I don’t understand what you are saying. They’re on holiday too, aren’t they?
Right- is that supposed to be a bad idea? Sounds like a very sound choice to me.
The problem is they’re very likely not using any greeting they want, they’re using one designed to keep the forces of political correctness at bay. Do you think companies of their own free will undertake policies that are sure to infuriate and drive off a significant number of their customers just to fulfill some nebulous desire to be ‘inclusive’? No, they do it because they want to appear politically correct and they figure it’ll cost them less in the long run to do so than it will to drive off customers who don’t like it. Besides, people have to do their Christmas shopping somewhere, and if all or most stores adopt these policies people have little choice but to patronize them. It’s no accident that most of these types of retail stores adopt these policies at pretty much the same time.
I’m going to play along and pretend you really don’t know what I’m saying, as it gives me an opportunity to be even more specific. What I am saying is that the stores using their alleged desire to be inclusive as an excuse to conform to political correctness have no logical base for having done so, as people of the Jewish faith and those who celebrate Kwanzaa are not the ones who do the bulk of Christmas season holiday shopping and I don’t know of a one that uses Pine trees as part of its religious celebration. So they’re lying. They’re using a flimsy excuse that doesn’t hold up under scrutiny in an attempt to mask their true intent, which is indeed to to conform to political correctness.
Unfortunately the country’s founding fathers and its Constitution don’t agree with you, as they’ve prohibited passing laws that impinge upon the free exercise of religion. Religion isn’t free when it has to be hidden behind closed doors. That’s the kind of thing that happens under totalitarian governments, the largest and most brutal of which have coincidentally grown out of leftist ideology. Thus it comes as little surprise to me that you might find suppression of religion a good idea.
People have come to believe that their every little desire, no matter how small, should not only be outwardly respected, but acted on. It particularly manifests itself in when they are “offended” by something (or worse, assume someone else is offended by something).
It’s perfectly okay to be offended, but that doesn’t automatically get you an apology, or an adjustment to suit your very specific tastes. Tough shit if you don’t like something; get over it, and move on.
No, really, you didn’t explain yourself at all.
I’ll leave the job of pointing out the words of Madison and Jefferson to others.
So? How is “happy holidays” impinging on anybody’s rights? If anything, secularism is what prevents one religion to take over and persecute the others.
I’m more of a center guy. And I’d like to point out to you the many terrible places in the world that are highly religious and not secular at all.
So, you knew your argument was wrong, but you ran with it anyway.
Can’t say I’m surprised.
You’re genuinely arguing here that people complaining is worse than an armed conflict that claimed the lives of over half a million people and devastated half the country for generations.
Surely, even you can see how crazy that is.
Factually wrong, of course - these were issues that consumed large parts of the Reoublic for decades. But even if you were right, you’re still in the position of arguing that lynchings and race riots - even ones that only affected 1% of the population - aren’t as bad as someone giving you a dirty look for saying “Christmas.”
Wow! That’s some incredibly tortured sentence construction! I hope you didn’t strain anything writing that.
But it’s also bullshit. Sorry, but you’re simply not a reliable witness. I know this from reading your opinions on events we both were alive for. See, for example, the "War on Christmas nonsense that you’ve swallowed completely and unquestionably. When your observations and reality are so obviously in conflict on something as trivial as that, why on Earth would anyone accept your pronouncements on what life was “really like” for black people, or women, religious minorities, or gays? You’ve a demonstrated inability to understand their experiences today. Why should any one take you seriously when you claim you understand what they’re were like fifty years ago? Particularly when they’re so utterly contradicted by the testimonies of actual minorities who were alive at the time?
The free market, of course. Companies have found that they make more money when they have “holiday” sales than when they have “Christmas” sales. This didn’t happen because liberals complained, it happened because capitalists looked at their sales during that time of the year and said, “How can we squeeze a little more out of the buying public?”
I can imagine a lot of reasons why you would get that reaction from people that have nothing to do with your use of seasonal greetings. Like, tons of them.
