Anti-PC people making a mistake on the Duck Dynasty story

[JoeB131]

[

In fact - as I write this it occurs to me that you're practicing PC right now. Obviously one of the many elements of Political Correctness is declaring that certain words and phrases are no longer acceptable and off-limits because they "may offend someone", and we end up having to change them to suit you, which is about as silly as it gets. "Midget" to "dwarf", "secretary" to "receptionist", "fat" to "calorically challenged". What should we change "Politically Correct" to so that you're not offended?

.

We don't change the language to not offend someone. We change it to be more accurate.

To take your above examples. Both "Midget" and "Dwarf" are considered offensive terms, the proper term today is "Little Person". The language was changed to emphasize the humanity of the person being described, something labels take away.

The same thing with "Secretary" vs. "Receptionist". The term was changed to emphasize the professionalism of the person doing the job. Secretary as a word implies some golddigger who is making a play for a professional married man. That's the stereotype we have. Receptionist implies a professional with multiple skills who is a key player in a professional office.

Nobody uses the term "calorically challenged" to describe an overweight person, except in humorous fashion.

It strikes me that what you call "Political Correctness" most people would consider common decency. Using an accurate label to describe something rather than a word to demean someone.

Now how does this all fold back to Phil and his bigotry?

Well, Phil subscribes to an old view of homosexuality that it is a "sin" (although he really can't demonstrate who it hurts, just that it offends his sky friend) and he really thinks it's a choice that he can't understand.

Reality- Science has concluded that sexual orientation is not a choice, which is why they took homosexuality off the list of psychological disorders decades ago.

you were making a little sense until you threw in the anti christian remark. ITS WHAT HE BELIEVES. HE HAS THE RIGHT TO EXPRESS HIS BELIEFS, JUST AS YOU DO.

you left wing assholes preach tolerance and acceptance but you never practice it.

YOU ARE HYPOCRITES.

People who burned witches at the stake sincerely believed that the women they were burning to death were indeed witches. Did that make it okay?

Saying, "Well, that's what he believes" really doesn't quite cut it anymore.

Particularly when he and most Christians cherry-pick what parts of the bible they want to follow.

 

[The T]

Hopefully not for much longer.

American blacks have been victimized long enough by the PC Police.

.

Yes, a lot of young blacks are waking up and seeing that PC and liberalism has done nothing for them. Juan Williams son was on last night and is a young arrticulate black republican conservative.

the tide is turning and the jacksons and sharptons are being left in the dust where they belong.

I'd like to see what Juan Williams' wife looks like to have such a stunning son. He looks like Mario Lopez.

Unfortunately too many black people are making their own living on being professional victims.

And leaders like Jackson, Sharpton, And the wrong Reverend Wright that Obama claims to have never really listened to.

 

[Redfish]

We don't change the language to not offend someone. We change it to be more accurate.

To take your above examples. Both "Midget" and "Dwarf" are considered offensive terms, the proper term today is "Little Person". The language was changed to emphasize the humanity of the person being described, something labels take away.

The same thing with "Secretary" vs. "Receptionist". The term was changed to emphasize the professionalism of the person doing the job. Secretary as a word implies some golddigger who is making a play for a professional married man. That's the stereotype we have. Receptionist implies a professional with multiple skills who is a key player in a professional office.

Nobody uses the term "calorically challenged" to describe an overweight person, except in humorous fashion.

It strikes me that what you call "Political Correctness" most people would consider common decency. Using an accurate label to describe something rather than a word to demean someone.

Now how does this all fold back to Phil and his bigotry?

Well, Phil subscribes to an old view of homosexuality that it is a "sin" (although he really can't demonstrate who it hurts, just that it offends his sky friend) and he really thinks it's a choice that he can't understand.

Reality- Science has concluded that sexual orientation is not a choice, which is why they took homosexuality off the list of psychological disorders decades ago.

you were making a little sense until you threw in the anti christian remark. ITS WHAT HE BELIEVES. HE HAS THE RIGHT TO EXPRESS HIS BELIEFS, JUST AS YOU DO.

you left wing assholes preach tolerance and acceptance but you never practice it.

YOU ARE HYPOCRITES.

People who burned witches at the stake sincerely believed that the women they were burning to death were indeed witches. Did that make it okay?

Saying, "Well, that's what he believes" really doesn't quite cut it anymore.

Particularly when he and most Christians cherry-pick what parts of the bible they want to follow.

False analogy. You cannot compare the views of right and wrong in the past to current views of right and wrong.

