- All Purchases made this month instantly go into the draw to win a USD $ 100.00 credit to your HoP account.
Forums > Social Discussion > US/UK Political Correctness
Login/Join to Participate
Posted:This is something that I've been thinking about for a while. It's a bit complicated and there are lots of hot topics associated with my main point so I'll try to boil my main point down to one, hopefully clearly worded paragraph:
I find it counterintuitive that there appears to be more political correctness and sensitivity associated with Americans in some areas when examining parallel areas of US and UK society.
The US has this wonderful reputation of doing whatever it want and being generally horrible about how they go about doing it. Much of this reputation is rooted in or stems from fact and history. Yet, I am sometimes startled by some blatantly insensitive things I've seen in the UK that would NEVER be said/done by the parallel organization/group in the US.
Most of these things have to do with ethnic and racial sensitivities. I heard some things on Radio4 that made my jaw drop a few weeks ago. The topics were valid but the delivery was so insensitive. [One example I can remember was the commentators brainstorming as to why blacks are naturally more violent.] There are ways that topic can be addressed more appropriately but the language that the radio commentators used was shocking to an American like myself. I would NEVER expect to hear that from a parallel radio show in the US. The same with sitcoms, internet videos, newspaper articles. I also find it apparent in liberal communities that I hang out with in both countries. If you compare what I'd equate to be parallel communities I just don't see a sensitivity that I'm used to here in the US.
Obviously, if you compare apples and oranges, you can find a difference. I'd expect the Alabama chapter of the KKK to be less sensitive than the Sheffield Knitting Society. I'd also expect some American Shock Jock to be less sensitive than Radio4.
I'm not necessarily judging it. It just surprises me in light of the fact that the US is generally known for it's global insensitivity.
I have some theories about it but maybe I'll wait for some responses first.
[Disclaimer because this is the internet: I picked the US and UK because they are the two cultures I am most familiar with. I am only speaking from my own personal, unscientific observations and isolated incidents. I would be happy to hear of other experiences that would discredit my extrapolations. I consider the UK my second home and love many things about it. I thoroughly enjoy and support Britain, the British, and your mom.]
I find it counterintuitive that there appears to be more political correctness and sensitivity associated with Americans in some areas when examining parallel areas of US and UK society.
The US has this wonderful reputation of doing whatever it want and being generally horrible about how they go about doing it. Much of this reputation is rooted in or stems from fact and history. Yet, I am sometimes startled by some blatantly insensitive things I've seen in the UK that would NEVER be said/done by the parallel organization/group in the US.
Most of these things have to do with ethnic and racial sensitivities. I heard some things on Radio4 that made my jaw drop a few weeks ago. The topics were valid but the delivery was so insensitive. [One example I can remember was the commentators brainstorming as to why blacks are naturally more violent.] There are ways that topic can be addressed more appropriately but the language that the radio commentators used was shocking to an American like myself. I would NEVER expect to hear that from a parallel radio show in the US. The same with sitcoms, internet videos, newspaper articles. I also find it apparent in liberal communities that I hang out with in both countries. If you compare what I'd equate to be parallel communities I just don't see a sensitivity that I'm used to here in the US.
Obviously, if you compare apples and oranges, you can find a difference. I'd expect the Alabama chapter of the KKK to be less sensitive than the Sheffield Knitting Society. I'd also expect some American Shock Jock to be less sensitive than Radio4.
I'm not necessarily judging it. It just surprises me in light of the fact that the US is generally known for it's global insensitivity.
I have some theories about it but maybe I'll wait for some responses first.
[Disclaimer because this is the internet: I picked the US and UK because they are the two cultures I am most familiar with. I am only speaking from my own personal, unscientific observations and isolated incidents. I would be happy to hear of other experiences that would discredit my extrapolations. I consider the UK my second home and love many things about it. I thoroughly enjoy and support Britain, the British, and your mom.]
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
Posted: Written by: FireTom
Non-Https Image Link
stop the cunning, I sincerely get the impression you don't mean it.
Maybe its because you're more willing to spend far more energy on perpetuating personal aversions than to focus on the topic... ??? or maybe it's because you are depending on claqueurs? (no offence meant)
You seem to be stuck in (political) issues... what a surprise [/ironic]
"Racism" is not about skin colour or nationality, but on personality
(and right now you seem not to be prone to look beyond yours... 
)
It's not depending on cultural/ ethnical background and I guess my (controversial) thread back then was exclusively designed for you... 
Consider to read it one more time (you have kept a copy, as I learned) - you may show off in public, but I'm afraid you may have not gotten the true essence of it by heart...
If "political correctness" degrades to a mere shell, without content, then I rather prefer ppl who express their judgement straightforward, like Imus. Honesty goes so much further...
yeah, maybe I'm just getting too sensitive after a loooooooong day and travelling. So I give you that one again: "no offence meant!"
STOP TROLLING.
STOP.
I was genuine in wishing you peace.
As you're genuinely unable to have a conversation without trolling, I'm no longer interested. Stop talking to me. Stop talking about me. Stop quoting me. Stop taking shots at me. Stop making innuendo. Stop saying things that could be about me but upon challenge could be defended as having nothing to do with me. Stop purposely jumping in on my conversations just to try and piss me off.
Stop.
If you want to keep going, you're just going to make yourself look stupid.
It's done.
Stop.
Non-Https Image Link
stop the cunning, I sincerely get the impression you don't mean it.
Maybe its because you're more willing to spend far more energy on perpetuating personal aversions than to focus on the topic... ??? or maybe it's because you are depending on claqueurs? (no offence meant)
You seem to be stuck in (political) issues... what a surprise [/ironic]
"Racism" is not about skin colour or nationality, but on personality
(and right now you seem not to be prone to look beyond yours... ) It's not depending on cultural/ ethnical background and I guess my (controversial) thread back then was exclusively designed for you...
