-for-3 here. Taking the Lord's name in vain is all but encouraged. And as far as I know, no one has a law against it. maybe some small town in Bumblefuck County, Mississippi does, but no one I've ever heard of.

Commandment IV: Remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy.
Ouch. I guess I'm going to hell because I used to work Sunday. Oh yeah, and all you pro football fans? You're all going to hell, too. Frankly, in this day and age, it's not at all illegal to work Sundays, and it's hard to get through life without doing so.

Commandment V: Honor thy father and thy mother.
This one's a push. Sure, you have to do whatever they tell you until you turn 18, but beyond that, if you want to flip them the bird and move out to Arizona and never speak to them, no one's telling you that you have to. You're, by all means, still encouraged to keep up with your folks, but not at all required to.

Commandment VI: Thou shalt not murder.
Finally, we have a winner. Every state has a law against murder (oddly enough, though, the federal government does not.) It's straightforward - if you kill someone and intend to do so, you committed murder. Hope you like rotting in prison, or frying in the electric chair, or whatever your state does to scum-sucking murderers.

Commandment VII: Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Please. Like any law on this matter is enforced. Nor can it be. Cheating wives still get the house and the kids, and cheating husbands still get off more or less scot-free. It's looked down upon, but it's by no means illegal.

Commandment VIII: Thou shalt not steal.
This was originally meant to mean "thou shalt not kidnap," but either way, there are laws against it. How well they are enforced is another story, but if you steal a car, you go to jail. If you steal a car stereo...you probably get away with it. Well, no law is perfect.

Commandment IX: Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
If they strictly mean lying in court or the like, then yes, this is against the law. If they refer to lying in all circumstances, there's no generalized law against it...well, there are slander laws. OK, I'll say this is codified.

Commandment X: Thou shalt not covet.
According to this, if you really, really want your neighbor's Corvette, you're not allowed to go across the street, hand him a large sum of cash, and drive away in the Corvette. Well, that about dooms the Classified Ad industry, now, doesn't it? Sure, you can't steal or anything, but that's codified elsewhere. This is a prohibition against a thought. Nowhere in American law is this codified.

So let's see. We have six Commandments that are not codified, three that are, and one that kinda-sorta-to-a-certain-degree is. How can anyone say that the laws of the United States are based on the Ten Commandments when the majority of them appear nowhere in the text of the law?

Political correctness:eek:? Part of a conspiracy by satan-worshipping liberals to force us to be nice to weird people. Blatantly
...
...
...
...
Just kidding. As old people always say..."everything in moderation". Good PC makes people less inclined to be hideously offensive and encourages tolerance of harmless difference. Problem?

The extreme examples highlighted in the right-wing press e.g. people being encouraged to rename christmas trees "holiday trees" etc is bad PC, the missing ingredient being common sense.

Hmm...this good PC, bad PC stuff makes me want to go and watch some classic detective drama:D

I fail to see the connection between Political Correctness and the ACLU.

The latter is an organization that protects civil and human rights by litigation, legislation and education (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACLU), whereas the former is a ridiculous concept that is driven by the mindset that things like racism stop existing if you dress it up in incomprehensible words. You don't stop discrimination by calling minorities funny names like "melanin-endowed"; you stop discrimination by not discriminating.

If the ACLU promotes Political Correctness, I must have overestimated them.

but its stupid when it goes overboard, especially him/her distinctions [mankind, fireman, etc.]
Worst one I once got was being told in a business paper I was doing at Uni that we weren't allowed to use the word 'manager', cause of the man- prefix.:rolleyes:
Little interest was shown when I took the effort to find out and inform the actual meaning of manager.
It's derived from the word maneggiare, to handle or to train (esp horses) - itself derived from manos - hand in case you're interested.

Doing this just marked me down as a troublemaker, and - of course - unpc. Which just naturally implied that I was a misogynist, a male chauvanist and anti-feminist. I was probably also a NeoNazi, a child molester and a drowner of kittens, but had given up talking to the others in the group by then - they had done likewise.


One soon learns to keep one's thoughts upsoken and just write what they want to hear.

Political Correctness is a myth, there is no-one trying to force you to use certain terms in reference to certain groups of people, if you call black people 'damn dirty niggers' no governmental agency is going come out and reprogram you. The onus is entirely on you to not be a total douchebag.

There is no grand conspiracy to limit your right to be offensive and crass, just the subtle suggestion that you don't. The suggestion otherwise is merely paranoid and frankly pathetic.