You refuse to tolerate Phil's beliefs and demand that he renounce them but you want the government to mandate that he accept yours. Don't you see the hypocrisy in that?

typical liberal thought process "I know best and I demand that you follow my beliefs and deny yours"

 

[The T]

If the outrage was manufactured, it was manufactured by GLAAD. Then Jesse Jackson got outranged because blacks were accused of past happiness.

Thats funny. the Jacksons of the world can only exist if they convince blacks that they are miserable and oppressed and kept from happiness by whitey "the man".

Hopefully not for much longer.

American blacks have been victimized long enough by the PC Police.

.

The NEW victim group will be Illegals...Hispanics...Obama has announced his intent already with focusing on Immigration reform...while still refusing to focus on our sick economy he foisted on us.

It's ALL a diversion.

 

[jon_berzerk]

We don't change the language to not offend someone. We change it to be more accurate.

To take your above examples. Both "Midget" and "Dwarf" are considered offensive terms, the proper term today is "Little Person". The language was changed to emphasize the humanity of the person being described, something labels take away.

The same thing with "Secretary" vs. "Receptionist". The term was changed to emphasize the professionalism of the person doing the job. Secretary as a word implies some golddigger who is making a play for a professional married man. That's the stereotype we have. Receptionist implies a professional with multiple skills who is a key player in a professional office.

Nobody uses the term "calorically challenged" to describe an overweight person, except in humorous fashion.

It strikes me that what you call "Political Correctness" most people would consider common decency. Using an accurate label to describe something rather than a word to demean someone.

Now how does this all fold back to Phil and his bigotry?

Well, Phil subscribes to an old view of homosexuality that it is a "sin" (although he really can't demonstrate who it hurts, just that it offends his sky friend) and he really thinks it's a choice that he can't understand.

Reality- Science has concluded that sexual orientation is not a choice, which is why they took homosexuality off the list of psychological disorders decades ago.

you were making a little sense until you threw in the anti christian remark. ITS WHAT HE BELIEVES. HE HAS THE RIGHT TO EXPRESS HIS BELIEFS, JUST AS YOU DO.

you left wing assholes preach tolerance and acceptance but you never practice it.

YOU ARE HYPOCRITES.

People who burned witches at the stake sincerely believed that the women they were burning to death were indeed witches. Did that make it okay?

Saying, "Well, that's what he believes" really doesn't quite cut it anymore.

Particularly when he and most Christians cherry-pick what parts of the bible they want to follow.

except now glaad and others are the ones with the matches

 

[The T]

We don't change the language to not offend someone. We change it to be more accurate.

To take your above examples. Both "Midget" and "Dwarf" are considered offensive terms, the proper term today is "Little Person". The language was changed to emphasize the humanity of the person being described, something labels take away.

The same thing with "Secretary" vs. "Receptionist". The term was changed to emphasize the professionalism of the person doing the job. Secretary as a word implies some golddigger who is making a play for a professional married man. That's the stereotype we have. Receptionist implies a professional with multiple skills who is a key player in a professional office.

Nobody uses the term "calorically challenged" to describe an overweight person, except in humorous fashion.

It strikes me that what you call "Political Correctness" most people would consider common decency. Using an accurate label to describe something rather than a word to demean someone.

Now how does this all fold back to Phil and his bigotry?

Well, Phil subscribes to an old view of homosexuality that it is a "sin" (although he really can't demonstrate who it hurts, just that it offends his sky friend) and he really thinks it's a choice that he can't understand.

Reality- Science has concluded that sexual orientation is not a choice, which is why they took homosexuality off the list of psychological disorders decades ago.

you were making a little sense until you threw in the anti christian remark. ITS WHAT HE BELIEVES. HE HAS THE RIGHT TO EXPRESS HIS BELIEFS, JUST AS YOU DO.

you left wing assholes preach tolerance and acceptance but you never practice it.

YOU ARE HYPOCRITES.

People who burned witches at the stake sincerely believed that the women they were burning to death were indeed witches. Did that make it okay?

Saying, "Well, that's what he believes" really doesn't quite cut it anymore.

Particularly when he and most Christians cherry-pick what parts of the bible they want to follow.

Just like YOU cherry-pick the parts of the Constitution/LAW YOU want to follow Joey?

Fuck off you idiotic HYPOCRITE.

 

[JoeB131]

you were making a little sense until you threw in the anti christian remark. ITS WHAT HE BELIEVES. HE HAS THE RIGHT TO EXPRESS HIS BELIEFS, JUST AS YOU DO.

you left wing assholes preach tolerance and acceptance but you never practice it.

YOU ARE HYPOCRITES.

People who burned witches at the stake sincerely believed that the women they were burning to death were indeed witches. Did that make it okay?

Saying, "Well, that's what he believes" really doesn't quite cut it anymore.

