Posted on 03/06/2007 2:57:24 PM PST by TChris
You've really bought into all this PC nonsense haven't you?
When I was your age if I called someone a "faggot' at work (and it happened all the time), they would likely call me an equally offensive perjorative and we would laugh it off and that would be the end of it. Today, if you use the word "faggot" in a work setting, you are relegated to rehabilitation and sensitivity training. What a load of horsecr@p.
America needs to grow a spine. And lawyers need to find an honest way to make a living besides suing people because their clients feelings are hurt.
That's certainly not true. African-Americans have taken the term for internal use. Did you ever see the scene in Rush Hour where Jackie Chan tries to follow Chris Tucker's lead and ask a bunch of black guys, "What's up my n----a?"?
(I also have been called a n----r as an insult, but that's another story.)
I don't have a choice. Those are the societal norms now.
There are some words that it's just in poor taste to use. If someone wants to try to defend himself for having used them, as Senator Byrd did with the n-word, he just digs himself into a deeper hole. If one says, "not all Blacks are n___s and not all n___s are Black," as Byrd did, or "they call themselves that" it doesn't improve one's situation.
If there's an ambiguity in the meaning of words, it doesn't mean that one can simply pick and choose which meaning one wants, and ignore the other. Insults are different from other words in this respect. Coulter's word is both an insult children use and an adult insult for homosexuals. The sting comes from the two senses, and a lot of the "meaning" is in that very sting. One can't simply say, "I was only using it in this sense" and be wholly honest.
Was her use of the word as bad as people seem to think? It was stupid, childish, and easily backfired on her. That's bad enough, I think. Ann's statements have a cumulative effect on people. A lot of people who've loved her up to now will go on doing so. If you're already fed up with her, this is just another nail driven in. It would be useful to know if anybody was turned off by this latest affair alone.
The fag's, um I mean gays don't OWN the word faggot. It is used as a schoolyard taunt meaning sissy.
When we play golf and guy leaves a 2 foot putt a few inches short of the hole someone will invariably say--"fag".
Keep going, Ann! She's refreshing and honest with a great sense of humor! And she's more conservative than the current top three Republican candidates. What's all the fuss about?
I suppose "homosexual" and "lust" are the proper names. Even if homosexuals uses many other names to describe their identity (like "faggot"), it's inappropriate to follow this language as it's a "bait-and-switch" tactic inviting souls to sin via abuse.
There are a lot of infamous "bait-and-switch" tactics that are common today. Historical documentation reveals such traps. Perhaps we remember them as "we must go to war/we should never go to war", "they have WMD/no they don't", or "We're not spending enough on our troops/we're spending too much on this war". The only real message to the bait-and-switch is "I want to have absolute power over your will and you should give it to me freely by voting for me."
I recall the same victimhood response from people of a different continental background (and sometimes a different appearance). Some of those stressing the difference had gone through a series of appearance appropriate language. I can't recall the all of the exact details. Maybe they aren't important for a final conclusion, but the verbage went from a series of "colored/negro, black, African American". Confusion rises because not everyone from the African continent can claim the same identity as one who's naturally dark-skinned and living in America. Not every African continent dweller is "black" skinned. Not every naturally-dark American has an African continental origin. Not every naturally-dark American who has ancestors from Africa has just arrived in America within the last generation. Furthermore, if there's emotions of economics and the idea that skin-color has something to do with earning income, then there are many more impoverished people about this world much worse off than self-deceiving American citizens.
Since there are plenty more products of interracial love making in America today (just visit a singles site and look at self-posted multi-hyphenated ethnic backgrounds), the real discussion for identity is respect. Perhaps the genetics has become a conversation starter because talking about the weather is too politically uncomfortable? Gradually, as the whole understands, using appearances for political purposes for some fictitious edge for political popularity polls in reality weakens the respect for those separated by appearances. Victimhood has made us all suspicious suspicion victims and hard hearted to real victims of far worse crimes and circumstances. This is what the devil intended and must be recognized as such.
Despair and lust are deadly sins. I have to recognize it in myself less I use it as an excuse to murder my brother the way Cain killed Abel or desire an out-of-bounds Bathsheba (which leads to another murder). It's vital to recognize and avoid being crestfallen or horny like a lower creature/animal. We await Joyfully in God's Hope and thus become masters of the despairing demon lurking at the door beckoning to devour us (reference the Book of Genesis), and pray for Angelic intercession (Book of Tobit) to tie up diabolic obsessions. And should we fall, we can't deny God's Mercy and hang ourselves like Judas.
Using the self-imposed language that a political agenda follows does nothing to lift the despairing lust vice(s). In essence, sin gives aid to a diabolic enemy. In this case, the enemy is not a homosexual, but the vice. After all, a homosexual is just like me--a soul struggling against desires that keep us from God's Perfection. The aid given to the vice is abuse, and abuse/rage is a sin (reference the 5th Commandment and the "2nd Greatest Commandment", to love your neighbor as yourself).