Political Correctness is a myth, there is no-one trying to force you to use certain terms in reference to certain groups of people, if you call black people 'damn dirty niggers' no governmental agency is going come out and reprogram you. The onus is entirely on you to not be a total douchebag.

There is no grand conspiracy to limit your right to be offensive and crass, just the subtle suggestion that you don't. The suggestion otherwise is merely paranoid and frankly pathetic.
PC does get carried rather too far these days, but GC's right: there is no grand conspiracy. Part of the problem with Political Correctness, however, is that by its very existence it has afforded ... ahem ... assholes with a convenient strawman / whipping boy / umbrella excuse: "Sorry, this is not Politically Correct (we all hate that, after all), but really, black people are just damn dirty niggers and I certainly wouldn't want my sister to marry one, or even ride the same bus with one. Just my opinion, of course, I'm just a plain-speaking, Politically Incorrect common man."

Commandment IV: Remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy.
Ouch. I guess I'm going to hell because I used to work Sunday. Oh yeah, and all you pro football fans? You're all going to hell, too. Frankly, in this day and age, it's not at all illegal to work Sundays, and it's hard to get through life without doing so.In Germany, shops are usually not open on Sundays or holidays. Then again, Saturday is the real sabbath day, so God mightn't be too pleased with the whole moving it to Sunday anyway...

Political correctness is no better than the censorship from the right.

Steryotypes gotta start somewhere.

Because the 10 commandments are not our law. And ironically, by placing them around and making them so high and untouchable, you break one of them.
England was founded out of pagan belifes, then Roman. America was founded upon the concept of it being beneficial to both church and state to remain separate. You know how religion can't be taxed? Yeah, it's because of that separation you are complaining about.

I'm all for the 10 Commandments being in courthouses, as long as they're set up beside Hammurabi's Code, the Corpus Juris Civilis of Justinian and various other great works of law throughout history.

There's tact, diplomacy and decorum... and at the other end, just as bad as the opposite of all those traits is political correctness. PC is for assholes who have no iddea what "tact", "diplomacy" and "decorum" are.

It doesn't matter, and I've got far better things to worry about than PC crap.

Hey, if what the ACLU does is PC, then I am a PC-Nazi. The ACLU fights for the rights of Americans and fights to protect the state from the Church and the Church from the state.

I couldnt be prouder to be pro-PC. :rolleyes:
ACLu does all kind of **** they area a bunch of liberal ass holes who dont want something in public so every one else cant have it either

From WIKI:
The ACLU:
Opposes the government-sponsored display of religious symbols on public property;
Opposes official prayers, religious ceremonies, and some kinds of "moments of silence" [10] in public schools or schools funded with public money;
What is wrong with either? Why cant we have a moment of silence? Isnt the majority of the US and Britian Christian any way? I know where i live it may be 98% christian, but it cant be lower that 50% in many places in either nation.

In Germany, shops are usually not open on Sundays or holidays. Then again, Saturday is the real sabbath day, so God mightn't be too pleased with the whole moving it to Sunday anyway...

I understand that what I said doesn't necessarily hold true in Europe; I was mainly trying to refuse the ass-clowns who try to argue that the Constitution and U.S. law is based on the Ten Commandments and such. And of those laws that DO correlate with the Ten Commandments, I assure you they are on the books for other reasons as well. Murder isn't just bad because the Ten Commandments say so; I would say it's quite the reverse of that, actually.

From WIKI:
The ACLU:
Opposes the government-sponsored display of religious symbols on public property;
Opposes official prayers, religious ceremonies, and some kinds of "moments of silence" [10] in public schools or schools funded with public money;
What is wrong with either?

"government-sponsored", "official", and "public money"

If "political correctness" is going to be grouped with the ACLU, I'll vote for it any day. Merit by association.
The ACLU protects free speech. Who the fuck is dumb enough to think it's a PC organization? Hell, they've stood up for racist groups' right to voice their opinions. "Niggers are inferior mud people" isn't exaclty PC.

"government-sponsored", "official", and "public money"
Nothing wrong with government sponsored events. Sponsoring != establisment of "official religion".

No, there should be no official religion but the bumper sticker phrase does apply:
"Freedom of Religion does not mean freedom from religion"

ACLu does all kind of **** they area a bunch of liberal ass holes who dont want something in public so every one else cant have it either
someone has been grossly misinformed about the ACLU. :rolleyes:

Linking the ACLU to political correctness (both are involved in freedom of expression stories) is like linking the communist party with the republicans: they're both political parties. Now, does that stand that republicans are communists?

no?

well, then, you should see how the ACLU and PC are not related.

