So many definitions? Really? Would you enlighten us with some of them?

Personally, I think that the multiple definitions referenced by Clyde can be summed up in the two definitions that Habib touched upon.

 

"Political correctness" can mean refraining from using certain terms because they are offensive. This is good.

"Political correctness" can mean treating certain viewpoints as so radical and outlandish that they are entirely ignored to the point of silence. This is bad.

 

It is difficult to comprehend which one of these you are talking about, which is why we'd like examples.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion but I must submit that your knowledge of the US Constitution is rather lacking.

 

You seem hung up on government prosecutions. Actually, most violations of the First Amendment deal with civil offenses involving private legal parties. But, then, I'm sure you really knew that, didn't you?:thumb:

I'd like to see some examples to get a clearer context about what you are saying here, but FWIW:

 

I agree with Habib in that it is government prosecutions that are troubling, whereas private ones do not bother me at all. As you mentioned earlier about people losing their jobs because of violating political correctness, would you prefer that the government tells a private company executive who they can and can not fire?

 

Yes, we have a right to free speech, but that doesn't mean that an employer should have to employ someone who is purposely disrespectful.

 

"Political correctness" can mean refraining from using certain terms because they are offensive. This is good.

 

 

 

The problem with that is that what is offensive to one person, may not be to another.

I agree with Habib in that it is government prosecutions that are troubling, whereas private ones do not bother me at all. As you mentioned earlier about people losing their jobs because of violating political correctness, would you prefer that the government tells a private company executive who they can and can not fire?

 

Yes, we have a right to free speech, but that doesn't mean that an employer should have to employ someone who is purposely disrespectful.

 

I think you are wasting your time, but you may want to amend "prosecute" to "enforce" or "legislate" if you want to avoid a parsing of your post.

The problem with that is that what is offensive to one person, may not be to another.

Perhaps I've missed what you are saying, but if your goal is to avoid offending anyone- I can't imagine why someone would aim to offend someone- then what's the problem with self-restricting your language?

 

Don't get me wrong- I agree that, often times, people get too easily offended. But that doesn't mean that we should aim to use terms that are "politically incorrect". I have a hard time imagining a context in which I should try to use an offensive term.

Perhaps I've missed what you are saying, but if your goal is to avoid offending anyone- I can't imagine why someone would aim to offend someone- then what's the problem with self-restricting your language?

 

Don't get me wrong- I agree that, often times, people get too easily offended. But that doesn't mean that we should aim to use terms that are "politically incorrect". I have a hard time imagining a context in which I should try to use an offensive term.

 

 

My point is that you're always going to find people that are offended no matter what terminology is used. Most terms that are considered offensive to some people are not used with the intent to offend someone, but more so because the person using the term doesn't feel it is offensive.

That wouildn't be your first mistake.

 

I've made many mistakes in my life, but that isn't one of them.

My point is that you're always going to find people that are offended no matter what terminology is used. Most terms that are considered offensive to some people are not used with the intent to offend someone, but more so because the person using the term doesn't feel it is offensive.

Sounds like you have less of a problem with political correctness and more of a problem with the attitudes of people.

I've made many mistakes in my life, but that isn't one of them.

 

 

Habib's knowledge when it comes to politics and government is possibly unequaled on this site in my estimation. I would not hesitate to defer to him on technical matters of the Constitution and such.

 

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?

 

 

Actually, wouldn't that just be capitalism? Doesn't the owner or CEO or Director of any company have the right to hire or fire whom they wish? Most such cases you are citing are probably job losses because the individuals in question may have "stood up for their opinions" but their superiors in the company disagreed.

 

Just because you have convictions and stand up for them (and I hope everyone, including you does) doesn't mean there isn't a price to be paid. Frankly I have a hard time crying over someone who loses their job because of their convictions when history is rampant with examples of people who lost their lives for their convictions.

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.

 

:clap:

Good job, young grasshopper!! You're getting it.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion but I must submit that your knowledge of the US Constitution is rather lacking.

 

You seem hung up on government prosecutions. Actually, most violations of the First Amendment deal with civil offenses involving private legal parties. But, then, I'm sure you really knew that, didn't you?:thumb:

 

 

Uhhh.... No.

The only entities that do not have a right to infinge upon your First Amendment rights are governmental entities(and to get technical, some governmental entities in some instances are allowed: i.e. schools). Governments are not allowed to practice prior restraint(Censorship). As Habib says:

 

Actually, wouldn't that just be capitalism? Doesn't the owner or CEO or Director of any company have the right to hire or fire whom they wish? Most such cases you are citing are probably job losses because the individuals in question may have "stood up for their opinions" but their superiors in the company disagreed.

 

Just because you have convictions and stand up for them (and I hope everyone, including you does) doesn't mean there isn't a price to be paid. Frankly I have a hard time crying over someone who loses their job because of their convictions when history is rampant with examples of people who lost their lives for their convictions.

 

...he's correct. Every private company has the right to protect thier reputation over the rights of a worker or employee to express their rights to free speech. By joining a specific company, there are certian things you must give up. Now there are some specific reasons that companies can't fire you in certian states, but as a general rule, your expression of the first Amendment can cost you your job. Expression of your First Amendment rights(as decided by the Court: Freedom of Speech and Expression is not limitless) will not get you arrested or jailed.

I believe Tancredo not being allowed to speak at UNC is a form PC.

Calling acts of terrorism man-made disaters is PC.

Covering up Jesus in the background when making a speech is PC.

Making it difficult for professors at colleges to speak out against the so-called conventional wisdom on topics like global warming or abortion is PC.

 

PC is about makng people afraid to speak out, so the PC police have an easier job of controlling the oppostion.

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?

 

:laugh: Would not have bothered me at all. This is representative that people are over sensitive. I am a balding old fat guy. I could care less what you call me. Call me FAT! Call me BALDY! Call me OLD! That hurts me how?

Get over yourselves America!

 

I believe Tancredo not being allowed to speak at UNC is a form PC.

Calling acts of terrorism man-made disaters is PC.

Covering up Jesus in the background when making a speech is PC.

Making it difficult for professors at colleges to speak out against the so-called conventional wisdom on topics like global warming or abortion is PC.

 

PC is about makng people afraid to speak out, so the PC police have an easier job of controlling the oppostion.

 

 

While people do not go to jail or get fined for Political Incorrectness, they do lose their jobs, censorhip keeps their jobs. Ask Michael Richards, Mel Gibson, Jimmy the Greek if PC is like censorship. They may some interesting views.

So many definitions? Really? Would you enlighten us with some of them?

 

"PC" is a term many people throw around but they have different standards as to what exactly is PC.

 

Is calling someone "black" instead of "African American" not being PC?

 

Is gay v homosexual?

 

Is fascist/socialist vs Obama?

 

Some would then say you can't question a black person or you are not racially sensitive/PC.

 

My guess is you have a specific example(s) you want to get off your chest so I say have at it. We can stop talking in theory and get down to brass tacks.

:laugh: Would not have bothered me at all. This is representative that people are over sensitive. I am a balding old fat guy. I could care less what you call me. Call me FAT! Call me BALDY! Call me OLD! That hurts me how?

Get over yourselves America!

 

 

 

 

While people do not go to jail or get fined for Political Incorrectness, they do lose their jobs, censorhip keeps their jobs. Ask Michael Richards, Mel Gibson, Jimmy the Greek if PC is like censorship. They may some interesting views.

 

Would you add the Dixie Chicks to your list?