Majority of Americans reject more Political Correctness for their country

[Heathen Hammer]

It's just ironic that people from the anti-PC crowd are often the same people that expect PC treatment of Christians and Christianity...

Doesn't seem to be the case. For example, South Park got censored for the first time for their depiction of Muhammad, after seasons of making fun of Christianity:

Note that it wasn't even offensive, South Park's Muhammad was a much cooler and better character then the on in Quran.

[PointOfViewGun]

Doesn't seem to be the case. For example, South Park got censored for the first time for their depiction of Muhammad, after seasons of making fun of Christianity:
Note that it wasn't even offensive, South Park's Muhammad was a much cooler and better character then the on in Quran.

That's like saying you have a black friend, hence, no racism exists in the USA.

[Heathen Hammer]

That's like saying you have a black friend, hence, no racism exists in the USA.

Not really. Another good example would be metal music, where nobody is outraged by "kill Jesus!" in lyrics, but a another Satanic band was called "Nazis" for calls to "impale Muhammad" in their lyrics.

[Aexodus]

I don’t see much mainstream figures wanting political correctness towards Christianity. It does exist, such as demanding that ‘f the pope’ being frowned upon, but heathen is technically correct about Islam being additionally, and more so like that.

[mongrel]

Not really. Another good example would be metal music, where nobody is outraged by "kill Jesus!" in lyrics, but a another Satanic band was called "Nazis" for calls to "impale Muhammad" in their lyrics.

.

Metal bands and going back further, rock and roll bands have been banned for such things as:

reference to old testament:Elvis Presley's song Hard Headed Woman , UK 1958

hair length, Led Zepplin: Singapore 1972

graphic content Cannibal Corpse: Germany, Australia, Russia 1996

influence on young people The Beatles: Israel 64

buggered if I know Behemoth: Russia 2014

drugs The Rolling Stones: Japan 1973

blasaphemy (Koran) Lamb of God: Malaysia 2013

unsuitable Cradle of Filth: China 2013

being fond of Russia Fred Durst: Ukraine 2015

unsuitable for young peopleRammstein: Germany 2009

union ban due to rowdy behaviour:The Kinks: U.S.A. 1965

Lyrical content :Carcass (Malaysia)#

Gary Glitter wil never be able to perform again. Need I have to explain why?

In passing Tom Jones was banned from the village of Fochriw, because it was believe he stole a chicken, not true apparently.

So no your's is not a good exampe it's a one. Bands are banned for a variety of reasons as anyone who is old enough or genuinely follows rock will know.

To suggest that bands are only banned if they mention Islam is as lame as it gets.Again this demonstrates the quality of the whole PC argument. It presumes people have to dump years worth of accumulated facts and life experience, as it;'s the only way their arguments work.

[Himster]

.

Metal bands and going back further, rock and roll bands have been banned for such things as:

reference to old testament:Elvis Presley's song Hard Headed Woman , UK 1958

hair length, Led Zepplin: Singapore 1972

graphic content Cannibal Corpse: Germany, Australia, Russia 1996

influence on young people The Beatles: Israel 64

buggered if I know Behemoth: Russia 2014

drugs The Rolling Stones: Japan 1973

blasaphemy (Koran) Lamb of God: Malaysia 2013

unsuitable Cradle of Filth: China 2013

being fond of Russia Fred Durst: Ukraine 2015

unsuitable for young peopleRammstein: Germany 2009

union ban due to rowdy behaviour:The Kinks: U.S.A. 1965

Lyrical content :Carcass (Malaysia)#

Gary Glitter wil never be able to perform again. Need I have to explain why?

In passing Tom Jones was banned from the village of Fochriw, because it was believe he stole a chicken, not true apparently.

So no your's is not a good exampe it's a one. Bands are banned for a variety of reasons as anyone who is old enough or genuinely follows rock will know.

To suggest that bands are only banned if they mention Islam is as lame as it gets.Again this demonstrates the quality of the whole PC argument. .