See, this right here is a perfect example of why nobody takes you seriously when you start to go on about how much better things were back in the day. If you’re this utterly disconnected from contemporary events, how much poorer must your understanding of things that happened fifty years ago be?
The targets of PC don’t believe they have done anything wrong, or at least that the accusations can’t be supported by the evidence. Hence their objections to being criticized. When someone says something non-PC, there is an interpretation involved. If not, it is simply bad language, not non-PC. The target objects to having others interpret what they are saying instead of simply taking the statement at face value.
I certainly agree that often the interpretation is more correct than the face value, but that is why the target is upset at PC conversations.
I suppose you are partly right, as Jesus was indisputably a leftist:
Come to think of it, Jesus said he was the Way the Truth and the Life, and no one comes to the Father except through him. That makes him a leftist AND a totalitarian!
Now they know how gay & lesbian couples feel trying to buy a wedding cake.
Except:
So, that Christ fella wanted his followers to set example by their good actions, as opposed to superficial symbolism?
That’s a clear example of War on Christmas. What a PC hippie.
Of course not. What I knew was that in a deliberate attempt to play gotcha, someone would dredge up the Civil War, which was a completely different type of conflict and in no way comparable to my statement about people nowadays being at each other’s throats more than ever. The Civil War was basically one side against the other for one thing, as opposed to today where differing groups of people all over the country are pitting themselves against each other in an apparently never ending attempt to come up ways to find offense and tell everyone else how to think and behave. There’s no reasonable comparison at all between the two.
If you really want to hijack the thread with arguments over numbers of people killed and repercussions lasting for generations, perhaps we could discuss the millions killed by the explosion of drug use and crime that followed in the wake of the counterculture revolution.
They were still issues that pretty much pitted one group of people against another and once again aren’t comparable to what I was very clearly talking about.
You’re not only wrong but you’re conflating two different things in your eagerness to find some way to prove me wrong about something. I made remarks regarding attempts by the politically correct crowd to generalize/secularize the Christmas holiday. I made other remarks in regard to how political correctness has everyone at each other’s throat and how it’s generated so much resentment that it now accounts for much of Donald Trump’s support. I made no mention of anti-Christmas agitation being worse that lynchings and race riots for the very simple reason that it’s a ridiculous idea…which of course is the very reason you’re trying to hang that idiotic sentiment on me in the first place.
Your concern is duly noted.
I’ve made exactly no observations on what life was really like back then that have been met with anything more weighty than denial. Certainly life is better in many ways for women and minorities than it was in the 50s and 60s. But the ways in which I’ve argued other things were better back then are undeniably true. For example minority parents most certainly had less to contend with in keeping their children free from drugs and their associated ills like addiction, crime and death as well as gang activity.
Another example of the way history revisionism has portrayed an inaccurate view of the time is the ridiculous claim that women were treated like children back then and couldn’t have their own checking accounts without the permission of their husbands. I live in the midwest, smack in the middle of the Bible belt, and both my mother and stepmother, my aunt and my grandmother every one had their own checking accounts. My grandmother both bought and sold real estate and my aunt was buying and flipping houses decades before anyone ever heard the term. Yes, she was married but she in no way needed her husband’s permission for anything. He had his own career but in his spare time assisted her in her house flipping. He functioned as her carpenter and handy man and pretty much did as he was told when it came to her projects. She was a feisty old gal and probably would have smacked you were you ever to suggest such a thing as her needing her husband’s permission for her own bank accounts.
Cite that companies make more money attributable to having ‘holiday’ sales rather than ‘Christmas’ sales that isn’t the result of their bowing to political correctness.
I’ll ask for a cite on this as well. Somehow I have a hard time believing that significant numbers of shoppers suddenly began to patronize stores at Christmas time in ways they never had before simply because these stores had become more ‘inclusive’. Would you have us believe these people all just sat at home with nothing during the holidays because Christmas sales made them feel excluded but now they’re rushing out to buy gifts and Pine trees like crazy because they suddenly feel welcome?
