Season 4 Podcast 5 Political Correctness 2023 Pt II
Season 4 Podcast 5 Political Correctness 2023 Pt II
Welcome to season 4 of ‘A New Voice of Freedom.’ The Podcasts are taken from the four volumes ‘In Defense of Christianity’ written by Ronald Keith Messer. Podcast 5 is entitled “Political Correctness 2023 Pt II.”
“The goal of the Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative is to eliminate many forms of harmful language, including racist, violent, and biased (e.g., disability bias, ethnic bias, ethnic slurs, gender bias, implicit bias, sexual bias) language in Stanford websites and codes.”
May I encourage you to listen to Podcast 4 before listening to this podcast; however, they can be understood separately. This is a continuation of Part I.
Some of the phrases recommended by the Stanford committee on Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative communicate no information. For example, rather than the phrases, “handicap parking,” “handicapped,” or “handicapped space,” the committee recommended the following substitutes: “accessible parking,” “person with a disability,” or “accessible space.” Trying to remove all connotations, they neutralize the language. We all have disabilities of some kind and in a crowded parking lot, we all look for accessible parking or accessible space. The only offence is the Stanford committee on Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative which is a form of mind control. If you preface each initiative with the phrase,”Thou shalt not” it reveals the fanatical religion it is. Stanford does not want separation of church and state. They want separation of competing religions and state.
The same committee replaced the acronym “OCD” with the phrase “detail oriented.” OCD refers to those with an obsessive-compulsive disorder. Are they suggesting that all “detail oriented” people have OCD? My wife alphabetizes her spices and makes infinite lists. Does she have OCD?
The committee kills language, stripping it of both its denotation and connotation. According to the Stanford Committee, you can’t even use the phrase “rule of thumb” because supposedly the phrase is attributed to an old British law that allowed men to beat their wives with sticks no wider than their thumb. Were you aware that every time you said “rule of thumb” you were encouraging husbands to beat their wives with a stick? How lucky we are that Stanford has nipped it in the bud. Wait, by Stanford logic, you can’t say “nip it in the bud” because it suggests violence to plants. Far-fetched? I don’t think so. They banned the phrase “spirit animal” because it might offend people who identify with animals. Once you are converted to their religion there is no end to the commandments.
One is tempted to call that lunacy, but you can’t use the word lunacy because it comes from lunatic, which comes from moonstruck which means crazy because, according to the committee on the Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative, lunatic defines people by just one of their characteristics.
They ban the word “brave” because it perpetuates the stereotype of the “noble courageous savage” equating the Indigenous male as being less than a man. They also condemn the use of the word “chief.”
There is a pattern. The committee on the Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative is an artificial attempt to turn one group against another. None of those words were offensive until the Stanford committee on the Elimination of Harmful Language Initiative made them so. In other words, they want the Indians, the Blacks, and all people of color to be offended. They want to convince them that the language was created by white Anglo Saxon male supremacists to oppress all people of color. They want them to hate the whites. It has nothing to do with sensitivity training. It is and will always be about gaining power. They want to be seen as everyone’s champion who has nonwhite skin.
Create your
podcast in
minutes
It is Free