Only when we allow it. My dictionary does not "change" while resting on the shelf. My name does not change over time.
"..regarding a term that was coined more than thirty five years ago."
Taking that "logic" to its natural conclusion, our Constitution is hopelessly out of date, and the meaning of it has utterly changed, so we might as well ignore it completely .
You and the socialists have a lot in common. Did you get that job that you applied for in the Obommer administration?
How do you stop it? I would have been honored to be called a liberal 200 years ago.
But yet, your protestations to the contrary notwithstanding, the meanings of words continue to change. Be sure and tell the person, the next time you're asked, that you had a gay time at the event.
Taking that "logic" to its natural conclusion, our Constitution is hopelessly out of date, and the meaning of it has utterly changed, so we might as well ignore it completely
In the future I'll be sure not to use the word logic and Designer in the same sentence.
You and the socialists have a lot in common. Did you get that job that you applied for in the Obommer administration?
Do you only stop shooting yourself in the foot to reload? Do you only stop talking long enough to change feet? Your profound superiority complex must be a difficult burden for you to bear.
I wasn’t going to chip in much more, but this statement demands a response:
“Taking that “logic” to its natural conclusion, our Constitution is hopelessly out of date, and the meaning of it has utterly changed, so we might as well ignore it completely.”
That is in fact the strategy and view on the left. They try to control the evolution of language in order to gut the original meaning of the Constitution. Now, the meaning of words does evolve, devolve, and just plain change. The term “gay” is a prime example. That’s why the counter to the left’s attack on the Constitution is not to deny that the meaning of language changes, but rather to have “originalist” or “Constitutionalist” judges who try to determine the original intent of the words used in the Constitution. See the Keller gun control case for a prime example.
The quoted part of your comment simply doesn’t hold up to scrutiny.