Consider to read it one more time (you have kept a copy, as I learned) - you may show off in public, but I'm afraid you may have not gotten the true essence of it by heart...
If "political correctness" degrades to a mere shell, without content, then I rather prefer ppl who express their judgement straightforward, like Imus. Honesty goes so much further...
yeah, maybe I'm just getting too sensitive after a loooooooong day and travelling. So I give you that one again: "no offence meant!" STOP TROLLING.
STOP.
I was genuine in wishing you peace.
As you're genuinely unable to have a conversation without trolling, I'm no longer interested. Stop talking to me. Stop talking about me. Stop quoting me. Stop taking shots at me. Stop making innuendo. Stop saying things that could be about me but upon challenge could be defended as having nothing to do with me. Stop purposely jumping in on my conversations just to try and piss me off.
Stop.
If you want to keep going, you're just going to make yourself look stupid.
It's done.
Stop.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
faith enfire
BRONZE Member since Jan 2006
![faith enfire]()
wandering thru the woods of WI
Location: Wisconsin
Total posts: 3556
BRONZE Member since Jan 2006
wandering thru the woods of WI
Location: Wisconsin
Total posts: 3556
Posted: Written by: onewheeldave
Written by: FireTom
at least in both countries it's politically correct for an Afro-American to use derogatory expressions within his own ethnic group... that much we've learned so far.
That's debatable- some blacks actively put forward their view that habitual use of terms like 'nigger/nigga' amongst a sub-section of blacks, is harmful to black culture as a whole.
they actually had a conference i think in georgia, the consensus was that it is detrimental and people should not use either form
on the otherhand i watched resurrection (tupac biography) and he went and explained thug nigga, if it was used in that context i think it would be alright
but forget about being pc, why call people names anyways?
Written by: FireTom
at least in both countries it's politically correct for an Afro-American to use derogatory expressions within his own ethnic group... that much we've learned so far.
That's debatable- some blacks actively put forward their view that habitual use of terms like 'nigger/nigga' amongst a sub-section of blacks, is harmful to black culture as a whole.
they actually had a conference i think in georgia, the consensus was that it is detrimental and people should not use either form
on the otherhand i watched resurrection (tupac biography) and he went and explained thug nigga, if it was used in that context i think it would be alright
but forget about being pc, why call people names anyways?
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
Posted:Ok..I'll back pedal on the Elitist thing..I could have sworn that the first post wanted only input from those intimately familiar with both cultures and at the forefront of liberal philosophy..or something along those lines. Anyways it was enough to stop me posting on this thread until I was certain that it had reached Catastrophic derailment. Which it seemed to do on the first page.
Yes I would have questioned Albertaboys statement, simply because he relates it as second hand information..had he defended it with something like "my friends don't lie if they say they're barbarians then they are" See...it wasn't really his own experience that led him to that belief, it was just something he heard somewhere. Haven't you heard things, believed them, only to have them proved wrong. Why should this be any different ? Oh...because he heard and believed something deemed offensive in liberal circles so...KABOOM !!!! . No questions asked. Sort of like he was guilty of blasphemy.
I have no reason to believe the Maori are barbarians, but I've never been to New Zealand, come to think of it, I've never met a Maori, so for me to outright state that Albertaboys's opinions are outright wrong, I'd consider quite a stretch on my part. Mind you I do have the google working for me, and I've never read anything here on HoP even remotely alluding to Maori barbarism.
As to the Easter bunny...you don't see a separation of church and state issue in there ? I do, but it's just a guess based on paralleling this with the ACLU trying to get the Boy Scouts banned from holding their jamborees on public ( federal ) land. If it's not a separation of church and state issue,,,then what is it ? Why should the ACLU even care where the jamborees are held, or state that the boy scouts have to swear an allegiance to God ? Why bother with the lawsuits ?
The get a grip,,do more reading, was aimed at the HoP audience in general, I wasn't meaning you specifically, NYC, but on rereading my last post I can see how that wasn't all that clear. Mea Culpa..
Yes I would have questioned Albertaboys statement, simply because he relates it as second hand information..had he defended it with something like "my friends don't lie if they say they're barbarians then they are" See...it wasn't really his own experience that led him to that belief, it was just something he heard somewhere. Haven't you heard things, believed them, only to have them proved wrong. Why should this be any different ? Oh...because he heard and believed something deemed offensive in liberal circles so...KABOOM !!!! . No questions asked. Sort of like he was guilty of blasphemy.
I have no reason to believe the Maori are barbarians, but I've never been to New Zealand, come to think of it, I've never met a Maori, so for me to outright state that Albertaboys's opinions are outright wrong, I'd consider quite a stretch on my part. Mind you I do have the google working for me, and I've never read anything here on HoP even remotely alluding to Maori barbarism.
As to the Easter bunny...you don't see a separation of church and state issue in there ? I do, but it's just a guess based on paralleling this with the ACLU trying to get the Boy Scouts banned from holding their jamborees on public ( federal ) land. If it's not a separation of church and state issue,,,then what is it ? Why should the ACLU even care where the jamborees are held, or state that the boy scouts have to swear an allegiance to God ? Why bother with the lawsuits ?
The get a grip,,do more reading, was aimed at the HoP audience in general, I wasn't meaning you specifically, NYC, but on rereading my last post I can see how that wasn't all that clear. Mea Culpa..
Delete
Posted:Triple Misunderstanding Squared.
I believe that the Easter Bunny is a definite separation of Church and State issue.
Since this thread is hopelessly derailed currently I'll even say why.