Nothing wrong with government sponsored events. Sponsoring != establisment of "official religion".

No, there should be no official religion but the bumper sticker phrase does apply:
"Freedom of Religion does not mean freedom from religion"
I think the jurisprudence disagree with you.

The ACLU protects free speech. Who the fuck is dumb enough to think it's a PC organization? Hell, they've stood up for racist groups' right to voice their opinions. "Niggers are inferior mud people" isn't exaclty PC.
No it doesn't. It protects it's version of what is acceptible speech. If it feels something is inappropriate the ACLU won't raise a finger to "protect" it.

Nothing wrong with government sponsored events. Sponsoring != establisment of "official religion".

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion

Why do people so often forget that word?

No it doesn't. It protects it's version of what is acceptible speech. If it feels something is inappropriate the ACLU won't raise a finger to "protect" it.
link?

I'll bet you twenty dollars that if the ACLU didn't want to touch it, the claim had no legs to stand on.

The ACLU protects free speech. Who the fuck is dumb enough to think it's a PC organization? Hell, they've stood up for racist groups' right to voice their opinions. "Niggers are inferior mud people" isn't exaclty PC.

I agree; it's a ridiculous association.

From WIKI:
The ACLU:
Opposes the government-sponsored display of religious symbols on public property;
Opposes official prayers, religious ceremonies, and some kinds of "moments of silence" [10] in public schools or schools funded with public money;
What is wrong with either? Why cant we have a moment of silence? Isnt the majority of the US and Britian Christian any way? I know where i live it may be 98% christian, but it cant be lower that 50% in many places in either nation.
If you lived in a community that was 98% muslim would you consent to living under Sharia law? The US is not a direct democracy for the simple reason that there are certain rights that are not up for majority vote. The right not to be coerced into religion is one of those. The majority can't force it's religion onto the minority, like in Sharia cultures. You don't like it, move to Saudi Arabia or something.

If you lived in a community that was 98% muslim would you consent to living under Sharia law? The US is not a direct democracy for the simple reason that there are certain rights that are not up for majority vote. The right not to be coerced into religion is one of those. The majority can't force it's religion onto the minority, like in Sharia cultures. You don't like it, move to Saudi Arabia or something.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with moments of silence. I have several each and every day. Usually unplanned. :p

They just don't belong in a public school classroom.

No it doesn't. It protects it's version of what is acceptible speech. If it feels something is inappropriate the ACLU won't raise a finger to "protect" it.
The only speech it doesn't protect is speech which violates the constitution, like a teacher in the public schools telling the kids to pray to Jesus regardless of the kid's religions.

link?

I'll bet you twenty dollars that if the ACLU didn't want to touch it, the claim had no legs to stand on.
Student editor of a student owned newspaper at Oregon State University published an editorial explaining and emphesising an editorial written by Leonard Pitts Jr, that was published in various newspapers across the country.

This editorial was along the lines that a lot of the problems in the "black" community are self inflicted and the cause can be traced back to role models that the community chooses.

Leonard Pitts Jr is black but the student editor was white. The paper was protested as insensitive/racist etc etc. The student editor was fired because of it.

When the ACLU was confronted by a radio talk show host, their response was that the editorial was insensitive and inflammatory and that they did not defend racist remarks in student papers.

Student editor of a student owned newspaper at Oregon State University published an editorial explaining and emphesising an editorial written by Leonard Pitts Jr, that was published in various newspapers across the country.

This editorial was along the lines that a lot of the problems in the "black" community are self inflicted and the cause can be traced back to role models that the community chooses.

Leonard Pitts Jr is black but the student editor was white. The paper was protested as insensitive/racist etc etc. The student editor was fired because of it.

When the ACLU was confronted by a radio talk show host, their response was that the editorial was insensitive and inflammatory and that they did not defend racist remarks in student papers.
Link? Wanna read about this before making my mind. There might be some laws about Student papers I'm not aware that makes this firing non-actionnable. Or some part of the story you're not telling us. I don't know, that's why I'd like a link.

Although, one case hardly makes a trend.

Student editor of a student owned newspaper at Oregon State University published an editorial explaining and emphesising an editorial written by Leonard Pitts Jr, that was published in various newspapers across the country.

This editorial was along the lines that a lot of the problems in the "black" community are self inflicted and the cause can be traced back to role models that the community chooses.

Leonard Pitts Jr is black but the student editor was white. The paper was protested as insensitive/racist etc etc. The student editor was fired because of it.

