The issue is in using the word as a pejorative. I use the term “retarded” or “mentally retarded” to describe people with a certain handicap. I also use the term “gel retardation assay” (or “GRA”) to describe a specific kind of laboratory experiment. I will never use the word as a pejorative.
The problem is, when a word to describe the retarded develops a pejorative context, then another word has to be coined to describe the clinical condition. It will always be a race to find another word that is non-offensive, because as long as we allow the current term for “retarded” to be used as a pejorative, there never will be an acceptable clinical term for the condition.
I’d rather see people take a stand against using whatever the current term is as a pejorative. There are plenty of other words that work perfectly fine as insults. Personally, I like calling people acting stupidly “fruitcakes.”
“Personally, I like calling people acting stupidly “fruitcakes.””
That leaves you open to being called anti-homo.
If you allow speech to be defined as offensive by those taking offense, you restrict freedom of speech to that acceptable to the most sensitive. When speaking against affirmative action is racist, it’ll be because of people like you who think there’s something okay with allowing offense at descriptive words to have political consequence. It’s like you never heard the old saying that starts with “Sticks and stones.”