In this world of soft-pedaling and instant condemnation, I was curious as to whether others see political correctness as censorship.

 

We are all aware of the terms that cannot be used and the statements that cannot be made- even if, in fact, they are absolutely true.

 

I believe that we saw the political correctness charade used to great advantage during the past presidential campaign and, of course, it continues unabated today.

 

What happened to the First Amendment? What happened to the time-honored belief that I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to my death your right to say it. It is clearly censorship and control of speech.

 

I see the necessity of not allowing one to cry "fire" in a crowded theatre. The safety of the masses overshadows the right to free speech in that case. However, what we see today has no legitimate legal basis and is suppressive.

 

What say you?

In this world of soft-pedaling and instant condemnation, I was curious as to whether others see political correctness as censorship.

 

We are all aware of the terms that cannot be used and the statements that cannot be made- even if, in fact, they are absolutely true.

 

I believe that we saw the political correctness charade used to great advantage during the past presidential campaign and, of course, it continues unabated today.

 

What happened to the First Amendment? What happened to the time-honored belief that I may not agree with what you say but I will defend to my death your right to say it. It is clearly censorship and control of speech.

 

I see the necessity of not allowing one to cry "fire" in a crowded theatre. The safety of the masses overshadows the right to free speech in that case. However, what we see today has no legitimate legal basis and is suppressive.

 

What say you?

Do you have any examples in which using a politically incorrect term has resulted in arrest or criminal charges? This would be a breach of the First Amendment. Saying something politically incorrect and receiving backlash for it is not a breach of the First Amendment- it is just other people exercising their First Amendment rights.

 

Some people- seemingly yourself included- loathe political correctness so much that they will go out of their way to avoid it, abandoning manners in the process. Just a quick rundown of your posts have various references to our President as "Panderer in Chief" and other posters as "Obamites". Have you done the world a favor by ignoring political correctness and just being rude? Furthermore, if your goal is to convince other people to think and vote similarly in terms of government, is name-calling and condescending tones the most effective way of doing so?

 

As for the general idea behind your post, I think I agree. I've referenced before how, as the late Msgr. William Smith said, "verbal engineering precedes social engineering." As Father Tadeusz Pacholczyk, Ph.D, says: The baby in the womb is just a ball of tissue. Rather than life prevention, we say Birth Control is when they mean less birth and no control.

 

On the other hand, while I am wary of government censorship, to a large degree, censorship is a necessary part of our lives. If you restrict your kids or I restrict my younger siblings from all of the most graphic types of pornography that I can purchase, is that censorship? As stated by Newadvent.org, The highest public authorities are bound to protect by stern measures, if necessary, their communities from epidemics and infectious maladies; state and police rightly allow the selling of poison and the like only under strict supervision. In the same way the competent ecclesiastical authorities in their sphere justly claim the right to protect the faithful by appropriate precautions from the poison, the danger of infection, the corruption springing up from bad books and writings.

 

Censorship is a natural extension of morality. While, as I said, I am very weary of government censorship, until I see people getting arrested and charged for political incorrectness, I won't get too upset about it. In fact, it angers me more when people, so desperate to be politically incorrect, completely abandon manners.

I think I have made my opinion pretty well known over the course of the last week.

Do you have any examples in which using a politically incorrect term has resulted in arrest or criminal charges? This would be a breach of the First Amendment. Saying something politically incorrect and receiving backlash for it is not a breach of the First Amendment- it is just other people exercising their First Amendment rights.

 

Some people- seemingly yourself included- loathe political correctness so much that they will go out of their way to avoid it, abandoning manners in the process. Just a quick rundown of your posts have various references to our President as "Panderer in Chief" and other posters as "Obamites". Have you done the world a favor by ignoring political correctness and just being rude? Furthermore, if your goal is to convince other people to think and vote similarly in terms of government, is name-calling and condescending tones the most effective way of doing so?

 

As for the general idea behind your post, I think I agree. I've referenced before how, as the late Msgr. William Smith said, "verbal engineering precedes social engineering." As Father Tadeusz Pacholczyk, Ph.D, says: The baby in the womb is just a ball of tissue. Rather than life prevention, we say Birth Control is when they mean less birth and no control.

 

On the other hand, while I am wary of government censorship, to a large degree, censorship is a necessary part of our lives. If you restrict your kids or I restrict my younger siblings from all of the most graphic types of pornography that I can purchase, is that censorship? As stated by Newadvent.org, The highest public authorities are bound to protect by stern measures, if necessary, their communities from epidemics and infectious maladies; state and police rightly allow the selling of poison and the like only under strict supervision. In the same way the competent ecclesiastical authorities in their sphere justly claim the right to protect the faithful by appropriate precautions from the poison, the danger of infection, the corruption springing up from bad books and writings.

 

Censorship is a natural extension of morality. While, as I said, I am very weary of government censorship, until I see people getting arrested and charged for political incorrectness, I won't get too upset about it. In fact, it angers me more when people, so desperate to be politically incorrect, completely abandon manners.

 

Gee. Can I assume that you are also appalled by the lewd and condescending descriptions by all those in the liberal media and in the administration against the citizens who participated in the demonsrations last Wednesday? Or, are you just upset when one shows a lack of reverence for your leader? Surely, you don't equate my jabs at your president with the vulgar statements of those in the media, in the "entertainment" industry, and in the Obama administration made about those who protested.

 

While I am not aware of any prosecutions resulting directly from statements not deemed by some to be politically correct, I am aware that a number of individuals have lost their jobs for such statements. I would call that a bit of retaliation, wouldn't you?