The fundamental issue with education and the separation of church and state is that TAX DOLLARS should not be spent on RELIGION at all. It has nothing to do with public space, it has everything to do with public funds.
Here is the wording:
Written by:
The 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between Church and State
It's a minor thing, but it has a major impact.
Firstly, we are all forced to pay taxes regardless of what religion we are or aren't. I strongly believe (a phrase I don't use all that often) that money should not in any way go towards funding religion. Any religious funding should be optional paid by members of that church.
Of course, blatant examples are going to be obvious. We don't want to be taxed to have that money go to build a church. We don't want to pay the police to go door to door signing people up for one specific religion or another. We don't want to pay a tax that would be sent as a donation to the Vatican.
Public funds can't (and shouldn't IMHO) mix with private religious causes.
The supreme court, on this one, agrees with me.
In 1947 there was a case where one state made a law to use tax dollars to pay for busing religious students to private religious schools.
Obvious examples are obvious. Less obvious examples are less obvious. And then you get the absolute stretching of the furthest little technicality and THAT'S when people get upset at what seems like illogic.
But actually, it's very logical.
You can't spend a penny of tax dollars on anything religious. Period.
Now I'm a public employee. As a High School teacher my entire salary comes directly from the mandatory tax payments of the residents of my town. I cannot mandate that a student must recite a prayer, even if it's nondenominational. That also means that I can't do anything seen as promoting (or "influencing") any religion.
Now the difference between "promoting" and "allowing" is certainly a interesting discussion. Obviously, I can wear a crucifix, turban or other religious garments as long as I'm not promoting anything.
Now in the Easter Bunny case it was determined that by calling it "The Easter Bunny" was promoting a religion. I think by the mere fact that it has the word "Easter" in it leads ME to believe that I'd agree with that fact.
Calling the Easter Bunny "The EASTER Bunny" is promoting Easter. Despite the fact that many people forget it, Easter is a catholic holiday not a type of bunny. You can't use public tax dollars by paying public employees to promote a religious holiday.
Stupid as it sounds, the law makes perfect sense.
I personally think that the bad that this law prevents far outweighs the good that it inconveniences.
I, personally, do not believe that I should be taxed to promote easter. I do not personally believe that any of my tax dollars should go towards the promotion of ANY religious holiday or "influence" any public school child towards (or away from) religion.
I believe that the Easter Bunny is a definite separation of Church and State issue.
Since this thread is hopelessly derailed currently I'll even say why.
The fundamental issue with education and the separation of church and state is that TAX DOLLARS should not be spent on RELIGION at all. It has nothing to do with public space, it has everything to do with public funds.
Here is the wording:
Written by:
The 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever form they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between Church and State
It's a minor thing, but it has a major impact.
Firstly, we are all forced to pay taxes regardless of what religion we are or aren't. I strongly believe (a phrase I don't use all that often) that money should not in any way go towards funding religion. Any religious funding should be optional paid by members of that church.
Of course, blatant examples are going to be obvious. We don't want to be taxed to have that money go to build a church. We don't want to pay the police to go door to door signing people up for one specific religion or another. We don't want to pay a tax that would be sent as a donation to the Vatican.
Public funds can't (and shouldn't IMHO) mix with private religious causes.
The supreme court, on this one, agrees with me.
In 1947 there was a case where one state made a law to use tax dollars to pay for busing religious students to private religious schools.
Obvious examples are obvious. Less obvious examples are less obvious. And then you get the absolute stretching of the furthest little technicality and THAT'S when people get upset at what seems like illogic.
But actually, it's very logical.
You can't spend a penny of tax dollars on anything religious. Period.
Now I'm a public employee. As a High School teacher my entire salary comes directly from the mandatory tax payments of the residents of my town. I cannot mandate that a student must recite a prayer, even if it's nondenominational. That also means that I can't do anything seen as promoting (or "influencing") any religion.
Now the difference between "promoting" and "allowing" is certainly a interesting discussion. Obviously, I can wear a crucifix, turban or other religious garments as long as I'm not promoting anything.
Now in the Easter Bunny case it was determined that by calling it "The Easter Bunny" was promoting a religion. I think by the mere fact that it has the word "Easter" in it leads ME to believe that I'd agree with that fact.
Calling the Easter Bunny "The EASTER Bunny" is promoting Easter. Despite the fact that many people forget it, Easter is a catholic holiday not a type of bunny. You can't use public tax dollars by paying public employees to promote a religious holiday.
Stupid as it sounds, the law makes perfect sense.
I personally think that the bad that this law prevents far outweighs the good that it inconveniences.
I, personally, do not believe that I should be taxed to promote easter. I do not personally believe that any of my tax dollars should go towards the promotion of ANY religious holiday or "influence" any public school child towards (or away from) religion.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
Posted: Written by:
Easter is a catholic holiday not a type of bunny.
Not sure where you are going with this NYC.
In most languages of Christian societies, other than English, German and some Slavic languages, the holiday's name is derived from Pesach, the Hebrew name of Passover, a Jewish holiday to which the Christian Easter is intimately linked. Easter depends on Passover not only for much of its symbolic meaning but also for its position in the calendar.
Over time, some of the customs associated with the Christian Easter have taken on a life of their own; and today many families celebrate Easter in a completely secular way, as a non-religious holiday.
The Easter Bunny is an example of folklore mythology. The "Easter Bunny" is a traditional holiday character in the form of a rabbit which is said to leave gifts, usually Easter baskets for children at Easter (or at springtime). It originates in Western European cultures, where it is a hare rather than a rabbit, and in the eastern half of the continent it also has a long tradition in Hungary.
