What Is It You Think You Can't Do Because of Political Correctness?

[paperview]

So, don't keep your trap shut and face the consequences.

I shouldnt have to face consequences, if people were not such bigoted assholes.

The biggest bigots are now on your side of the spectrum. You must be SOOOO fucking proud about it.

Wait...you want to call people names but not face the consequences because THEY are bigoted assholes?

Gee, Marsha, I don't know why people get so pissed when I call them vile fags and skanky bull-dykes. I shouldn't have to put up with such oppression!

 

[DiamondDave]

So, an employer should just let ya'll call each other names and we will have harmonious workplaces. Riiiggghhhttt....

No, either they eliminate all names, or allow all names. They shouldnt be allowed to be subjective. Rules are rules, not some plaything for progressive assholes.

That's not gonna happen if you don't say you're offended by the term. If rednecks aren't offended by the term redneck or if someone doesn't say they're offended, how is it "namecalling"? How do you know if the offended party doesn't say anything?

OK.. because rappers use the term N!GG@R, we can assume they are not offended by it.. because we have heard homosexuals use the term 'queen' or 'queer', they must not be offended.. so I guess anyone can say those thing.. OOPS, nope, not according to the PC crowd.. because YOUR subjectivity takes precedence because you are IN the pc crowd

 

[Seawytch]

I shouldnt have to face consequences, if people were not such bigoted assholes.

The biggest bigots are now on your side of the spectrum. You must be SOOOO fucking proud about it.

Wait...you want to call people names but not face the consequences because THEY are bigoted assholes?

No.. in a world of freedom.. nobody should face consequences for simple speech...

That is the difference between me and the fucking goddamn PC crowd

No consequence for speech, are you nuts? Of course there should be consequences...just not legislative ones.

 

[NYcarbineer]

No.. being able to witch hunt based on terms or names you consider 'offensive' and punish people for it is... kinda like slavery being wrong, you suddenly don't make the correction one where the former slaves can now own the former masters

Really? Where's the list of people who've been unjustly punished?

Dunno.. make a list for ones that have been fined, reprimanded, or fired for using an offensive term.. or have been raked over the coals by government or the media for using an offensive term

And yes, we still have call for 'fair treatment' of the minorities because of them 'starting off without advantage' or 'whitey having an advantage'.. or the unfair punishment of the whites who have the same qualifications as a minority, yet the minority gets a scholarship purely because of race.. that would be punishment based on your subjective PC standard

Again, like who? It was your accusation.

 

[Seawytch]

No, either they eliminate all names, or allow all names. They shouldnt be allowed to be subjective. Rules are rules, not some plaything for progressive assholes.

That's not gonna happen if you don't say you're offended by the term. If rednecks aren't offended by the term redneck or if someone doesn't say they're offended, how is it "namecalling"? How do you know if the offended party doesn't say anything?

OK.. because rappers use the term N!GG@R, we can assume they are not offended by it.. because we have heard homosexuals use the term 'queen' or 'queer', they must not be offended.. so I guess anyone can say those thing.. OOPS, nope, not according to the PC crowd.. because YOUR subjectivity takes precedence because you are IN the pc crowd

No, you're supposed to say you're offended by it. You're not supposed to buy the albums that use the word, you're supposed to speak out against the language you find offensive. Is that so hard?

 

[martybegan]

Wait...you want to call people names but not face the consequences because THEY are bigoted assholes?

No.. in a world of freedom.. nobody should face consequences for simple speech...

That is the difference between me and the fucking goddamn PC crowd

No consequence for speech, are you nuts? Of course there should be consequences...just not legislative ones.

So a person should be fired or castigated for thier personal views? ANY personal views that go against the grain of a protected class? And we are not talking about namecalling here. A person cannot hold a view opposed to those held by the "right" people without fearing for thier economic and social well being? They have to hide what they think just to preserve thier own way of life?

I guess some animals are more equal than others.

 

[DiamondDave]

Now, the bigots must hide in the shadows

Nobody should hide in the shadows for speech.. unlike what you and the PC crowd calls for with your 'tit for tat' approach

That's just it, you don't have to. You aren't actually prevented from saying or doing anything because of political correctness, you're prevented by your own personal desire not to be labeled an asshole.

No... you and your crowd are not prevented.. ones outside of your PC crowd are.. and his has been shown over and over with each story about 'racist remarks' or 'insensitive' remarks

You can label me an asshole all you want.. you can even call me a freaking piece of shit.. whether I am offended by what you call me makes no difference... but your era of political correctness has brought the process and will to punish those who do not fit your politically correct label... my want of free speech does no such thing

 

[NYcarbineer]

I shouldnt have to face consequences, if people were not such bigoted assholes.

