Being difficult pressed to find a single appropriate definition of it, I will use that of Mr. Philip Atkinson put forth on the website ourcivilisation.com. Philip said "Political Correctness is the communal tyranny that erupted in the 1980s. It was a spontaneous declaration that particular ideas, expressions and behavior, which were then legal, ought to be forbidden by law, and folks who transgressed ought to be punished. It started with a couple of voices but grew in popularity until it became unwritten and written law inside the community. With those who were publicly declared as being not politically correct becoming the object of persecution by the mob, if not prosecution of the state."
If you are offended by definitions that appeal to the raw emotions and prefer a more scholarly explanation then maybe this one from Wikipedia will do. Offering this second definition so that any offense to the reader may be thwarted is the most practical example of what drives the notion of political correctness in the first place. The preceding statement is tongue in cheek, what follows is the definition.
"Political Correctness (also politically correct or PC) is a term used to describe language, or behavior, which is claimed to be calculated to provide a minimum of offense, particularly to the racial, to the cultural, or other identity groups being described."
Almost all that pertains to maturity and certainly all that pertains to New Testament Christianity have been based on common politeness, holding other people in high esteem and genuine respect for all folks. Political correctness seems more involved in images instead of the Christian belief that all men are created in the image of God. The difference is that the former is based in perception and the latter actually.
When Christians see images of fanatically driven Muslim extremist flying into buildings to kill themselves and take as a lot of with them as they are able to, that doesn't provoke feelings of political correctness. Any one with an ounce of humanity, Christian or not, would initially prefer to use far less than savory words to describe the perpetrators of this kind of mass murder. it's only the Spirit of God and the word of God (Christ's commandments) that persuade the believer to see right through the outward display and see each participant of such acts as worthy but misdirected souls who are created in the image of God, despite the image they're creating.
instead of being double talk such a viewpoint when practiced is only proof that political correctness is contrived while genuine humanity driven by Gods love cannot find an adequate substitute in a mere ersatzes intellectual concept.
Thousands of problems arise from mindless adherence to the unwritten tenants of political correctness. One is that while it tries to make a culturally level playing ground for all common speech it tends by its nature to provoke falsehood, and it genders class distinctions that go far beyond reality. for instance as it pertains to the dreaded N word an entire class or group is silently ignored. they're never known as out for their use or misuse of the word. That group is African Americans.
In African American social life, films and music, the N word is used profusely. That is they use the word to describe themselves frequently. That never seems to raise the question among the proponents of political correctness about the classes of users and non-users it's creating. It seems that the N word is only off limits to Caucasians but not to African Americans. The Blatant use of racially bent titles as in the movie "White Men Can't Jump" are overlooked because white folks supposedly are the only ones who are known for political incorrectness. Here is double talk at its nefarious height.
Far from being a level playing field that is created by strict PC, it's a world of class defining word wrangling and semantic nonsense. Political correctness is a true enemy to free speech, common sense and common decency. it's a doctrine that has been floated on the waves of liberalism private "Imaginary Ocean" instead of anchored in any real part of America's founding principles, law or jurisprudence. maybe it might be good for some humor, even if that is not ever what was intended. To wit, consider some of these politically corrected definitions of some rather common phrases and words.
Old Person - Gerontologically advanced
A Crook - A morally or ethically challenged individual
Drug Addict - Chemically Challenged
Bum - Displaced Homeowner
Alcoholic - Anti-sobriety activist
Insane folks - Selectively Perceptive
among the more disconcerting aspects of PC trends is its marriage to anything that emerges from pop culture or is in its throws to acquire new acceptance. The great push for homosexuality to be accepted as a part of our culture or even as a new race of folks that ought to be accorded every protection of law is one example. Our laws are framed to protect all folks but not all behavior. To even suggest that laws ought to do so puts the whole matter into a subjective mode and nevertheless there are those who nonetheless think the laws ought to be changed.
Now, as prescribed and officially sanctioned PC terms are more acceptable we are shying away from knowable and familiar PC terms and have begun sliding down the slippery slope of mere connotations and implied meanings. In an article titled "Politically Correct Candidates" that appeared on The Conservative Voice website, December 13, 2006, columnist Joe O'Connell said "...racism is no longer the kidnapping and deportation and enslavement of tens of thousands of a different race. Racism has become a word or merely an theme implied by someone other than the declared bigot. Sexism is no longer the beating of women and the denial of vote rights. Sexism is now a glance or a mistaken comment." When political correctness becomes a fashionable or commonly acceptable attitude we are at tyranny's door which leads directly down the hall to the room marked "goodbye freedom of speech."
How far will we go with this exercise in cultural reconstruction and change of cultural perceptions? Since it's now popular among millions of Muslims to commit acts of terror and suicide bombings shouldn't we accept this as emerging cultural phenomena worthy of protection of the law? The answer is understood, or perhaps not. Undoubtedly someone will take exception with the comparing of homosexuality and terrorism but there are nonetheless millions of Americans and other people who think the promulgation of the homosexual agenda is a terror to their culture and to their children. maybe the pillars of PC could produce a PC boot camp to assuage the PC challenged starting on a volunteer basis. They might name it "The Center for Intensified Sensitivity Training for the PC Challenged."
David Kupelian of the World Net Daily said in an article from that news organization on September 28, 2001 ""The news media, the filter through which Americans receive their information, is reluctant to define the enemy. Indeed, inside the last week, it has become politically incorrect to describe the Islamic terrorists who blew up the World Trade Center and Pentagon, murdering thousands of Americans, as "Islamic terrorists."
Kupelian's article was penned in 2001 so it might be safe to say that by now it we ought to be approaching the place where it's OK to defend the enemy whom we are able to no longer define outside of the parameters of acceptable PC. Again look to the gay agendas militant stand and their clear advances to see if this could be true.
Talk about definitions, Kupelian goes on to say what might be considered a summary definition of the final outcome of serious adherence to the tenants of PC.
"Now that we've discussed what we're up against, let's think about political correctness, that bizarre self censorship that currently makes us afraid even to name the enemy, let alone fight it."
"Political correctness, at its core, is intimidation. Terrorism, surely is the ultimate in intimidation."
Among the a lot of enemies hurtling themselves at America right now, political correctness ought to be identified and resisted with every fiber of our moral strength. it's the neo-censorship of the left. it's the brain dribbling of the spineless and if taken seriously will demand its pound of flesh from our national character as would any other enemy we now face. America has already lost enough weight. Let's fatten up for the fight and persist.
Hiding behind words is after nonetheless hiding. Telling the truth as fair men in consideration of other people even if it's to our own hurt is now and will always be an act of bravery and a show of character. The last time I looked, the best Americans I've ever encountered or heard of are nonetheless made of this kind of stuff and it's nonetheless known as the right stuff.
Senator Toomey Responds! (Or, rather, "Responds")
46 minutes ago