Eggs, like rabbits and hares, are fertility symbols of extreme antiquity; since birds lay eggs and rabbits and hares give birth (to large litters) in the early spring, these became symbols of the rising fertility of the earth at the Vernal Equinox.
Rabbits and hares are both lagomorphs; they are prolific breeders. The females can conceive a second litter of offspring while still pregnant with the first (the two are born separately); this phenomenon is known as superfetation. Lagomorphs mature sexually at an early age and can give birth to several litters a year (hence the saying, "to breed like bunnies"). It is therefore not surprising that rabbits and hares should become fertility symbols, or that their springtime mating antics should enter into Easter folklore. (Easter from Wiki)
Easter is a catholic holiday not a type of bunny.
Not sure where you are going with this NYC.
In most languages of Christian societies, other than English, German and some Slavic languages, the holiday's name is derived from Pesach, the Hebrew name of Passover, a Jewish holiday to which the Christian Easter is intimately linked. Easter depends on Passover not only for much of its symbolic meaning but also for its position in the calendar.
Over time, some of the customs associated with the Christian Easter have taken on a life of their own; and today many families celebrate Easter in a completely secular way, as a non-religious holiday.
The Easter Bunny is an example of folklore mythology. The "Easter Bunny" is a traditional holiday character in the form of a rabbit which is said to leave gifts, usually Easter baskets for children at Easter (or at springtime). It originates in Western European cultures, where it is a hare rather than a rabbit, and in the eastern half of the continent it also has a long tradition in Hungary.
Eggs, like rabbits and hares, are fertility symbols of extreme antiquity; since birds lay eggs and rabbits and hares give birth (to large litters) in the early spring, these became symbols of the rising fertility of the earth at the Vernal Equinox.
Rabbits and hares are both lagomorphs; they are prolific breeders. The females can conceive a second litter of offspring while still pregnant with the first (the two are born separately); this phenomenon is known as superfetation. Lagomorphs mature sexually at an early age and can give birth to several litters a year (hence the saying, "to breed like bunnies"). It is therefore not surprising that rabbits and hares should become fertility symbols, or that their springtime mating antics should enter into Easter folklore. (Easter from Wiki)
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
DeletePosted:Yes, I fully agree, no public funds should be used to promote ANY religion, I'm totally for user pay spirituality. The "problem" is though, it has spread to public space. Let's face it Christian culture is what built North America, so naturally there's going to be indications of that all over the place. From signs on courthouses, to art in public spaces, to churches getting the prime real estate, they've definitely left their mark.
I just can"t agree to the demands that it be removed, that's all. As an atheist I can't really convince myself to find the Jesus trappings offensive, I more approach them with a yea..whatever, some people need to believe, and...hey...not all Christian ideas are evil.
So I watch for "overboardness" in both the left and right of the political spectrum and IMO going after the Easter bunny fits the bill. Now throw that one in with the ACLU/Boy scouts thing and it does raise a question of just how much separation do you really want ? Do you really want prohibition on any sort of what may be construed as religious symbolism by...somebody....somewhere, banned in publicly owned spaces ? Even if they're paying full rent for that space ?
It's a freedom of expression thing.
I just can"t agree to the demands that it be removed, that's all. As an atheist I can't really convince myself to find the Jesus trappings offensive, I more approach them with a yea..whatever, some people need to believe, and...hey...not all Christian ideas are evil.
So I watch for "overboardness" in both the left and right of the political spectrum and IMO going after the Easter bunny fits the bill. Now throw that one in with the ACLU/Boy scouts thing and it does raise a question of just how much separation do you really want ? Do you really want prohibition on any sort of what may be construed as religious symbolism by...somebody....somewhere, banned in publicly owned spaces ? Even if they're paying full rent for that space ?
It's a freedom of expression thing.
Delete
Posted:Thanks for mentioning that Easter is predominantly NOT a Christian holiday. The only justification for funds being spent (in regards of promoting a religious holiday) is to finally clarify the roots and origins of alleged "Christian" holidays and rites - IMHO.
Whilst adults have made up their belief system, children are in a different position and I believe they should be protected from getting "brainwashed" in public schools... (That would include the promotion of "Intelligent Design")
So Imus got fired (which I think was inappropriate - he should have resigned, but that's only me), however this still doesn't make Rev. Sharpton happy....
CBS hired a pathological troublemaker ("once named one of the 25 Most Influential People in America by Time magazine and a member of the National Broadcasters Hall of Fame") and now fires him for doing what he seems to have done all along ("His career took flight in the 1970s and with a cocaine- and vodka-fueled outrageous humor. After sobering up, he settled into a mix of highbrow talk about politics and culture, with locker room humor sprinkled in")...
what were they thinking? Maybe it was just about a bad timing, as the US are approaching elections???
If "political correctness" is only a shell, without content, coming from the mind (not from the heart) - IMO - it's worse than being offensive - it's bigoted.
I guess what NYC seems to misunderstand is that the rest of the world regards the US as a bigoted global player for good reasons (electoral system, racial and environmental issues). If one accuses and kills others for being racist, oppressive backwards and totalitarian, but still have the death penalty (how Christian that one is anyways) and other (fundamental) issues unresolved in the own country...
"political correctness" IMHO is only a masquerade. To cite the Imus-case once more: It was okay and appropriate for many years, his "sense of locker room humor" seemed to have entertained the masses for quite a while - no wonder he got carried away.
As for the offense taken, NYC pls compare:
[post edited for aesthetic reasons... ]
However, this one's for you:
you don't have to be the one with the glasses, okay?