The biggest bigots are now on your side of the spectrum. You must be SOOOO fucking proud about it.

Wait...you want to call people names but not face the consequences because THEY are bigoted assholes?

No.. in a world of freedom.. nobody should face consequences for simple speech...

That is the difference between me and the fucking goddamn PC crowd

Somebody loses their freedom if you allow the punch but don't allow the counterpunch.

 

[martybegan]

I shouldnt have to face consequences, if people were not such bigoted assholes.

The biggest bigots are now on your side of the spectrum. You must be SOOOO fucking proud about it.

Wait...you want to call people names but not face the consequences because THEY are bigoted assholes?

Gee, Marsha, I don't know why people get so pissed when I call them vile fags and skanky bull-dykes. I shouldn't have to put up with such oppression!

The problem is you assholes lump the people who oppose gay marriage on religous grounds, or those who oppose it when it is erroneously judicually mandated, and do it civilly, with the people who go around screaming vile fags/skanky bull dykes.

 

[martybegan]

Wait...you want to call people names but not face the consequences because THEY are bigoted assholes?

No.. in a world of freedom.. nobody should face consequences for simple speech...

That is the difference between me and the fucking goddamn PC crowd

Somebody loses their freedom if you allow the punch but don't allow the counterpunch.

The counterpunch is saying "you are wrong" or "i disagree with you." In your world the counterpunch is ruining the person economically and socially, and letting other people do it for you.

It shows what type of gutless cowards you really are.

 

[DiamondDave]

That's not gonna happen if you don't say you're offended by the term. If rednecks aren't offended by the term redneck or if someone doesn't say they're offended, how is it "namecalling"? How do you know if the offended party doesn't say anything?

OK.. because rappers use the term N!GG@R, we can assume they are not offended by it.. because we have heard homosexuals use the term 'queen' or 'queer', they must not be offended.. so I guess anyone can say those thing.. OOPS, nope, not according to the PC crowd.. because YOUR subjectivity takes precedence because you are IN the pc crowd

No, you're supposed to say you're offended by it. You're not supposed to buy the albums that use the word, you're supposed to speak out against the language you find offensive. Is that so hard?

No.. you CAN say you are offended by it all you want.. you don't get a right to suppress or punish others for saying what offended you... and if you find it offensive, you are indeed a hypocrite if you are actually using it yourself.. and when you call for the condemnation of another who uses it, you show how you are full of shit with your politically correct bullshit

 

[rightwinger]

No, either they eliminate all names, or allow all names. They shouldnt be allowed to be subjective. Rules are rules, not some plaything for progressive assholes.

That's not gonna happen if you don't say you're offended by the term. If rednecks aren't offended by the term redneck or if someone doesn't say they're offended, how is it "namecalling"? How do you know if the offended party doesn't say anything?

OK.. because rappers use the term N!GG@R, we can assume they are not offended by it.. because we have heard homosexuals use the term 'queen' or 'queer', they must not be offended.. so I guess anyone can say those thing.. OOPS, nope, not according to the PC crowd.. because YOUR subjectivity takes precedence because you are IN the pc crowd

Chris Rock explained it best....

Two fat girls can joke about how fat they are, but if a skinny girl does it, it is just plain mean
Two poor people can joke about how poor they are, but if a rich person does it, it is just plain mean

Get it?

 

[DiamondDave]

Really? Where's the list of people who've been unjustly punished?

Dunno.. make a list for ones that have been fined, reprimanded, or fired for using an offensive term.. or have been raked over the coals by government or the media for using an offensive term

And yes, we still have call for 'fair treatment' of the minorities because of them 'starting off without advantage' or 'whitey having an advantage'.. or the unfair punishment of the whites who have the same qualifications as a minority, yet the minority gets a scholarship purely because of race.. that would be punishment based on your subjective PC standard

Again, like who? It was your accusation.

What.. you want a list of specific names of whites who don't get scholarships while other minorities do??

No... sorry.. something can exist without me having to give a list of names.. we know the process exists

 

[NYcarbineer]

Wait...you want to call people names but not face the consequences because THEY are bigoted assholes?

No.. in a world of freedom.. nobody should face consequences for simple speech...

That is the difference between me and the fucking goddamn PC crowd

No consequence for speech, are you nuts? Of course there should be consequences...just not legislative ones.