These stores kowtow to political correctness in the same way I do when instead of saying ‘Jews’ - which to me is no more offensive than saying ‘Muslims’, nor should it be - I say something along the lines of ‘people of the Jewish faith’ when talking about them on this board simply because I know I’ll catch a rash of shit for it even though it’s undeserved and I don’t want to have to put up with it. (Has anyone ever heard an actual Jewish person ignorant of political correctness complain about being call a Jew? As is to be expected, I’ve only heard it from SJWs agitating on their behalf.)
Is this little ad hominem swipe supposed to disprove the contention I made that spurred it? Or, as is more likely, you had nothing of merit by way of argument (a recurring theme) and went for the cheap insult instead?
Again you offer nothing but denial to counter my observations of limitless attempts, many of which have been successful, to remove religious (or should I say, Christian) imagery from public view by force of law or to discourage it on a personal social level. The effects of the latter are pernicious and therefore not attributable to any individual person or organization. But they’re there nonetheless, as can be observed in the way people are beginning to hesitate and question whether they’re going to offend someone by saying Merry Christmas or get them in trouble with their employers by appearing to expect it in return, or anger them by daring to be so politically incorrect as to say it in the first place. It’s apparent too in fact that people have begun to feel they’re doing something impolitic by putting up Christmas lights and decorations outside their homes. I’m sure you’ll deny this also, as is your wont since you seem to have nothing else, but unless you can come up with some sort of evidence to disprove the things I hear from family, friends and random employees and coworkers every time Christmas rolls around, I’m afraid I’m going to have to continue to believe that what I see and hear is actually the case.
Thank you for demonstrating the concept of “privilege”. As someone who lives in the Bible belt and practices a Jesus-centric religion, you are afforded the opportunity to be part of the majority culture. Your natural assumption is that “odds are most people are Christian” so in the off chance that you say “Merry Christmas” to someone who doesn’t celebrate the holiday, it’s on them to just go along with the majority.
It’s not a question of whether someone is “harmed in the slightest”. It’s a question of being inclusive around people who don’t share your beliefs.
Your understanding of the Constitution is incorrect though:
Amendment I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
What this means is that the government will not prevent you from practicing your religion, however they will not recognize any particular religion either. This means that public schools and town halls should not be setting up Christmas decorations, throwing Christmas parties, putting nativity scenes on the town green (at least not as a government sponsored activity) or any other activities that relate to religious holidays. Of course Christians see this as an “attack” on their religion. It’s not. You are perfectly free to practice your religion at home, church or any public area. What you are not “free” to do is have the government endorse your beliefs as the de facto national religion.
Since when is there the right to not be offended? Who decides what is offensive? I find the whole idea of political correctness offensive and any time someone uses political correctness to silence someone I am offended*. Does my view count? If not, why?
And you still missed the point. Social ostracism is not restricting speech, it is reacting to speech.
Slee
*Even if I happen to disagree with the person being silenced.
Since this was discussed in an earlier thread “If you whine about political correctness, you’re a bigot” (If you whine about political correctness, you're a bigot - The BBQ Pit - Straight Dope Message Board) I’ll respond with my 2 posts from that:
Examples (sorry no cites):
-
a Carleton University (in Ottawa, Canada) administrator, in order to avoid controversy, had the male/female signs (the pictograms with stick figures in skirts (or not)) on washroom doors replaced by the ones that look like Volvo trademarks. A female student complained that it was sexist.
-
maybe this was just a Canadian thing, but does anyone remember the big “issue” about how man-hole covers had to be called “maintenance holes”? That didn’t seem to last too long.
-
how about “animal companions” instead of “pets”. I wouldn’t want to offend the cats would I?
-
an issue (there were a few magazine articles about this, back in the day) about “waiter” and “waitress”. Apparently even “waitron” was a suggested alternative - maybe in Star Trek - really?
-
in the late '80s/early '90s there was, for a while, an issue about how we shouldn’t call children “kids”
-
how about the “holidays” instead of Christmas? Btw “Christmas” isn’t exclusive - I’m secular but the period of time towards the end of December is Christmas. Calling it something else changes nothing.
