The thread is titled “pet peeves”, not “major problems we need to address”.
Can we also call the English “Engs”?
monstro’s point is 180 degrees off target. Terr is annoyed by the fact that people taking such extremes to avoid use of a word perhaps they think that it might offend some people, in this case the some people including him. The verbal convolutions some take to avoid potentially offending members of the group he self-identifies as, is, to him, annoying. Not offensive, just roll-eye worthy. You want to do it anyway? Fine. Your intent is good … but odd to be doing something out of a desire to not offend and then continue to do it when told by many members of the group in question that there not only is no need to take it to such a level but that such extreme efforts come off as contrived and stilted to their ears. It is sort of like someone always saying “African-American” rather than “Black” because at some point they got the impression that that was what that group wanted to be called, being told that “No ‘Black’ is just fine” by many members of the group, and then insisting on still only using “African-American.” It’s not offensive, just roll-eye worthy.
Personally I agree with those who state that context matters. Generally the plural “Jews” is only offensive if in the context of “fukkin’ Jews” or "Goddamm Jews. Otherwise “Jews” or “Jewish people” are both just fine depending on the flow of a sentence. In general brevity is preferred but hey, YMMV. Singular “Jew” is used so much more commonly by anti-Semites, especially with the definite article “the” in front of it, that its use often does come off badly. “The Jew DSeid …” is clearly meant to offend. “DSeid, who is Jewish …” is not, at all. In isolation “DSeid is a Jew.” does have a different tone than “DSeid is Jewish.” or “… is of Jewish descent.” The former usage is preferred by a … certain … crowd, and therefore when one applies that usage one sounds like a member of that certain crowd. But only minimally so unless the context primes one to hear it in that light.
I think wanting to avoid that association by usage has led many to be overly cautious else they might inadvertently be misconstrued. Ironically that is a very Orthodox tradition … I think referred to as building a fence around the law … interpret and practice stricter than the Law literally requires so unintentional breaking of the Law is even less likely. I don’t get offended by the excesses of the Orthodox and I don’t get offended by those falling over themselves needlessly to avoid offending me.
Being annoyed is not any more virtuous or admirable than being “offended.” It’s just another emotion.
If Terr can take the piss at people who feel upset when they are the butt of racist jokes or they are forced to talk about racial shite they don’t want to talk about, I can take the piss at him for being annoyed at the misuse of the word “Jew” by well-meaning, non-malicious people.
FWIW, I don’t think I’ve ever hesitated saying the word “Jew” before. At least not out of fear of offending anyone. But I’ll try to watch what I say in the future. But because of you, not him. 
To be fair, some people will be offended by those. “Autistic people”, in particular, is considered by some activists to be offensive and the proper term is “people with autism” (called “person first language”).
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18457035&postcount=338
“But maybe someone has asked a Jewish person what church they belong to and never stopped to think how that seemingly harmless question might grate someone’s nerves day after day.”
I promise to do better, Jews.
Sure, so are “love”, “hate”, “anger”, “sadness”, etc. also just other emotions … and as “Inside Out” teaches us, none are more admirable than any other. 
But still if one is pissing at someone calling them out for a claim they are not easily offended themselves by saying “Aha. Gotcha. See you are too!” then the fact that are actually something else other than offended, no more or less virtuous or admirable but different … well then the piss stream aint hitting the target and leaves a mess on the seat, y’know?
And that is assuming that continuing pissing contests across threads and fora is good form to begin with. Not my place to comment on that.
Your expressed future consideration is appreciated, although I note I only speak for my own ears, and thank you for illustrating how the use of the plural can be offensive even without “Fukkin” or “Goddam” in front of it, depending on exact usage and understood intent. It was cute.
… I think I agree with you. In contrast, I would get offended by people falling over themselves needlessly to avoid offending me: In my culture it is insulting to suggest that I am easily offended, ( and particularly, lying to avoid offending me becomes the one really offensive thing you can do.)
Not sure how well it’s known, but an early Google bomb was a response to Google’s top-ranked site for the keyword “Jew” being to an anti-semitic website.
I confess as a gentile (can I be an atheist gentile? whatever) I hesitate to use the word “Jew” in proper context, and am aware of my usage when I do use it. That’s not necessarily a good thing. Terr is correct that it’s a perfectly cromulent word. However, it’s worth noting the reasons for that Google bomb’s necessity: for a long time, “Jew” appeared in primarily derogatory contexts, and we gentiles were likelier to hear “Jewish people” used in non-derogatory contexts than we were to hear “Jews” in the same contexts. This was true to such a degree that Google’s algorithms figured you must be looking for an antisemitic website if you searched for “Jews.”
The word has gotten itself an ugly connotation attached through usage. Is it worth scrubbing off that connotation, taking the word back from bigots? This is one of those things that’s not really my call, but I think it is.
I still hesitate over its usage, am still aware when I use it, but I try to use it in appropriate contexts.
Well, reactions like this might have something to do with it.
… because one idiot was against it, Rand changed it. Who says Rand is not just like any other politician?
Correct! We would have openly laughed/mocked/ridiculed him. We would have asked why the doctor’s race was even worth mentioning. We would have talked about it. But by using the word “colored”, nobody wanted to even go there, as “there” was a place too far.
Plus there was beer needing drunk.
Not just one idiot. I saw it on the cable news because it said “Jew.”
In my lifetime, I went from being Oriental to Asian-American. It’s not like anyone consulted me on it. But somehow “Oriental” came to be considered an offensive term. These things happen. It’s not like all of us involved are polled.
You presented evidence of one idiot.
“Operator, I’d like to make a person-to-person call.”
“That’s offensive.”
“Person-to-person?”
“That’s just as bad.”
Phil Dunphy: Okay, huddle up everybody. Your mother’s right. She’s the quarterback of this family and we need to protect her like Blind Side did.
Luke Dunphy: She just said that mom was Blind Side.
Phil Dunphy: She’s confused. Blind Side was the black kid who played tight end.
Alex Dunphy: Offensive line.
Phil Dunphy: Sorry, African-American kid.
Yes cable news report of one person complaining. Slow day.
But yeah that context does come off … wrong. Wouldn’t if it was plural or if adjectives were used. Does he think he has only one supporter in each category? Most of them could be read as nouns or adjectives and adjectives makes more sense.
One Iowan for Paul? One Christian? Dang his support is thin!
Meanwhile we can at least poll here!
Thank you for proving my point. People who know me would take “damn nigh impossible” to mean exactly that - exceedingly difficult. Others, as you did, will put their own spin on it and infer things that were never said (not gonna even try, Deal with it) or things that never happened (called out, embarrassed, defensive, etc.) precisely so they can be offended. That is the part I care about exactly zero.
There are very few phrases that can be spoken or typed about people that someone, somewhere will not find offensive.
Sure. Call us what you like. We don’t get offended easily, unlike those Trouserdodgers North of Hadrian’s Wall.