Morgan

It may be true we cannot force compassion, but what it does it make people aware of their words. Words do have an impact. It also implies what, as a society is not against the law but is unacceptable, it is attempting to raise the bar on how we communicate with each other, I don't see that as a bad thing.

Seth

When it is enforced by city, state or federal government, as if there are now "speech police," political correctness becomes a slippery slope in that it infringes on the First Amendment rights of one sector of opinion to protect the "feelings" of another.

As often as not, it also erects a barrier to dialogue that could, potentially, be beneficial to significant numbers of people who are being socially and/or economicallyshort-changed because of that same paucity of much needed discussion.

In the latter regard, PC has become a distinctly one-sided political tool.

Rose42

It can't be done via enforced language. The attitude starts in the heart. When people try and enforce it that will build resentment which then will increase the p.c. language which will increase the resentment. Its circular.

People don't have the right not to be offended. They need to toughen up.

I can't read your new avatar. What does it say?

rumitoid

Very well put. Thank you for your insights.

rumitoid

You make some good points. Let me ask you a question: why is it that "PC has become a distinctly one-sided political tool." No, this is true of both sides: the Left smugly promotes it and the Right revels in rejecting it. Please listen to an OPP member, morgan: "...what it does it make people aware of their words. Words do have an impact. It also implies what, as a society it is not against the law but is unacceptable, it is attempting to raise the bar on how we communicate with each other, I don't see that as a bad thing."

Words are the most damaging and lethal weapon we have to destroy lives. No weapon or punishment or attack by any other means is worse. That is what PC tries to show and reduce. Yes, it can get ridiculous, yet that is not the rule. The Right makes that the rule. Why?

Why not care and give sensitive attention to wh**ever we say to another person or group? What is wrong with that? Oh, you don't want to be bothered? Just want to say what you want to say no matter the harm? Your 1st Amendment right let's you be as cruel and hurtful in what you say and everyone be damned? Well, you are right, but that choice is about character and humanity. Again, why choose words that will hurt instead of heal? What is the motive or intent?

rumitoid

Saying things as they are by the Right, "That a Welfare Queen is a Welfare Queen, end of story." Wild cheers of forthrightness from Constituents. This illuminates their h**e of PC.

rumitoid

I believe you are a Christian. If not, this may still be something to consider. God does not say those people should "toughen up" but just the opposite. We need to soften up.

1 Peter 3:10: "“Whoever would love life and see good days must keep their tongue from evil and their lips from deceitful speech." Is that PC or "speech police"?

Colosians4:6: "Let your conversation always be filled with grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer EVERYONE." We have a PC God? Why not just tell it like it is without all these oppressive rules? These whiny minorities and disenfranchised people should get a life.

Ephesians4:29: "Do not let unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what what is helpful to building up others for their needs, that it may benefit those who listen." Rotten, c****e Demonrats have rewritten the Bible, those scoundrels.

Yes, I was a bit, or more, heavy-handed on you, sorry. Yet I am so tired--no, sickened--that being aware and decent in our speech is opposed by the Right as a 1st Amendment issue. It is a humanitarian issue and they are against it!

Rose42

So we gradually give up first amendment rights because its for our own good and so others don’t have their care bubble burst. Life isn’t fair.

Shall we make sure everyone gets their own saferoom too?

People h**e pc because they see through the spin and recognize it for what it is. The left wants to control speech.

rumitoid

Sorry you feel that way. But a question: how do you give up your 1st Amendment rights? If you have children, do you give them unrestricted free speech? Let them bully a student with hurtful remarks, use foul language, and say r****t comments? Once grown, would you not not want them to refrain from such? Or is that an attack on the 1st Amendment? This is a crazy argument about all the wrong things. And I am a little shocked you don't see that point.

The Right has a campaign to put their most controversial speakers on US campuses, speakers who are not afraid to call a spade a "spade" no matter who it hurts or what damage it may do. Bravo, free speech. Yes, inciting d******eness and h**e is protected, but the Right wants to make it exalted, the true champion of that liberty. Or go crawl you whiny wimps into your "safe-rooms." N**i-like torchlight parades by White Nationalists are protected: is speaking out against them really suppressing free speech? Why is one's objections to such things not also protected? Who is suppressing free speech?

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

Speaking out against them is fine.... And I would encourage it... Preventing them from their expressing their opinions is not ok...

Nor is the push to make certain topics or stances taboo ...

And I see the right as complicit in this as well..
Both sides have members who wish to stifle the speech of the other...

Rose42

I see the point you’re trying to make. You can teach a child to be respectful without political correctness. Parents have done it for thousands of years.



The left doesn’t have to be worried about inciting r****m and division - it is condoned. Its only wrong if the right does it.

Objecting isn’t wrong. Trying to control speech is. Its all well and good to say you believe in free speech when its comfortable. Its when it becomes uncomfortable that the real test begins. Americans used to be much tougher. Now everyone’s a victim

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

I recall my father correcting me for ill manners and for being overly sensitive...

That being said... I notice many younger (politically correct) individuals are lacking in many of the basic manners that we used to cherish... Simple civilities have been replaced by a sort of collective policing...

Seth

Again, such things as sensitivity in what one says or in ones descriptives when discussing others, good, bad or indifferent, should still be left up to the individual, not regulated by some level of government, for, among other reasons, the human nature perspective: once any body of government is given the power to police speech, it is inevitable that free speech will shrink until it becomes non-existent and the penalties for violating PC statutes will become extreme.

This has been proven every time a government has had any degree of speech policing authority.

There is also a double standard in play within our own political structure.

How do you think Trump supporters who liked what he was saying during his campaign felt when Hillary Clinton referred to them (us) as "deplorables?" Where was the sensitivity or, for that matter, criticism of her remarks from the political correctness advocates on the left?

Where were those same champions of hurt feelings, sensitivity and political correctness when Barack Obama made his comments about those who "cling to religion and guns?"

Was that "different?"

Sorry, but the entire political correctness argument seems to be profoundly one-sided, its goal being, ultimately, to silence those of us on the conservative side of the political divide.

rumitoid

The issue is not that simple. Primary to every campus is safety. But how they may weigh that concern could be biased. Or not, a real threat is possible. Put a pin in that.

I have said before and I will again now, I am totally for allowing any speaker on school grounds to address the students. They are there for an education and that is not just about the subjects on the curriculum. They are our future. They need to see the real world as it is with all its existential, messy, and hard choices. How are they going to make clear choices, know where they stand, be responsible citizens, without being exposed to what may be opposing or controversial or even h**eful stances? Time to be adults.

However, in my years at college, I met some really scary, fringe people. Both sides and weird sides. A speaker given the prestigious position to speak is seen as an authority, someone in the know. What that speaker may say could induce this nut to de-shell and.... Yet how can we possibly plan for or lessen the impact on such elements? We can't. Let them speak!

Canuckus Deploracus Loc: North of the wall

No argument from me...
And I recall your stances very well... I certainly have never considered you a PC advocate...

It's Funny that PC is one of the issues that the right has difficulty discussing... Lots of prejudice towards the topics....

Universities should have the final say in who speaks.. I disagree with the groups who advocate boycotts and threaten violence against speakers...

Your views on the matter are realistic and align with my own...