Particularly when he and most Christians cherry-pick what parts of the bible they want to follow.

False analogy. You cannot compare the views of right and wrong in the past to current views of right and wrong.

You refuse to tolerate Phil's beliefs and demand that he renounce them but you want the government to mandate that he accept yours. Don't you see the hypocrisy in that?

typical liberal thought process "I know best and I demand that you follow my beliefs and deny yours"

It's not a false analogy at all.

Those folks really believed there were witches!!! "Thou Shall not Suffer a Witch to Live!"

It was in the bible.

Now this does beg the question if there weren't any real witches, why did God say there were in the bible and FURTHERMORE demand they be killed. Because then you have to wonder, what else is the bible wrong about.

People in bible times believed that plagues were curses from God. Today we know they are caused by things called "Germs".

So when Phil says we should discriminate against gay folks because, hey, it's in the bible, some of us might want to demand a slightly higher standard, given the Bible was wrong on the whole Witch and Plague things...

 

[JoeB131]

you were making a little sense until you threw in the anti christian remark. ITS WHAT HE BELIEVES. HE HAS THE RIGHT TO EXPRESS HIS BELIEFS, JUST AS YOU DO.

you left wing assholes preach tolerance and acceptance but you never practice it.

YOU ARE HYPOCRITES.

People who burned witches at the stake sincerely believed that the women they were burning to death were indeed witches. Did that make it okay?

Saying, "Well, that's what he believes" really doesn't quite cut it anymore.

Particularly when he and most Christians cherry-pick what parts of the bible they want to follow.

Just like YOU cherry-pick the parts of the Constitution/LAW YOU want to follow Joey?

Fuck off you idiotic HYPOCRITE.

Well, that's because, I don't think the Constitution came from a Magic Sky Fairy.

It came from Men. And we have to apply it with a lick of common sense to the world we live in today. Right to Bear Arms might have made sense in 1787 when you needed a musket to chase off a wolf, but it makes less sense when a crazy person takes a machine gun to a school.

Now, to the point. We don't stone our daughters to death for knowing a man before her wedding. We don't eschew pork and shellfish as abominations. We've grown beyond those laws.

I will even concede some of the laws in the bible actually kind of make sense, but only after you think about them.

So, that all said, "Homosexuality is bad because....."

(It's in the Bible is not a good enough answer anymore.)

 

[OODA_Loop]

Right to Bear Arms might have made sense in 1787 when you needed a musket to chase off a wolf, but it makes less sense when a crazy person takes a machine gun to a school.

Needed a musket to fend off tyrannical government.

Same as it ever was.

 

[JoeB131]

Right to Bear Arms might have made sense in 1787 when you needed a musket to chase off a wolf, but it makes less sense when a crazy person takes a machine gun to a school.

Needed a musket to fend of tyrannical government.

Same as it ever was.

Okay, so those kids who got whacked at Newtown were a tyrannical government?

 

[The T]

Right to Bear Arms might have made sense in 1787 when you needed a musket to chase off a wolf, but it makes less sense when a crazy person takes a machine gun to a school.

Needed a musket to fend of tyrannical government.

Same as it ever was.

OR whatever it takes. ALL the Second states is ARMS.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Right to Bear Arms might have made sense in 1787 when you needed a musket to chase off a wolf, but it makes less sense when a crazy person takes a machine gun to a school.

Needed a musket to fend of tyrannical government.

Same as it ever was.

the framers made no distiction between a simple musket

or a highly advanced weapon of the time the Girandoni

which could pump out 40 rounds a minute

 

[OODA_Loop]

Right to Bear Arms might have made sense in 1787 when you needed a musket to chase off a wolf, but it makes less sense when a crazy person takes a machine gun to a school.

Needed a musket to fend of tyrannical government.

Same as it ever was.

Okay, so those kids who got whacked at Newtown were a tyrannical government?

No.

 

[Redfish]

People who burned witches at the stake sincerely believed that the women they were burning to death were indeed witches. Did that make it okay?

Saying, "Well, that's what he believes" really doesn't quite cut it anymore.

Particularly when he and most Christians cherry-pick what parts of the bible they want to follow.

Just like YOU cherry-pick the parts of the Constitution/LAW YOU want to follow Joey?

Fuck off you idiotic HYPOCRITE.

Well, that's because, I don't think the Constitution came from a Magic Sky Fairy.

It came from Men. And we have to apply it with a lick of common sense to the world we live in today. Right to Bear Arms might have made sense in 1787 when you needed a musket to chase off a wolf, but it makes less sense when a crazy person takes a machine gun to a school.

Now, to the point. We don't stone our daughters to death for knowing a man before her wedding. We don't eschew pork and shellfish as abominations. We've grown beyond those laws.