EDITED_BY: FireTom (1176519676)
Whilst adults have made up their belief system, children are in a different position and I believe they should be protected from getting "brainwashed" in public schools... (That would include the promotion of "Intelligent Design")
So Imus got fired (which I think was inappropriate - he should have resigned, but that's only me), however this still doesn't make Rev. Sharpton happy....
CBS hired a pathological troublemaker ("once named one of the 25 Most Influential People in America by Time magazine and a member of the National Broadcasters Hall of Fame") and now fires him for doing what he seems to have done all along ("His career took flight in the 1970s and with a cocaine- and vodka-fueled outrageous humor. After sobering up, he settled into a mix of highbrow talk about politics and culture, with locker room humor sprinkled in")...
what were they thinking? Maybe it was just about a bad timing, as the US are approaching elections??? If "political correctness" is only a shell, without content, coming from the mind (not from the heart) - IMO - it's worse than being offensive - it's bigoted.
I guess what NYC seems to misunderstand is that the rest of the world regards the US as a bigoted global player for good reasons (electoral system, racial and environmental issues). If one accuses and kills others for being racist, oppressive backwards and totalitarian, but still have the death penalty (how Christian that one is anyways) and other (fundamental) issues unresolved in the own country...
"political correctness" IMHO is only a masquerade. To cite the Imus-case once more: It was okay and appropriate for many years, his "sense of locker room humor" seemed to have entertained the masses for quite a while - no wonder he got carried away.
As for the offense taken, NYC pls compare:
[post edited for aesthetic reasons...
]However, this one's for you:
you don't have to be the one with the glasses, okay?
EDITED_BY: FireTom (1176519676)
the best smiles are the ones you lead to 
Posted:Stone,
Easter is a Catholic holiday.
The Catholic church thinks so.
The United States Suprime court thinks so.
I'm gonna stop here because I'm either completely misunderstanding your point or this is the silliest discussion I've ever had. SInce this is the internet, I'll assume the former.
Are you suggesting that Easter is not religious?
Are you suggesting that because many people celebrate it in a nonreligous way that overrules the fact that some do celebrate it in a religious way and therefore it is not religious?
Are you suggesting that the Easter Bunny has no relation to the Catholic Holiday of Easter?
I'm genuinely confused about your specific point despite your lengthy and informative post.
Easter is a Catholic holiday.
The Catholic church thinks so.
The United States Suprime court thinks so.
I'm gonna stop here because I'm either completely misunderstanding your point or this is the silliest discussion I've ever had. SInce this is the internet, I'll assume the former.
Are you suggesting that Easter is not religious?
Are you suggesting that because many people celebrate it in a nonreligous way that overrules the fact that some do celebrate it in a religious way and therefore it is not religious?
Are you suggesting that the Easter Bunny has no relation to the Catholic Holiday of Easter?
I'm genuinely confused about your specific point despite your lengthy and informative post.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
Posted: Written by: Stout
So I watch for "overboardness" in both the left and right of the political spectrum and IMO going after the Easter bunny fits the bill. Now throw that one in with the ACLU/Boy scouts thing and it does raise a question of just how much separation do you really want ? Do you really want prohibition on any sort of what may be construed as religious symbolism by...somebody....somewhere, banned in publicly owned spaces ? Even if they're paying full rent for that space ?
It's a freedom of expression thing.
Do you understand my/the suprime court's distinction between "freedom of religious expression" and "using public funds to fund religious expression"?
Because that's THE point.
[I feel like my words are coming out strong. I'm genuinely enjoying this discourse. I'm genuinely a bit confused but trying to understand what your main point is and I'm also not sure that you understand my main point. Hint: My main point has ONLY to do with someone's tax dollars going to promote someone else's religion.]
So I watch for "overboardness" in both the left and right of the political spectrum and IMO going after the Easter bunny fits the bill. Now throw that one in with the ACLU/Boy scouts thing and it does raise a question of just how much separation do you really want ? Do you really want prohibition on any sort of what may be construed as religious symbolism by...somebody....somewhere, banned in publicly owned spaces ? Even if they're paying full rent for that space ?
It's a freedom of expression thing.
Do you understand my/the suprime court's distinction between "freedom of religious expression" and "using public funds to fund religious expression"?
Because that's THE point.
[I feel like my words are coming out strong. I'm genuinely enjoying this discourse. I'm genuinely a bit confused but trying to understand what your main point is and I'm also not sure that you understand my main point. Hint: My main point has ONLY to do with someone's tax dollars going to promote someone else's religion.]
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
Posted:from your "educate yourself" link i got this:
Written by:
Easter (disambiguation)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Easter may refer to:
Easter, the most important religious feast of the Christian liturgical year
Eostre, a putative pre-Christian deity of the Anglo-Saxons, whose month gives the name "Easter" to the Christian holiday in some Germanic languages
Easter Bunny, rabbit which leaves gifts for children at Easter
Easter egg, specially decorated eggs given out to celebrate the Easter holiday or springtime
Easter Saturday, the Saturday after the Christian festival of Easter
Easter Week, in the Christian calendar, the week beginning with Easter and ending on Easter Saturday (Holy Week, the week before Easter, is often inaccurately called Easter Week).
i think it is pretty safe to say that the majority of people in america are (at least) aware that easter it's a religious holiday and treat it that way. is there something i'm missing?
"I personally think that the bad that this law prevents far outweighs the good that it inconveniences."
me too
Written by:
Easter (disambiguation)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Easter may refer to:
Easter, the most important religious feast of the Christian liturgical year
Eostre, a putative pre-Christian deity of the Anglo-Saxons, whose month gives the name "Easter" to the Christian holiday in some Germanic languages
Easter Bunny, rabbit which leaves gifts for children at Easter
Easter egg, specially decorated eggs given out to celebrate the Easter holiday or springtime
Easter Saturday, the Saturday after the Christian festival of Easter
Easter Week, in the Christian calendar, the week beginning with Easter and ending on Easter Saturday (Holy Week, the week before Easter, is often inaccurately called Easter Week).
i think it is pretty safe to say that the majority of people in america are (at least) aware that easter it's a religious holiday and treat it that way. is there something i'm missing?
