We should have added Founding Mothers

[Gonz]

pc is not merely the domain of the 'communist' and frustrations and annoyance with it are not a right-wing specialism.

I've not once referred to left or right. It is very much on both sides. The right is afraid of today & the left is afraid of yesterday. The communsist reference is in regard to having our collective rights trampled by the psyche's of a gross minority.

EVERYBODY should be very afraid of that.

 

[Jeslek]

Are Californians French?

Nah, neo-communists, a lot of them.

Now watch them bitch at my political incorrectness.

 

[chcr]

The communsist reference is in regard to having our collective rights trampled by the psyche's of a gross minority.

Trampling of rights is the one of the first steps of any elitist group trying to gain or hold power over the majority. Communism is dead except as an intellectual exercise, although I will admit Castro is trying to hang on.

 

[flavio]

I'm not referring to the USA becoming the next Great Communist State, per se. I am referring to how far left we've gone & that movement hasn't slowed one iota.

and then....

I've not once referred to left or right.

interesting.

 

[Squiggy]

I've not been able to grasp the idea behind this thread from the beginning....And Gonz's statement that "the right is afraid of today and the left is afraid of yesterday" seems totally contrary to most discussions I've had or seen in this forum....

 

[ris]

pc is not merely the domain of the 'communist' and frustrations and annoyance with it are not a right-wing specialism.

I've not once referred to left or right. It is very much on both sides. The right is afraid of today & the left is afraid of yesterday. The communsist reference is in regard to having our collective rights trampled by the psyche's of a gross minority.

EVERYBODY should be very afraid of that.

short memory gonz? this is the very first line of the thread:

One of the reasons my wife & I are lookiong into homeschooling. PC is just another word for communist.

 

[Gato_Solo]

Problem is, that, no matter what you write, somebody will be offended. The purpose of free speech is just that. Free Speech. If you don't like what is being said, you can always exercise your right of free speech also, or, if you don't think that will work, you can always leave.

BTW...I learned this from when I was in school...

Each right has a corresponding responsibility, ie, the right to free speech has a responsibility of not inciting a crime.

 

[Professur]

Offending someone is now a crime????


Quick, the queen on Britain is offended. Recind that Declaration of Independance.

 

[chcr]

Offending someone is now a crime????

Hope not, it's my second favorite pastime.

 

[Q]

Ooooh, me too!

 

[Gato_Solo]

Offending someone is now a crime????


Quick, the queen on Britain is offended. Recind that Declaration of Independance.

Inciting a crime is not freedom of speech. Offending someone, no matter how trivial, is not a crime. The person who is offended has the right to free speech also, and can respond in kind, leave the offensive person, or ignore the offending person. If the verbal altercation turns physical, however, then the person who strikes first is clearly in the wrong, as the other options were available.