Saturday is a good day for exposing silliness.
Silliness is always to be found among the devotees of political correctness.
And the devotees of political correctness are always to be found in the universities.
Today it may be found in the University of Michigan. It is “banning” words.
Professor Jonathan Turley writes:
The University of Michigan has spent $16,000 on a campaign to get students to use “inclusive language” and stop using certain words and phrases.
Among the banned words and phrases are: crazy, insane, gay, tyranny, illegal alien, fag, ghetto, and raghead.
He points out that –
Once schools begin to list approved and disapproved words, there is a slippery slope toward the inclusion of any word that could possibly insult any person or group.
And that –
Most of my friends who are homosexual refer to themselves as “gay”.
The level of intelligence among those at the University of Michigan who are trying to shrink the English language is demonstrated by this:
“I wanted to die” is listed as offense to “people who have attempted or committed suicide”.
That prompts us to say that the language-censors at Michigan University are positively retarded.
But – oops! – that’s another “banned” word. This comes from Truth Revolt:
Students at UCLA are uniting in solidarity over a new political correctness campaign: to ban the “R-word”.
The campaign, called “Spread the Word to End the Word”, asks students to pledge to eradicate the words “retard” and “retarded” from their vocabulary.
UCLA (University of California Los Angeles) hopes to get the entire nation to stop using those two words.
The Spread the Word to End the Word campaign is part of a larger national movement to stop people from using the word “retard” or “retarded”. Using the word as a negative label can be offensive because it is associated with people who have developmental or learning disabilities.
In other words, retarded people.
“New Year’s Day: Now is the accepted time to make your regular annual good resolutions.
Next week you can begin paving hell with them as usual.” – Mark Twain
A Happy New Year to all who see this page!
We make New Year wishes rather than resolutions. Here are some of them:
May Obama be hindered, hampered, frustrated and blocked in every political action he takes. Best of all, may he (and Joe Biden) resign.
May the decline of America, that Obama has deliberately worked, be reversed. May the Republicans use their congressional majorities and all their positions of authority to effect that reversal.
May religious belief start withering away, irreversibly, from the human psyche.
May Islam be soundly defeated everywhere on earth and set on the road to rapid and total extinction.
May the welfare state start being phased out, and genuine market economies be allowed to function in every nation-state.
May the man-made global warming lobby give up.
May the United Nations and all its agencies be destroyed.
Those are enough to be getting on with.
Okay – we’re being unrealistic. But while we’re wishing, we may as well wish big.
Readers are invited to tell us their wishes (or resolutions) if they will.
Let us celebrate this season of the year with feasting and carousing, with good cheer in good company, with music and laughter.
December 25 was not the birthday of that tragic rabbi, “Jesus” of Nazareth; nor claimed to be for St Paul’s (completely different and totally fictitious) “Jesus Christ”.
December 25 was only chosen as the day of the Christian god’s earthly birth (from the womb of a virgin!) in the third century CE at the earliest.
A Christian source states authoritatively:
The eventual choice of December 25, made perhaps as early as 273, reflects a convergence of Origen’s concern about pagan gods and the church’s identification of God’s son with the celestial sun. December 25 already hosted two other related festivals: natalis solis invicti (the Roman “birth of the unconquered sun”), and the birthday of Mithras, the Iranian “Sun of Righteousness” whose worship was popular with Roman soldiers. The winter solstice, another celebration of the sun, fell just a few days earlier. Seeing that pagans were already exalting deities with some parallels to the true deity [haw-haw, yeah, sure – ed], church leaders decided to commandeer the date and introduce a new festival.
The day has been called “Christmas” for some 1,841 years.
So we say to our frequent readers, casual visitors, highly valued commenters, critics, and even our less insulting abusers:
We wish you a Very Merry Christmas!
On this Thanksgiving day, November 27, 2014, we at The Atheist Conservative thank our readers and commenters – especially our frequent commenters – for helping so vitally to make our online magazine of analytical opinion the success that it is.
We extend our thanks also to our occasional visitors and even to our (more indulgent) critics.
The greater part of the value of our site results from your interest in it, your contributions to it, your sympathetic and corrective views.
Thank you for the links you send us, the knowledge you give us, the works you tell us about, the ideas you stimulate us with, the anecdotes you enthrall us with.
Feast, drink deep, be merry!
We drink to your good health, happiness with much laughter, and enduring liberty.
Andrew Klavan interprets the language of the Left.
We wonder which of the 71 genders now recognized, these three belong to. Anyway they’re all feminists. Shouldn’t Pajama Boy be with them? And Barry “Chickenshit” Obama?
Our opinion: They’d all look great in a Burkha!
Here’s the Telegraph’s list of the 71 genders:
The 21 new options for UK Facebook users
Female to male trans man
Female to male transgender man
Female to male transsexual man
Male to female trans woman
Male to female transgender woman
Male to female transsexual woman
The list of the 50 previous gender options
Female to Male
Male to Female
At least one of these should be easy to recognize: the Bigenders.
There seems to be a certain redundancy in (for instance) Female to Male and also FTM and even still F2M. But I can already hear an exasperated voice – breaking in mid-sentence – crying out impatiently: ‘You’re so dumb! Can’t you get it that there’s all the difference in the world whether you want a full label applied to you or only the initials or a description suitable for a text message?”