"I personally think that the bad that this law prevents far outweighs the good that it inconveniences."
me too
Delete
Posted:[edited for aesthetical reasons]
Religious symbols should be banned as soon as it comes to take influence on children (i.e. schools) and as long as it's public.
Sage: educate yourself in the case sensitive section
Easter is as Christian as the Christmas tree and the date of it.
EDITED_BY: FireTom (1176519735)
Religious symbols should be banned as soon as it comes to take influence on children (i.e. schools) and as long as it's public.
Sage: educate yourself in the case sensitive section
Easter is as Christian as the Christmas tree and the date of it.
EDITED_BY: FireTom (1176519735)
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
Posted: Written by: sagetree
i think it is pretty safe to say that the majority of people in america are (at least) aware that easter it's a religious holiday and treat it that way. is there something i'm missing?
I thought so too.
i think it is pretty safe to say that the majority of people in america are (at least) aware that easter it's a religious holiday and treat it that way. is there something i'm missing?
I thought so too.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
Posted:NYC..yes, I fully understand both yours and the supreme court's position. ( see the first sentence of my last post ) I just see the Easter bunny thing as taking this idea too far. As far as I can tell, technically no tax dollars were spent ( ie the group that hosted the craft fair paid rent,,but that sort of detail is missing in the story, they might have gotten it for free ) and the school superintendent MAY ( most likely ) have seen this as a separation of church and state issue.
Meaning...that if the Easter bunny made an appearance at the school ( on the weekend ) somebody, somewhere may interpret this as religious favouritism , may assume that the school supports Christianity and therefore by extension, assume that the school board and maybe the superintendent himself, favours Christianity.
I could be completely wrong on this, but I doubt it, and I see it as being somewhat demeaning to the noble idea of separating church and state.
The unfortunate thing being of course, is that this type of behaviour is what's given the term political correctness a black eye. Sure, the ideas of cultural sensitivity and tolerance etc. are in themselves noble it's just that the ridiculous seems to get all the press, and has done for years.
Speaking as someone who has NO European culture to relate to ( I'm adopted..I could be anything...French even ) and who has no choice to accept "what we have here" as being my culture, and given that the PC tend to trivialise MY culture in favour of "other" cultures it's no wonder I get defensive when the PC liken my self respecting my own Caucasian Canadian-ness as being akin to being a white supremacist.
I know it's "only the Easter bunny'...but it's MY Easter bunny..and he/she brings chocolate
Meaning...that if the Easter bunny made an appearance at the school ( on the weekend ) somebody, somewhere may interpret this as religious favouritism , may assume that the school supports Christianity and therefore by extension, assume that the school board and maybe the superintendent himself, favours Christianity.
I could be completely wrong on this, but I doubt it, and I see it as being somewhat demeaning to the noble idea of separating church and state.
The unfortunate thing being of course, is that this type of behaviour is what's given the term political correctness a black eye. Sure, the ideas of cultural sensitivity and tolerance etc. are in themselves noble it's just that the ridiculous seems to get all the press, and has done for years.
Speaking as someone who has NO European culture to relate to ( I'm adopted..I could be anything...French even ) and who has no choice to accept "what we have here" as being my culture, and given that the PC tend to trivialise MY culture in favour of "other" cultures it's no wonder I get defensive when the PC liken my self respecting my own Caucasian Canadian-ness as being akin to being a white supremacist.
I know it's "only the Easter bunny'...but it's MY Easter bunny..and he/she brings chocolate
Delete
faith enfire
BRONZE Member since Jan 2006
![faith enfire]()
wandering thru the woods of WI
Location: Wisconsin
Total posts: 3556
BRONZE Member since Jan 2006
wandering thru the woods of WI
Location: Wisconsin
Total posts: 3556
Posted:Catholic is not synonomous with Christian by the way
saying that Easter is a Cathollic holiday implies or it could be inferred that other Christians do not celebrate Easter
The Easter Bunny is as Christian as Santa Claus
saying that Easter is a Cathollic holiday implies or it could be inferred that other Christians do not celebrate Easter
The Easter Bunny is as Christian as Santa Claus
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
Posted:You are absolutely correct.
My error.
My error.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
Posted: Written by: Stout
I know it's "only the Easter bunny'...but it's MY Easter bunny..and he/she brings chocolate
It's true. And it may be my Easter bunny too. But when we start suggesting that it's EVERYBODY's Easter bunny, that's when I have a problem. (Again, follow the money...)
I know it's "only the Easter bunny'...but it's MY Easter bunny..and he/she brings chocolate
It's true. And it may be my Easter bunny too. But when we start suggesting that it's EVERYBODY's Easter bunny, that's when I have a problem. (Again, follow the money...)
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
Posted:just for the records
Written by: NYC
Not only that... but I was like, wait, People like Tom are on the board, so I should put it in bold. So I did. (I changed it to caps in this post so you can find it.)
And then I was like, "Wait, wait... people like Tom are going to get confused and bring up stuff like the racist south compared to a liberal center of the UK" so I wrote:
(...)
Then I was like, "Well, maybe people like Tom will skim the first couple of times I said it, so I should make sure to say it again as clearly as possible":
(...)
Then I was like, "Well, maybe people like Tom need me to explain it in more detail that I'm not suggesting that there aren't racist places in the US so I'll say it again":
(...)