I will even concede some of the laws in the bible actually kind of make sense, but only after you think about them.

So, that all said, "Homosexuality is bad because....."

(It's in the Bible is not a good enough answer anymore.)

Homosexuality is wrong because of biology, the Bible and all other religious teachings are merely confirming the biological reality of the human species.

BTW, I am offended when you refer to God as a sky fairy. I am going to sue you for hate speech.

 

[Redfish]

Right to Bear Arms might have made sense in 1787 when you needed a musket to chase off a wolf, but it makes less sense when a crazy person takes a machine gun to a school.

Needed a musket to fend of tyrannical government.

Same as it ever was.

Okay, so those kids who got whacked at Newtown were a tyrannical government?

they were victims of mental illness that was ignored by society, because society did not want to offend the mentally ill person by calling him mentally ill.

 

[The T]

Right to Bear Arms might have made sense in 1787 when you needed a musket to chase off a wolf, but it makes less sense when a crazy person takes a machine gun to a school.

Needed a musket to fend of tyrannical government.

Same as it ever was.

Okay, so those kids who got whacked at Newtown were a tyrannical government?

Nice try jackwad. They were victims of a mentally disturbed child...just as YOU are mentally disturbed.

 

[The T]

Just like YOU cherry-pick the parts of the Constitution/LAW YOU want to follow Joey?

Fuck off you idiotic HYPOCRITE.

Well, that's because, I don't think the Constitution came from a Magic Sky Fairy.

It came from Men. And we have to apply it with a lick of common sense to the world we live in today. Right to Bear Arms might have made sense in 1787 when you needed a musket to chase off a wolf, but it makes less sense when a crazy person takes a machine gun to a school.

Now, to the point. We don't stone our daughters to death for knowing a man before her wedding. We don't eschew pork and shellfish as abominations. We've grown beyond those laws.

I will even concede some of the laws in the bible actually kind of make sense, but only after you think about them.

So, that all said, "Homosexuality is bad because....."

(It's in the Bible is not a good enough answer anymore.)

Homosexuality is wrong because of biology, the Bible and all other religious teachings are merely confirming the biological reality of the human species.

BTW, I am offended when you refer to God as a sky fairy. I am going to sue you for hate speech.

Then he should applaud you as you use his same tactic as he, but watch this jackass spin on a dime and change his tune.

 

[Redfish]

Well, that's because, I don't think the Constitution came from a Magic Sky Fairy.

It came from Men. And we have to apply it with a lick of common sense to the world we live in today. Right to Bear Arms might have made sense in 1787 when you needed a musket to chase off a wolf, but it makes less sense when a crazy person takes a machine gun to a school.

Now, to the point. We don't stone our daughters to death for knowing a man before her wedding. We don't eschew pork and shellfish as abominations. We've grown beyond those laws.

I will even concede some of the laws in the bible actually kind of make sense, but only after you think about them.

So, that all said, "Homosexuality is bad because....."

(It's in the Bible is not a good enough answer anymore.)

Homosexuality is wrong because of biology, the Bible and all other religious teachings are merely confirming the biological reality of the human species.

BTW, I am offended when you refer to God as a sky fairy. I am going to sue you for hate speech.

Then he should applaud you as you use his same tactic as he, but watch this jackass spin on a dime and change his tune.

right, tolerance is a one way street with libtards.

 

[Vox]

Homosexuality is wrong because of biology, the Bible and all other religious teachings are merely confirming the biological reality of the human species.

BTW, I am offended when you refer to God as a sky fairy. I am going to sue you for hate speech.

Then he should applaud you as you use his same tactic as he, but watch this jackass spin on a dime and change his tune.

right, tolerance is a one way street with libtards.

that is true, but the other truth is a lot of conservative Christian groups or individuals do not pursue the "sue them" venue because of the wrong interpretation of forgiveness and "the other cheek".

Otherwise the whole bigotry and discrimination against Christians would be long gone.

Show some FINANCIAL aggressiveness, and the issue will disappear.

 

[The T]

Then he should applaud you as you use his same tactic as he, but watch this jackass spin on a dime and change his tune.

right, tolerance is a one way street with libtards.

that is true, but the other truth is a lot of conservative Christian groups or individuals do not pursue the "sue them" venue because of the wrong interpretation of forgiveness and "the other cheek".

Otherwise the whole bigotry and discrimination against Christians would be long gone.

Show some FINANCIAL aggressiveness, and the issue will disappear.

Just standing UP to these people is enough. I agree with 'turning the other cheek'...but turning the tables on oppressors to the point it hurts them right back does work. MAKE them question their purpose, their existence...