What is the difference, we wonder, between the first list of Trans- (female male man person) and the second list of the same which we have italicized? We suspect a printing error occurred there, and if so the total of the tally is wrong. The number needs to be reduced from 71 to 67 max.
The Trans person is a particularly curious category. What can a person trans into? An animal? A plant?
Man and Woman were not among the previous options, and have apparently only just been introduced. Most people were ahead of Facebook there.
Gender Fluid brings to mind the shape-changers of Star Trek.
Amazing that, with so comprehensive-seeming a list, there is still the category of “Other”. Wouldn’t Male, Female, Other have covered everything?
And most amazing of all is Pangender. There are people going about among us who are all of the listed genders simultaneously? Aren’t some of them mutually exclusive – as, for instance, Neither and Man/Woman? Or Agender and most of the others?
(The picture of the three feminists comes from a Front Page article by Daniel Greenfield.)
(Hat-tip to Robert Kantor for the 71 genders.)
This video is one of a series – a pleasure to watch in its entirety – in which Charles R. Kesler of the Claremont Institute interviews Heather Mac Donald. She thinks clearly and speaks plainly. Her ideas are genuinely profound.
Very rare, that. Most intellectuals are not very intelligent, and seem to hold to the precept: “I cannot be profound so I’ll be unintelligible – and trust that few who hear me can tell the difference.”
Heather Mac Donald is an atheist and a conservative. We expect most of our readers will be in agreement with what she says here:
The Golden Rule: Treat others as you want them to treat you.
Or (better): Don’t treat others as you’d hate to be treated yourself.
It is worth noting that belief in the Golden Rule is not common to all religions. Not even to all the “moral religions”. There is nothing in the teaching of Islam that approximates to it, even with the most liberal interpretation of Muhammad’s less offensive doctrines.
The Golden Rule is, however, reasonable. Sensible human beings don’t need a message from a mystical sphere to see that it makes good sense.
Sam Harris is an atheist. We like a lot of what he writes and says. Just recently one of our readers sent us this statement of his, which we acknowledge, sadly, to be most probably true:
For the rest of our lives, and the lives of our children, we are going to be confronted by people who don’t want to live peacefully in a secular, pluralistic world, because they are desperate to get to Paradise, and they are willing to destroy the very possibility of human happiness along the way.
We have watched videos of him lecturing. We have read some articles of his. And all with appreciation. So when we were sent his new book for review, we expected to like it.
Do we like it?
To read Jillian Becker’s review of Waking Up: A Guide to Spirituality Without Religion by Sam Harris, click on its title in our margin, under Pages.
In the midst of so much bad news, of wars and massacres and the decline of the West, we thought something cheerful would be a nice change.
Perfectly irrelevant to any of our concerns, here’s three-year old Lyonya Shilovsky, a Russian drummer, performing with the Novosibirsk Symphony Orchestra.
We first saw the little drummer boy at PowerLine, and captured the video from YouTube:
Every ethnicity, sexual proclivity, religion, body shape, etc., has a well-funded organization claiming the mantle of leadership on its behalf ready to jump (and fundraise) should someone string together words in an unapproved order.
There’s an effort to alter the First Amendment moving through the Senate right now, but there’s really no need for it. We, as a society, have voluntarily forfeited the reason for it already. The horse is dead; stop kicking it.
So Derek Hunter writes at Townhall.
He deplores the political correctness that is exercising a puritanical tyranny over free speech:
The political correctness movement ruined honest political discourse, funny movies and decent sitcoms, and now it’s sucking the joy out of everyday life …
It may seem like a lifetime ago, but it was only the 1970s when “Blazing Saddles” was made and embraced by a culture simply looking to laugh. It was offensive. It was silly. But most of all it was funny. Same goes for “Airplane!” Richard Pryor and George Carlin were mocking people and cultures, and it was hilarious.
Now we are no longer ready to laugh; we’re ready to be offended. No, we seem to crave being offended.
Not all of us, of course. But it’s amazing how many people like to complain that they are being victimized by something someone says.
A small deputation to this website asked us to find a word to describe people who make a point of taking offense.
A word is needed that will mark them. They constitute a national menace, demanding not just pity for themselves, but blame and severe penalty for their alleged offenders, abject apologies, and even the amendment – as Derek Hunter notes – of the free speech article, the essential First Amendment, of the Constitution.
We accepted the commission. We began to hunt for such a word. Surely, we reasoned, in the enormous vocabulary of the richest language in the world there is a word for them?
But it seems not. Political correctness is too recent a development in Western culture.
So we decided we would coin a word. A word that means: persons who crave an excuse to take offense; persons who are hurt-hungry.
Should we construct it from Greek words, we wondered. No: words in Greek for hurt, pain, offense, and hungriness do not blend and Anglicize smoothly.
Latin then? Yes. In Latin, pain (of body or mind) is dolor. Hungry is esuriens.
So we can construct a good strong word for the pain-hungry: the DOLORESURIENT.
Be not intimidated by it. It can obviously be shortened to a nice common English word to apply to the offense-collectors: DOLLIES.
With the connotations that word has, it could do very well to offend them.