Note: maybe we should ban “holiday” since it’s a contraction of “holy day”
maybe we should ban “goodbye” since it’s a contraction of “god be with ye” -
there was also a issue about some female university students who wanted their Bachelors degrees to be called something else - like, a Maiden of Arts (or science or whatever).
Meanwhile in the Royal Canadian Navy, a female Ordinary Seaman, Able Seaman, Leading Seaman, or Master Seaman is (how terrible) an Ordinary, Able, Leading, or Master Seaman. But they do get paid the same salary to do the same work and we have a number of female combat and weapons officers. We’ve also had a female ship’s captain.
If we treat people fairly and with the respect that they deserve I think that that’s what truly matters.
[/QUOTE]
And more recently (Nov 2015):
Basically, free yoga classes offered at the University of Ottawa have been scrapped because of complaints by some students and volunteers about “cultural appropriation”.
According to the instructor:
“I guess it was this cultural appropriation issue because yoga originally comes from India,” she said on Sunday. "I told them, ‘Why don’t we just change the name of the course?’ It’s simple enough, just call it mindful stretching.… We’re not going through the finer points of scripture. We’re talking about basic physical awareness and how to stretch so that you feel good.
“That went back and forth… The higher-ups at the student federation got involved, finally we got an email routed through the student federation basically saying they couldn’t get a French name and nobody wants to do it, so we’re going to cancel it for now.”
So someone volunteers to teach a free course, and this is the outcome, thanks to PC.
When petty members of the political class made official decrees denouncing “brown bag” as racist political correctness should have died from ridicule. Unfortunately the ridiculous are far too numerous and self important to be deterred.
I had posted this comment in the wrong thread. So here it is, properly relocated, with my heading “An early attack on political correctness”:
In his column of April 7, 2010 (“Why a Town in Iowa [Davenport] Sought to Abolish Good Friday”) Dennis Prager gives the “institution” of political correctness the drubbing it deserves.
He noted that City administrator Craig Malin “sent a memo to municipal employees announcing that Good Friday would officially be known as ‘Spring Holiday.’
“Given the importance of Good Friday to Christians, when news of the recommendation became public, there was a national and local outcry, and the recommendation was rescinded.”
Prager followed this with several points, given as headings to sub-topics, printed in boldface:
**1. There really is a war against Christianity. **(I must point out, however, that religion is not the specific issue I am discussing here.) --d.m.)
**2. Why not abolish Christmas?
3. Civil rights organizations are not about civil rights. **Prager followed this statement by saying that the ACLU “and other left-wing organizations” promote left-wing agendas.
4. Good Friday as an American holiday reminds Americans that this is a religious society.
5. Non-Christians offended by Good Friday as an American holiday are narcissists.
Prager added “As a Jew, permit me to say that any non-Christian offended by Good Friday or Christmas gives new meaning to the word “narcissist.”
6. As for the last heading, I will quote Prager in full, heading and all:
PC (political correctness) should be renamed OTL (offends the Left). “Most will characterize the attempt to rename Good Friday as political correctness. That it is. But the term itself is politically correct. Like everything PC, the term itself hides its true meaning, which is Leftism. Political correctness is invariably produced by the Left. The term, therefore, should not be ‘PC’; it should be ‘OTL.’ It is very unfortunate it isn’t. Americans would have much greater clarity as to the Second Civil War now taking place—from San Francisco to Boston to, yes, Davenport, Iowa.”
I think the statistics are fairly clear that few females graduate as Maidens in the literal sense of the word. No doubt they’d be offended at being called virgins.
According to the etymology of “bachelor” in my dictionary, the word comes from Latin baccalaris, meaning “farmhand,” but ultimately from vacca, “cow.” Of course, they might consider “spinster”…:eek:
…and how about the recent dreadlock issue at San Francisco State University? Basically an African-American student made a big scene about a white guy’s dreadlocks because of the cultural appropriation.
So, a35362, now that there have been a number of responses, I’m curious as to your thoughts about PC now (no snark intended at all btw).