If we are to give all our love to God with our entire being (Greatest Commandment), then in receiving Love of God we should reflect the same to our neighbor as we love the way God Loves us.
I'm not sure that I could give advice to Ann Coulter. She's a lot smarter than me (or is that "I"?). Perhaps she can admit fault before admonishing? "I admit my fault of pride and vanity...because DAMN, I'm one hot blonde! You homosexuals ought to forget hairy sweaty testosterone oafs and find a real woman to love and be loved. A real woman like me!" I don't know if that's the best approach. I can imagine her saying it, but it's probably not the best apology for this situation. Humility is better, but humor is fun too. The very deviant diabolic purpose for sewing a "militant" homosexuality is that there is an equal and opposite resistance from those who are naturally repulsed by aggression. When sinners are put off by the acts of aggressors, such as that from lust-filled men, then they convey similar suspicions to all men, including Jesus Christ. Who wants man-love when it becomes a dirty name and act? Like all vices, homosexuality must be mastered with Divine Intervention.
A sinner like a homosexual wants a "real man" and that Man is Jesus. Jesus is the real deal, and it takes the God/Man to overcome our weakness. His Perfect body, unblemished of sin (and no broken bones) is the Perfect Sacrifice. Let our desires be for Him.
A sinner, like all sinners, wants a "father's love" and the Father of Love is God the Father. Let our desires be for Him.
A sinner, like me, wants to express pure love, and the Purest of Love is the Love expressed between God the Father and His only Son, Jesus, and that Love is So Pure it's the Holy Spirit, an entire Person begotten not made. And we can be filled with the Spirit and full of Life and Love. Let the devil despair his glass coffin.
Communism was the societal norm for Eastern Europe for 60 years. I'm glad that some people didn't give up on the idea of LIBERTY.
You are in a position to change societal norms. All you need to do is to speak up and don't lie down when your liberty is being taken away. And this is all about liberty.
You as a young lawyer have the world in front of you. Our generation has left you with a mess, but you have it within your power to change it for the better. Are you willing to take that challenge, or are you just going to lay down and die where you are?
The right to call anyone "faggot" isn't where I want to direct my energies. I've got bigger fish to fry. (Mmmm... fish fry....)
"Lots of folks use "faggot" all the time....especially the young."
In my family we don't talk that way; never did. I'm sorry, but to me its common and unacceptable, like many words in "common" usage today. For a woman to use such a word is truly outrageous. I'd suggest that either she was not "bien elevee" or forgot what she her parents taught her.
If one wants to put done the likes of Edwards, it might be better to observe that he likely bought his own silver! :)
LOL!
"It's my mother...I'll put her on speaker"
"TChris wrote:
Whatever you think of her original comment, that explanation is unbelievably disingenuous. She must think people are flaming idiots or something."
Did you catch her on Hannity last night?
She gave the explanation then and it didn't seem the keast disingenuous. An explanation was not really necessary.
Her comment was dead on, she still stands by it and made no apologies for it.
Her wry barb was two fold:
She was commenting on the Democrat candidates and implied that Edwards is a faggot.
His effeminate qualities are well known. Other media people call him "The Breck Girl" relentlessly. So why is everyone suddenly upset at Ann?
The answer is found in the main thrust of Ann's comment. She was showing contempt for that portion of our society that feels that it's appropriate for someone to have to go into rehab over their choice of words. The way she delivered her line showed her disgust with the PC police.
In last nights show she again said that the dems were wusses, weak and sissies. It was her equivalent to Arnolds comment about his opponents being "girlie-men"
It's a schoolyard taunt as Ann aptly described it.
"There are some words that it's just in poor taste to use."
I'd like to know where the lines are drawn.
Girly-men must have been OK, no big stink over that.
We hear Edwards called the "Breck Girl" all the time.
Is it OK to tell a very fashion aware male co-worker "That's SO Gay!"?
Is it because faggot has 2 Gs in it and sounds gutteral?
I don't understand when and how faggot became a dirty word, almost as bad as nigger.
Which means it's now officially removed from the vocabulary of the rest of us. Like "queer" and "gay." One more fine, centuries-old word corrupted and ruined by degenerates.
Agreed. I would not expect our nominee to talk like this, nor a dinnerparty conservative like George Will. That's why we have a designated hitter on the team. After the leadoff men have done their thing, Ann can come up and swing for the fence. They have their role, and persona to match, and she has hers.
Any soap involved? LOL!
Webster apparently isn't totally capturing how it's being used. I guarantee it, at least for our corner of the world.
And it in no way rises to the level of the "N" word. And, if you haven't noticed, the "a" on the end of the n...a word, apparently makes it quite different for blacks. (Again, the ones I associate with.)
Looks like the liberal wing of FR is out in force today.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.