SUPREME COURT Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dead at 87

JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
*



Both examples here occurred within the last two weeks.
I am writing day after Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed
as a justice to the United States Supreme Court.
One of the senators questioning her
Mazie Hirono of Hawaii
accused Barrett of using the phrase “...sexual preference...”
and claims
that is a deliberately offensive term
and that “...sexual orientation....” should be used instead.


Unless Barrett happens to be up on the latest arguments
in the Twitterverse
I suspect she was surprised by that.


The interesting thing is that
if you went out to the online Webster’s dictionary later that day
part of the meaning of the word “...preference...”
included a note about it being offensive.
That meaning was not there the day before
– I saw screen snaps of the dictionary entry that day
and the day before.
The online Wester dictionary definition was changed real-time
to further a political agenda :smile:



I also heard
that all sorts of instances of use of the word “...preference...”
very quietly disappeared from the internet that afternoon :smile:
The dictionary
plus much of the Internet
were re-done to match Hirono’s agenda.:smile:


That blows my mind.
The dictionary is being rewritten real time
to match a political agenda.
Language usage that didn’t fit that agenda very quietly disappeared :smile:


That is doubleplusungood.
Charles Obert




.
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
*





next example shows a phrase
deliberately being used in a different sense
to change and dilute its meaning.
example also refers to the US Supreme Court.

The phrase “...packing the court...” had a specific meaning
– to add more justices to the court
in order to shift its political orientation.
It has nothing to do with just filling a vacancy. :smile:


As part of the arguments
democrats accused the republicans of “...packing the court...”
by appointing Barrett to give the court a conservative majority.

The term packing had nothing to do with filling a vacancy.:smile:
So the democrats respond to an accusation of court packing
by saying the republicans packed the court first.

Now the vaguer usage of the word is catching on

– in his podcast the morning after the confirmation
Scott Adams commented that the court is really packed now.
The phrase “...packing the court..” has been diluted
to the point that it is losing its specific meaning :smile:

it’s been blurred to mean, appointing someone on your team.


We’ve lost a perfectly useful word
and now it is harder to talk about that particular situation.
That is dangerous
because now talk about the Supreme Court
and its role is being diffused and obfuscated.

Those are a couple of cases from many
of language being deliberately blurred
to make clear and rational discussion impossible
and to hide what is actually happening.
It is language being redefined to fit an agenda.
Charles Obert




.
 
Top