A Tale of Tails

for paNOW

The tail is wagging the whole darn dog in recent years.

What better example than the recent editing of the Dire Straits song ”Money for Nothing”. It was necessary to remove the word “faggot”because ONE – count ‘em ONE – woman objected. How long has that song been sung without censoring? Thirty years? Words change meaning through history.

For hundreds of years a faggot was a bundle of sticks gathered to burn. It comes to us through Old French via medieval English. WWI soldiers sang, “While you’ve a lucifer to light your fag,” which meant a match to light a cigarette. Heaven help us if Lucifer objects!

Mark Twain’s books have been edited to remove the word ‘nigger’ and replace it with the word ‘slave’ – after 100 years or so? Why has no one objected before to Twain’s books? ‘Nigger’ is objectionable now, I agree, but does that give us the right to rewrite a classic? Negro, by the way, is a Latin word meaning the color black.

Court proceedings

'The impact of this trauma will echo for generations': court case surrounding La Ronge woman's death reaches conclusion

19h ago

Going Global

P.A.'s Zablocki named to Team Canada for U18 Women's World Championships

19h ago

Election 2024

Birch Hills staff won't share election decision

20h ago

If we ‘clean up’ every work printed, for words that one or more people object to now, but were the correct words when the book was written, we are going to be exceedingly busy. Shakespeare mentions doing away with lawyers. The Bible has no end of words this generation can object to and it certainly incites violence. If we don’t clean that up, why, kids everywhere might get horns and try to blow down walls. Joshua did it. Whoever cleans up Chaucer will have his/her hands full. Every single classic ever written probably has words dog waggers would object to so what do we do? Do we censor every book written? There’s a dangerous road!

Some time ago, I saw a short piece about three folk in Ontario who spend all their time finding things to object to and then start objecting – the Politically Correct Correctors.

Christians have been getting noticed lately. One of the two most important feasts must now be called ‘Holiday’ – not ‘Christmas.' It has taken people of other faiths 2000 years to learn they don’t like it or is that some busybody’s idea of what people of other faiths should want? When are people of other faiths going to call all of their important feasts or fasting ‘holidays?' I bet you didn’t even know that should be objectionable, although Christians have had 2000 years to find out if they do object.

One JP’s reasonable actions have been taken all the way to the highest court to find out that his Christian beliefs curtail the rights of ONE homosexual couple who wanted him to marry them. He refused, because marrying homosexuals goes against his beliefs. The court has decided that as of now, no JP, no matter what his/her personal beliefs, can refuse to marry a homosexual couple. What about the JP’s rights? Couldn’t the couple have quietly found another JP or a minister to marry them?

No. There was some dog wagging to do. Engaged homosexual couples everywhere will thank them.

Won’t they? And will some JPs, who are entitled to their beliefs, resign because they no longer have rights they thought Canadians were allowed to have?

What dog will be wagged next?

(Is it politically correct to use the word ‘dog’ in this context, or is that demeaning to dogs and offensive to dog lovers?)
 

The views expressed are strictly those of the author and not necessarily those of paNOW. paNOW presents its columns “as is” and does not warrant the contents.