Posted on 04/10/2015 5:01:33 PM PDT by Impala64ssa
When an institution sets out to ban something, more often than not the thing they choose to ban simply reflects back on that institution’s way of thinking.
So what does it tell us about the Oxford University Press that they are banning authors from using words that refer to pigs?
Yes, you read that correctly. Oxford UP is prohibiting authors from using the words pig, pork, sausage, or other pig-related words because they are afraid of offending Jewish or Muslim readers who consider pigs and pork to be off-limits for religious reasons.
Now, I can understand how Oxford UP would perhaps consider editing out a photo of someone stuffing their face with bacon in a manuscript where another photo could equally serve a purpose, but to eliminate all references to pigs is absurd.
Cutting out references to an entire species of animal isn’t an example of careful editorializing to avoid offending a particular group of people who don’t believe in eating that animal. What it is, however, is an example of removing language, information, and accuracy from a book to cater to the beliefs of another.
While freedom of press and speech may be a uniquely American ideal, it is absolutely wrong to impose a ban on a subset of information. No matter how hard Muslims or Jews try to imagine it, pigs are a species that exist on planet Earth. Not talking or writing about them isn’t going to make them disappear.
(Excerpt) Read more at usherald.com ...
“”are afraid of offending Jewish or””
Odd that we’ve managed to get along just fine for a very long time without the Jewish population minding the word(s).
Hillary, certainly.
But I think Chelsea would be more put out by insults of the equine variety...
G_d
P_rk
P_g
B_ck_n
OK.... SWINE works...
At this moment, I am eating a bacon, lettuce and tomato sandwhich. That would be a . . .
Bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon,bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, baconbacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon,, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, baconbacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, baconbacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, baconbacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, baconbacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, baconbacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, baconbacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon, bacon.
Of course, that would be a product of pork, pork, pork, pork, pork, pork, porkpork, pork, pork, pork, pork, porkpork, pork, pork, pork, pork, porkpork, pork, pork, pork, pork, porkpork, pork, pork, pork, pork, porkpork, pork, pork, pork, pork, porkpork, pork, pork, pork, pork, porkpork, pork, pork, pork, pork, pork, pork, pork, pork, pork, pork, pork, pork, pork, pork, pork, pork,,pork, pork, pork, pork, pork, pork,pork, pork, pork, pork, pork, pork.
They don’t want to offend “Jews or Muslims.” Liars!!!! Jews are not so easily offended.
Are they trying to ‘save their bacon’? ROFL
If you eliminate the words pork and pig and ham....how will they know what not to eat????
Given the fact that there's no reason Jews can't say the word port or pig, it's not surprising you've managed to get along without something which doesn't exist.
Sit down, I have a shocker for you.
We even play with these things, pigskins
Don't eat those pigs though.
Let’s do the same thing but in reverse.
I have a friend that would say “even orthodox Jews like baked ham, they just don’t eat it”.
I’m offended when people try to combine incompatible words together. Such as ‘gay marriage.’
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.