 

By the way, I actually support some censorship. Of course, you would likely find fault with what I support because it deals primarily with the trash and filth being constantly fed to our citizens through television, music, motion pictures, etc. Somehow, I don't see "Obamaites" and "Panderer in Chief" as remotely on the same level or even as not being politically correct. Surely, you don't either.

 

Oh, by the way, your lengthy post didn't remotely address my query. I realize you are upset with any negative references to your president. I already knew that. Try answering the question. Do you believe political correctness is censorship or not?

Edited April 19, 200917 yr by Wyrostek

You need to do some research on cch's posts. Pretty sure he didn't vote for Obama.

Do you believe political correctness is censorship or not?

 

 

Forgive me for deleting all of your diatrabe except the one thing you seem to want answered.

 

My answer is no, political correctness is not censorship.

I don't understand political correctness at all. People in this country are way too sensitive.

I don't understand political correctness at all. People in this country are way too sensitive.

 

 

So, you'd have been OK if over the last 2 presidential terms I'd have referred to GWB as the Great White Bully? or The Tyrant? Or anything similar?

 

I'm not sure what Wyrostek means specifically by political correctness.

So, you'd have been OK if over the last 2 presidential terms I'd have referred to GWB as the Great White Bully? or The Tyrant? Or anything similar?

 

I'm not sure what Wyrostek means specifically by political correctness.

 

Wouldn't have offended me in the least.

Wouldn't have offended me in the least.

 

 

What if liberal commentators had referred to him in such a manner, never using his name to refer to him?

So, you'd have been OK if over the last 2 presidential terms I'd have referred to GWB as the Great White Bully? or The Tyrant? Or anything similar?

 

I'm not sure what Wyrostek means specifically by political correctness.

 

Not maturity, apparently. cch5432 is spot-on.

Not maturity, apparently. cch5432 is spot-on.

 

 

I agree.

What if liberal commentators had referred to him in such a manner, never using his name to refer to him?

 

It wouldn't have bothered me at all.

 

I don't think that coming up with a nickname would offend anyone; however, if they never use his name then that seems to overstep the line & seems as if it is intentionally degrading the man.

 

Any President of the United States is going to be subject to criticism -- and rightfully so. That's part of the job, and one of the foundations that allows the United States to be the country that it is. In those criticisms, a few insulting remarks should be tolerated and, to an extent, expected.

 

There's nothing wrong with some nicknames & a little fun. That's the beauty of the 1st amendment. The problem is when you cross the line from good, quality fun that is harmless to malicious name-calling & defamation.

It wouldn't have bothered me at all.

 

I don't think that coming up with a nickname would offend anyone; however, if they never use his name then that seems to overstep the line & seems as if it is intentionally degrading the man.

 

Any President of the United States is going to be subject to criticism -- and rightfully so. That's part of the job, and one of the foundations that allows the United States to be the country that it is. In those criticisms, a few insulting remarks should be tolerated and, to an extent, expected.

 

There's nothing wrong with some nicknames & a little fun. That's the beauty of the 1st amendment. The problem is when you cross the line from good, quality fun that is harmless to malicious name-calling & defamation.

 

 

The issue I have is that there seems to be some who feel there is no line between a little fun and malice.

 

We have at least one poster here who refuses to use Obama's name. We have at least one who refuses to acknowledge that Obama is the President of ALL the citizens of the United States, not just those who voted for him.

 

A disrespectful nickname, as you say, can be a little fun. I feel it's intentional disrespect, and therefore, malicious, when it becomes the only way in which one will refer to the President.

 

There is such a thing, as cch says, as manners. Good, old fashioned manners. I find many who cry about political correctness, to most often be lacking in manners. There are ways to disagree without being disagreeable. That has nothing to do with censorship, it's tact, diplomacy, and (again) manners.

I really don't know how to respond to your post. I'll try my best.

Gee. Can I assume that you are also appalled by the lewd and condescending descriptions by all those in the liberal media and in the administration against the citizens who participated in the demonsrations last Wednesday? Or, are you just upset when one shows a lack of reverence for your leader? Surely, you don't equate my jabs at your president with the vulgar statements of those in the media, in the "entertainment" industry, and in the Obama administration made about those who protested.

President Obama is as much my president as he is your president. I did not support President Obama during his campaign- I have a difficult time finding any one of his policies that I agree with- but I can restrain myself from lowering myself to their level. Perhaps it is my young age, and maybe you can tell me better, but I have never found that it is productive to counter the wrongs of others by taking the same actions as them. Furthermore, at least the mainstream media has a goal in their despicable attitude- a profit- but I don't know what your goal is. Like I said, if you think President Obama is bad for our country- like I do- than the way to convince others so is not by acting like those you criticize.

While I am not aware of any prosecutions resulting directly from statements not deemed by some to be politically correct, I am aware that a number of individuals have lost their jobs for such statements. I would call that a bit of retaliation, wouldn't you?

 

By the way, I actually support some censorship. Of course, you would likely find fault with what I support because it deals primarily with the trash and filth being constantly fed to our citizens through television, music, motion pictures, etc. Somehow, I don't see "Obamaites" and "Panderer in Chief" as remotely on the same level or even as not being politically correct. Surely, you don't either.

Like you say, it is your right (and IMO duty as a Christian) to censor yourself from the trash that society gives us through various entertainment channels. However, in the same manner that it is your right to keep trash away from your family, it is the right of a company to fire someone who does not represent themselves in a manner that is good for aforementioned company.

 

This is on an entirely different level than government censorship, as I said.

Oh, by the way, your lengthy post didn't remotely address my query. I realize you are upset with any negative references to your president. I already knew that. Try answering the question. Do you believe political correctness is censorship or not?

No. Free speech still exists, and people are not being imprisoned for being politically incorrect speech.