These people who are claiming there shouldn't be consequences for speech?

Ask them about all the efforts to impose 'consequences' on Barack Obama for the 'speech' of the Reverend Wright.

I don't recall a whole lot of outrage from certain quarters about that.

 

[dblack]

OK.. because rappers use the term N!GG@R, we can assume they are not offended by it.. because we have heard homosexuals use the term 'queen' or 'queer', they must not be offended.. so I guess anyone can say those thing.. OOPS, nope, not according to the PC crowd.. because YOUR subjectivity takes precedence because you are IN the pc crowd

No, you're supposed to say you're offended by it. You're not supposed to buy the albums that use the word, you're supposed to speak out against the language you find offensive. Is that so hard?

No.. you CAN say you are offended by it all you want.. you don't get a right to suppress or punish others for saying what offended you... and if you find it offensive, you are indeed a hypocrite if you are actually using it yourself.. and when you call for the condemnation of another who uses it, you show how you are full of shit with your politically correct bullshit

I guess it depends on how you define 'suppress or punish'. In my book they entail a degree of coercion that should be the sole purview of government. Firing someone isn't coercion. Neither is refusing to associate with them. That sort of ostracizing is simply legitimate discretion that we should all exercise on a regular basis.

 

[DiamondDave]

Wait...you want to call people names but not face the consequences because THEY are bigoted assholes?

No.. in a world of freedom.. nobody should face consequences for simple speech...

That is the difference between me and the fucking goddamn PC crowd

No consequence for speech, are you nuts? Of course there should be consequences...just not legislative ones.

Or judicial ones... and we have seen lawsuits for 'discrimination' or 'treatment' against personal choices, including sexual behavior

 

[Seawytch]

No.. in a world of freedom.. nobody should face consequences for simple speech...

That is the difference between me and the fucking goddamn PC crowd

No consequence for speech, are you nuts? Of course there should be consequences...just not legislative ones.

So a person should be fired or castigated for thier personal views? ANY personal views that go against the grain of a protected class? And we are not talking about namecalling here. A person cannot hold a view opposed to those held by the "right" people without fearing for thier economic and social well being? They have to hide what they think just to preserve thier own way of life?

I guess some animals are more equal than others.

You can ask that question to a gay person who can be fired in 30 states for being gay?

 

[NYcarbineer]

No.. in a world of freedom.. nobody should face consequences for simple speech...

That is the difference between me and the fucking goddamn PC crowd

Somebody loses their freedom if you allow the punch but don't allow the counterpunch.

The counterpunch is saying "you are wrong" or "i disagree with you." In your world the counterpunch is ruining the person economically and socially, and letting other people do it for you.

It shows what type of gutless cowards you really are.

If a man were out preaching every day against the Jews, claiming in all sorts of manner that Jews were evil, that Jews were not to be trusted, that the Jews killed Jesus, that the Jews were out to take over the world, and on and on and on and on, blah blah blah

and that man were exercising a protected right of free speech,

YOU are saying that it would be gutless and cowardly for others to try to use their own powers of persuasion to impact that person economically and socially?

Are you mad? Seriously, do you not realize how insane you are?

 

[DiamondDave]

No.. in a world of freedom.. nobody should face consequences for simple speech...

That is the difference between me and the fucking goddamn PC crowd

No consequence for speech, are you nuts? Of course there should be consequences...just not legislative ones.

These people who are claiming there shouldn't be consequences for speech?

Ask them about all the efforts to impose 'consequences' on Barack Obama for the 'speech' of the Reverend Wright.

I don't recall a whole lot of outrage from certain quarters about that.

No.. it is only you and your ilk that makes it only about what is offensive in your PC sphere... again.. call someone a redneck or a breeder or whitey, and nothing will happen.. call someone a n-bomb a fag or blacky, and watch the repercussions... and that is perfectly OK with all of you

Just like equal treatment when it fits or benefits you, and unequal treatment of others when it fits or benefits you

Either anything or everything can be offensive.. or nothing can be and it is just free speech.. your subjective in-between bullshit is ridiculous

 

[Seawytch]

No.. in a world of freedom.. nobody should face consequences for simple speech...

That is the difference between me and the fucking goddamn PC crowd

No consequence for speech, are you nuts? Of course there should be consequences...just not legislative ones.

Or judicial ones... and we have seen lawsuits for 'discrimination' or 'treatment' against personal choices, including sexual behavior

Only because there are laws that protect things like race, religion, gender...and in some places sexual orientation. If I can't fire you for your religion, why should you be able to fire me for my orientation?