I then kept the arguement on the liberal centers as not to confuse people like Tom (again, NOT the south) in the US by saying:
(...)
Then I was like, "Well, maybe people like Tom forgot that I was just talking about the liberal centers and will get caught up with things like the south so I'd better make sure I refocus us on the liberal centers by saying:"
(...)
Thinking, well, maybe I haven't said it enough for people like Tom, I'd better say it again:
(...)
At this point, I'm like... "Well, people like Tom must surely get it now... but I'll say it again for people like Tom
(...)
Then, after bludgeoning the issue to death and making sure the people like Tom surely understand that I'm only talking about my own liberal centers in places like New York City and NOT conservative centers like the south...
*Bangs head against computer!*
Keep banging....
(sorry can't edit this one at this point)
EDITED_BY: FireTom (1176519800)
Written by: NYC
Not only that... but I was like, wait, People like Tom are on the board, so I should put it in bold. So I did. (I changed it to caps in this post so you can find it.)
And then I was like, "Wait, wait... people like Tom are going to get confused and bring up stuff like the racist south compared to a liberal center of the UK" so I wrote:
(...)
Then I was like, "Well, maybe people like Tom will skim the first couple of times I said it, so I should make sure to say it again as clearly as possible":
(...)
Then I was like, "Well, maybe people like Tom need me to explain it in more detail that I'm not suggesting that there aren't racist places in the US so I'll say it again":
(...)
I then kept the arguement on the liberal centers as not to confuse people like Tom (again, NOT the south) in the US by saying:
(...)
Then I was like, "Well, maybe people like Tom forgot that I was just talking about the liberal centers and will get caught up with things like the south so I'd better make sure I refocus us on the liberal centers by saying:"
(...)
Thinking, well, maybe I haven't said it enough for people like Tom, I'd better say it again:
(...)
At this point, I'm like... "Well, people like Tom must surely get it now... but I'll say it again for people like Tom
(...)
Then, after bludgeoning the issue to death and making sure the people like Tom surely understand that I'm only talking about my own liberal centers in places like New York City and NOT conservative centers like the south...
*Bangs head against computer!*
Keep banging....
(sorry can't edit this one at this point)
EDITED_BY: FireTom (1176519800)
the best smiles are the ones you lead to
Posted:Follow the money ? like that Mall in West Palm Beach, Florida. that trotted out "Baxter the Bunny" this year ? OK, capitalize on the season, have the 'traditional" attraction without all the baggage that the Easter bunny seems to be amassing...everybody wins ( in theory ) except for those who have their cultural icons compromised.
Now a private mall doing this, I don't have a problem with ( yes I'm overstating my connection to the Easter bunny, but only to make a point,,, IRL I have hasenfeffer for Easter dinner) but if I did, I'd simply show my displeasure by not shopping there...ever that, and letting mall management know why I'm not going to shop there.
Unfortunately, there's no such easy solutions when dealing with the government on issues such as this. and it only parallels the issue of Christmas trees in public spaces too. It only takes one person to complain about "the cultural norm" ( Seatac airport ) in order to get a public body to react, yet it takes a massive campaign to defend the cultural norm.
Now a private mall doing this, I don't have a problem with ( yes I'm overstating my connection to the Easter bunny, but only to make a point,,, IRL I have hasenfeffer for Easter dinner) but if I did, I'd simply show my displeasure by not shopping there...ever that, and letting mall management know why I'm not going to shop there.
Unfortunately, there's no such easy solutions when dealing with the government on issues such as this. and it only parallels the issue of Christmas trees in public spaces too. It only takes one person to complain about "the cultural norm" ( Seatac airport ) in order to get a public body to react, yet it takes a massive campaign to defend the cultural norm.
Delete
Posted:Sorry Stout. I can't continue this conversation interesting as it is.
Tom refuses to stop harassing me.
Tom refuses to stop harassing me.
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
Posted:The point NYC , was that Easter is not only a catholic holiday.
It is a holiday in many different religions and cultures, including pagans. You seem to equate catholic with all religions.
The Easter Bunny is as Christian as Santa Claus.
Want to hear the real story of Christmas?
It is a holiday in many different religions and cultures, including pagans. You seem to equate catholic with all religions.
The Easter Bunny is as Christian as Santa Claus.
Want to hear the real story of Christmas?
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
DeletePosted:Ok, Christmas in the USA, from Wiki
Throughout the 20th century, the United States experienced controversy over the nature of Christmas, and its dual status as a religious feast day and a secular holiday of the same name. Some considered the U.S. government's recognition of Christmas as a federal holiday to be a violation of the separation of church and state. This was brought to trial several times, recently including in Lynch v. Donnelly (1984) and Ganulin v. United States (1999). On December 6, 1999, the verdict for Ganulin v. United States (1999) declared that "the establishment of Christmas Day as a legal public holiday does not violate the Establishment Clause because it has a valid secular purpose." This decision was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court on December 19, 2000. At the same time, many devout Christians objected to what they saw as the vulgarization and cooption of one of their sacred observances by secular commercial society and calls to return to "the true meaning of Christmas" were common.
Debates about Christmas in America continued into the 21st century. In 2005, when commercial interests sought to ameliorate Christians concerned with protecting the sacredness of their holiday and non-Christians uncomfortable with the perceived connection to faith, some Christians, along with American political commentators such as Bill O'Reilly, protested perceiving that it represented the secularization of Christmas rather than its protection. They felt that the holiday was threatened by a general secular trend, or by persons and organizations with an anti-Christian agenda. The perceived trend was also blamed on political correctness.
