The psychology of political correctness

It seems like you're being intentionally obtuse. I've been explicit in several different ways, but there's really no need to belabor it any further

And it could be argued that repressing sexual freedoms has 10 times the negative effect. The irony is that 9 out of 10 times, the countries suppressing sexuality are Islamic... which you hate... and yet they're so similar to your belief system. Not to mention the majority of them are failed states. Secretly you must be delighted at the fact that ISIS throws homosexuals off buildings and stones harlots. Is that about accurate? Which explains perfectly why Europe and North America are vastly more prosperous than the countries that don't violate God's law. That's some judgment! Send the Taliban my regards! Your mouth seems to water at the thought of the sinners perishing in exquisite agony. Be careful what you wish for, as Jesus was mostly concerned with the Pharisees. Perhaps you're not quite as close to the good Lord as you might think. Separating the Wheat from the Tares!; the Goats from the Lambs!

I learned from the best! Ahhhh, his judgment cometh and that right soon! Well, Paul definitely thought he would see the Rapture in his life time. Meanwhile, 2,000 years later....

It's always been like that... every generation claims that it's going to hell in a handbasket, etc, etc.

I'm arguing that it has been like that. Always -- since the Church began

I can completely empathize. You could have substituted your name with mine, and almost everything about the story would have been relevant to mine.It's a lonely place for a moderate or a libertarian. You're too liberal to be a conservative, and too conservative to be a liberal. When I first arrived here, I was the prototypical Christian conservative... which seems so foreign now. And yet for however much I have changed, there are still elements that are more typical to conservative perspectives. On any given topic, my liberal or conservative hat might change. As a result, some have said that I was phony then while others that I'm a phony now.Well, my views are intricate and reasoned by both experiences and clever argumentation from once opposed viewpoints. I realize that neither of us has to fulfill the role of carbon copy. We don't need to toe any party line. We just need to remain open-minded and be willing to speak up but also to know when it's time to shut up and listen.

My take on it is that, as Coyote explained, the PC that exists among Progressives is obvious to the point of denials concerning it are pass. Many do in fact use it as a weapon to shut down a legitimate argument and use it a way similar to a filibuster. Conservatives have plenty of bad tendencies, but this bad tendency is particular to Progs.However, I also understand what many people have been trying to point out to Faith; that her use of the term PC is essentially mischaracterized to mean anything "liberal."

One example would be Genomicus and Modulous in the White Privilege thread. I'm too lazy to look up specific post numbersEdited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given.

What I mean by "shut down" is by excluding anything outside of your racist narrative. You won't even entertain it, because like Theodoric in the Sounding Gay thread, even the presumption of something must be racist or homophobic or sexist. In essence, it's like pulling the Race Card. Whenever somebody doesn't like what you're saying, just make allegations of racism instead of addressing the content. That's what I mean by "shut down." I'm not suggesting that you were trying to silence me or anything along those lines.

I may be confusing something Modulous said and unfairly pasted it on to you. If so, I apologize. Modulous at one point in the discussion claimed that I was getting dangerously close to overt racism (not a verbatim quote). I thought that was a rather unfair characterization of my argument. However, even this was a bad example of what people are referencing, because I actually don't think Modulous was being unfair or using some kind of straw man tactic against me.The argument between Bill Maher and Ben Affleck comes to mind. Affleck apparently thought it was racist to be critical of Islam. Apparently if you are critical of Islam, it means you hate Arabs. Affleck insisted over and over that it was "racist" even though Islam is a religion, not a race. But as soon as you make the allegation alone, it shifts the focus of the argument away from the topic and ends up with someone defending themselves against a false allegation. It's a straw man tactic.

Are you suggesting that people who use Political Correctness are getting this out of some manifesto or communist playbook?Political correctness is generally nonsense, I would agree, but your words read like some hysterical, delusional, tinfoil hat-wearing conspiracy straight out of the mouths of McCarthyists.

All that tells me is that, on top of being a monumental piece of shit, he's also a lying piece of shit who panders for votes.... but he wants us to believe that he's not a "politician?" Nobody can believe it. Trump comes across as mentally unstable and the kind of guy who would absolutely use the military as his personal mercenaries to settle scores with anyone that crosses him. He's a megalomaniac and an attention whore who will take part in anything that gets his name put up in lights.

Illegal immigration in to the United States is also at historic lows.