When the ACLU was confronted by a radio talk show host, their response was that the editorial was insensitive and inflammatory and that they did not defend racist remarks in student papers.
That doesn't sound like the ACLU. Especially since they've represented racist organizations in the past. Check your sources.

I'm all for the 10 Commandments being in courthouses, as long as they're set up beside Hammurabi's Code, the Corpus Juris Civilis of Justinian and various other great works of law throughout history.
In that case, yes, I'm okay with it. It displays our legal lineage, and therefore is not a religious monument, but a legal one.

Any other time, no.

From WIKI:
The ACLU:
Opposes the government-sponsored display of religious symbols on public property;
Opposes official prayers, religious ceremonies, and some kinds of "moments of silence" [10] in public schools or schools funded with public money;
What is wrong with either? Why cant we have a moment of silence? Isnt the majority of the US and Britian Christian any way? I know where i live it may be 98% christian, but it cant be lower that 50% in many places in either nation.

It is public money, public events, and on public land...in other words, all of ours. Sure, the majority may be Christian, but that doesn't mean everyone is. You can have your moment of silence. But it can not be structured as a time for prayer. If you lived in a majority Jewish area, would you be okay with following all of their laws? What about Muslim? Hindi? Voodoo?


Oh, and the ACLU is hardly PC. They supported a Nazi march in Skokie IL (a town that is heavily populated by holocaust survivors). Ironically enough, this case was fought by a Jewish lawyer.

In 1977, the ACLU filed suit against the Village of Skokie, Illinois, seeking an injunction against the enforcement of three town ordinances outlawing Nazi parades and demonstrations. (Skokie had a large Jewish population.) A federal district court struck down the ordinances in a decision eventually affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court. The ACLU's action in this case led to the resignation of about 15 percent of the membership from the organization (25 percent in Illinois), especially of Jewish members.

If you lived in a community that was 98% muslim would you consent to living under Sharia law? The US is not a direct democracy for the simple reason that there are certain rights that are not up for majority vote. The right not to be coerced into religion is one of those. The majority can't force it's religion onto the minority, like in Sharia cultures. You don't like it, move to Saudi Arabia or something.
not what im trying to say
have a moment of silence and pray to any god you like!
and why do the 10 commandments offend everyone?
i mean they dont aoffend me and i guess not you either since im pretty sure ure jewsish...

not what im trying to say
have a moment of silence and pray to any god you like!
and why do the 10 commandments offend everyone?
i mean they dont aoffend me and i guess not you either since im pretty sure ure jewsish...
I'm atheist.

The ten commandments don't offend me. What offends me is when, oh, let's say a judge puts them up in his courthouse or on it's grounds as an endorsement of religion and to send a message that violation of those commandments won't be tolerated by his court. They're not US law, and they're not everyone's religious law. They don't belong there.

and why do the 10 commandments offend everyone?

I am the LORD thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before Me.

I don't want any gods at all, so I suppose that puts myself before Him, thus violating this commandment. The insistence that I obey is offensive; I am rightfully free.

for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me

Sorry, this certainly isn't anything I want in a courthouse.

Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh His name in vain.

I want to exercise my free speech. Why should the courts care whether or not I blaspheme?

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.

I'll do what I want on the sabbath day. Why is this teaching essential to having a lawful society?

No it doesn't. It protects it's version of what is acceptible speech. If it feels something is inappropriate the ACLU won't raise a finger to "protect" it.
Example?

The only thing I sort of like to be PC about is Indians and Native Americans. It's blantantly wrong to mix them up.

I just call em Native Indians.

Student editor of a student owned newspaper at Oregon State University published an editorial explaining and emphesising an editorial written by Leonard Pitts Jr, that was published in various newspapers across the country.

This editorial was along the lines that a lot of the problems in the "black" community are self inflicted and the cause can be traced back to role models that the community chooses.

Leonard Pitts Jr is black but the student editor was white. The paper was protested as insensitive/racist etc etc. The student editor was fired because of it.

When the ACLU was confronted by a radio talk show host, their response was that the editorial was insensitive and inflammatory and that they did not defend racist remarks in student papers.


That's not a free speach issue. That's an employment issue. The ACLU doesn't do those. I'll bet if the university tried to ban the paper, or the state tried to ban it, the ACLU would have fought.

It's called issue spotting.

not what im trying to say
have a moment of silence and pray to any god you like!The problem with that is that it implies that its ok to believe anything as long as you believe something. It discriminates against athiests. The right to freedom of religion includes the right not to believe, and that is infringed upon.