Throughout the 20th century, the United States experienced controversy over the nature of Christmas, and its dual status as a religious feast day and a secular holiday of the same name. Some considered the U.S. government's recognition of Christmas as a federal holiday to be a violation of the separation of church and state. This was brought to trial several times, recently including in Lynch v. Donnelly (1984) and Ganulin v. United States (1999). On December 6, 1999, the verdict for Ganulin v. United States (1999) declared that "the establishment of Christmas Day as a legal public holiday does not violate the Establishment Clause because it has a valid secular purpose." This decision was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court on December 19, 2000. At the same time, many devout Christians objected to what they saw as the vulgarization and cooption of one of their sacred observances by secular commercial society and calls to return to "the true meaning of Christmas" were common.
Debates about Christmas in America continued into the 21st century. In 2005, when commercial interests sought to ameliorate Christians concerned with protecting the sacredness of their holiday and non-Christians uncomfortable with the perceived connection to faith, some Christians, along with American political commentators such as Bill O'Reilly, protested perceiving that it represented the secularization of Christmas rather than its protection. They felt that the holiday was threatened by a general secular trend, or by persons and organizations with an anti-Christian agenda. The perceived trend was also blamed on political correctness.
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
DeletePosted:"The perceived trend was also blamed on a newfound respect and tolerance for those that did not celebrate Christmas."
Hrmm... doesn't sound so bad when you word it like that?
Hrmm... doesn't sound so bad when you word it like that?
Well, shall we go?
Yes, let's go.
[They do not move.]
Posted:i will say my opinion on "political correct", and not about Easter....
I read all the post, was interesting.
I live in italy, in the south of italy, here are many problems whit crime, no job, bad places where we live, and generally here in naples (my city) there is not hope for the future. I think that it'is stupid to find the guilty in an other nation or in other people. Some of my frineds say that america destroy aor economy and our culture, some other (not my friend of course)say that are muslim that are detroing us, but i think that is too easy this way...It's easy to think that some one i worst, that we have right in every situation and that there are people that have guilt... The reality is that are all guilt, the word is based on bad laws, the money, the competition, the faer, that are the giult. All over the word a lot of people have fear and hate other people, peolpe never meet. This is the problem in my opinion, it's more hard to know people that hate him....
(sorry for my english)
I read all the post, was interesting.
I live in italy, in the south of italy, here are many problems whit crime, no job, bad places where we live, and generally here in naples (my city) there is not hope for the future. I think that it'is stupid to find the guilty in an other nation or in other people. Some of my frineds say that america destroy aor economy and our culture, some other (not my friend of course)say that are muslim that are detroing us, but i think that is too easy this way...It's easy to think that some one i worst, that we have right in every situation and that there are people that have guilt... The reality is that are all guilt, the word is based on bad laws, the money, the competition, the faer, that are the giult. All over the word a lot of people have fear and hate other people, peolpe never meet. This is the problem in my opinion, it's more hard to know people that hate him....
(sorry for my english)
Delete
Posted:My view is that the whole PC craze is a load of bovine excrement. Oh, I respect other people's cultures and traditions but I don't sugarcoat my words so as not to offend. I'll cross myself when entering a church, but if the Priest is full of crap I'll let him know (privately, after the service, I'm not a total prick).
One thing I do that just flat out pisses my family off to no end is the way I'll address some of my friends. I've got one friend who calls me a "cracker" every time he sees me. I call him "gator bait" in return and we go grab a beer. I don't know if that translates for other regions but in Florida cracker is a slur against whites (specifically a certain "type" of poor whites), and gator bait is just as offensive to blacks (I'm sure the origins of that one aren't to hard to figure out).
If I said such a thing on TV or the radio, I'd be thrown out immediately. I've almost got myself killed over it once or twice when we didn't pay attention to who was around, but we still don't care. FYI, late at night in a poor neighborhood is not the time to yell out "Hey Gator Bait, get over here!" at the top of your lungs even if you are certain that's him down there at the end of the block. In the end, so long as we both know it aint meant to hurt, there aint no foul.
One thing I do that just flat out pisses my family off to no end is the way I'll address some of my friends. I've got one friend who calls me a "cracker" every time he sees me. I call him "gator bait" in return and we go grab a beer. I don't know if that translates for other regions but in Florida cracker is a slur against whites (specifically a certain "type" of poor whites), and gator bait is just as offensive to blacks (I'm sure the origins of that one aren't to hard to figure out).
If I said such a thing on TV or the radio, I'd be thrown out immediately. I've almost got myself killed over it once or twice when we didn't pay attention to who was around, but we still don't care. FYI, late at night in a poor neighborhood is not the time to yell out "Hey Gator Bait, get over here!" at the top of your lungs even if you are certain that's him down there at the end of the block. In the end, so long as we both know it aint meant to hurt, there aint no foul.
Delete
Posted:Equality and Identicality are quite different I guess. Early activists sought for all races to be considered, more or less, the same, eventually realising that it was actually equality they were after. This incorporates an acceptance of the differences between different races. Allowing for the discussion of various differences in behaviour as well as the physical. I read a study somewhere that Caucasian and Black males are generally more aggressive than Asian males. I don't know how true this is but I don't feel it is in any way politically insensitive.
All that is solid melts into air
DeleteSimilar Topics
Using the keywords [usuk political correctnes*] we found the following similar topics.1. Forums > US/UK Political Correctness [146 replies]
2. Forums > warning: new york political rant ahead [10 replies]
3. Forums > political differances........not a debate [3 replies]
4. Forums > Political in nature, Yet Funny As All Get Out...and true to! [22 replies]
5. Forums > Political compass, what's your orientation? [75 replies]
Show more..
© 1998 - 2017 Home of Poi Ltd,
New Zealand unless otherwise stated.
All rights reserved
*All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com.