From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Wed Apr 02 2003 - 00:13:30 MST
John Clark writes
> "gts" <gts_2000@yahoo.com>
>
> > The KKK calls blacks and Jews scum, and they are no more correct than you
> > are in calling the KKK scum.
>
> If I were to say "Hey gts, what do you think about the KKK?" is it really
> inconceivable that you would reply "They're scum"; and should I think less
> of you if you did? Personally I feel it is perfectly correct, they are scum.
I find such emotional outbursts understandable,
but inaccurate. The name-calling does nothing more
than connote the emotional state of the speaker. Are
we to suppose that there is such a thing as "emotional
correctness"? From many others' posts on this list, I
think that about sizes it up.
One has to be "emotionally correct" when denouncing
racism, Communism, or Hitler, else in some quarters
it's thought that one is pushing a wicked agenda of
some kind, and that probably one secretly is a
fascist, commie, or racist.
That Joseph Stalin was a murdering, vicious dictator
of the Soviet Union is pretty close to being fact.
But to say that he was filthy animal, or a scumbag,
is nothing more than name calling, and I, for one,
won't applaud it.
Lee
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 02 2003 - 00:13:49 MST