This is so confusing.
You just listed an extensive collection of examples of political correctness gone too far (with the exception of Gary Glitter) and this is somehow to prove that political correctness doesn't exist or isn't a problem or

It presumes people have to dump years worth of accumulated facts and life experience, as it;'s the only way their arguments work

You couldn't have gotten that more backwards if you tried. To accept your argument that PC isn't an issue: that requires everyone to discount lifetimes of experience and facts. Those facts and experiences that you so helpfully shared.
What you have successfully demonstrated is the whimsical arbitrary nature of political correctness. In one decade it's referencing the Old testament that gets one deplatformed, in another decade it's referencing the number of biological genders or quoting the horrible bits from the koran.
What you have highlighted is how political correctness attacks in an utterly arbitrary manner depending on the fashions of the time. If you don't find that troubling or if you think this current incarnation of fashion is the superlative form and will never be laughed about in the future: then you have not been paying attention.

[PointOfViewGun]

Not really. Another good example would be metal music, where nobody is outraged by "kill Jesus!" in lyrics, but a another Satanic band was called "Nazis" for calls to "impale Muhammad" in their lyrics.

You can continue to base your position on singular examples. That's not really a good argument.

I don’t see much mainstream figures wanting political correctness towards Christianity. It does exist, such as demanding that ‘f the pope’ being frowned upon, but heathen is technically correct about Islam being additionally, and more so like that.

Christian political correctness is so well established that its something you don't really notice right away. Many Christians made a fuss when Starbucks changed their holiday cups not as Christian to Christian's liking.

[Aexodus]

Christian political correctness is so well established that its something you don't really notice right away. Many Christians made a fuss when Starbucks changed their holiday cups not as Christian to Christian's liking.

Actually the political correctness in that situation is the removal of Christmas iconography itself, with the aim of being bland and inoffensive to appear to be more inclusive and sensitive to other cultures.

Alhoon put it like this:

Noooope, it's about the 52% of the people being tired of being patronized with boring and pointless pieces like:
"On the one hand, there is no harm in acknowledging a persons belief by wishing them happy holidays. on the other hand, a bunch of right-wing snowflakes made up another fake persecution against them. now, obviously this isnt just loonies being loony, its another attempt at enshrining christianity as the only acceptable religion. mostly evangelical denominations, who, guess what, have quite an overlap with white supremacists. as in, a lot of people who think donny is entirely not racist enough, but will settle for him in a pinch. "

You may think that. You may share that. Some agree with such an opinion. Some disagree with such an opinion.
The majority are tired about such opinions and just want to say Merry Christmas without being told boring pointless lectures about Inclusion and the theoretical enshrinement of Christianity.

[the_mango55]

Not really. Another good example would be metal music, where nobody is outraged by "kill Jesus!" in lyrics, but a another Satanic band was called "Nazis" for calls to "impale Muhammad" in their lyrics.

"nobody" is outraged by anti-Christian lyrics in metal? What?

I know you aren't American but clearly you have missed something.

[Heathen Hammer]

"nobody" is outraged by anti-Christian lyrics in metal? What?

I know you aren't American but clearly you have missed something.

I'm talking about modern times, not Satanic Panic era.

[mongrel]

This is so confusing.
You just listed an extensive collection of examples of political correctness gone too far (with the exception of Gary Glitter) and this is somehow to prove that political correctness doesn't exist or isn't a problem or



You couldn't have gotten that more backwards if you tried. To accept your argument that PC isn't an issue: that requires everyone to discount lifetimes of experience and facts. Those facts and experiences that you so helpfully shared.
What you have successfully demonstrated is the whimsical arbitrary nature of political correctness. In one decade it's referencing the Old testament that gets one deplatformed, in another decade it's referencing the number of biological genders or quoting the horrible bits from the koran.
What you have highlighted is how political correctness attacks in an utterly arbitrary manner depending on the fashions of the time. If you don't find that troubling or if you think this current incarnation of fashion is the superlative form and will never be laughed about in the future: then you have not been paying attention.

A lengthy piece of fail.

You should have read further back. HH was, as usual implying that Muslims are entirely to blame for censorship of music asnd other media and no-one imposed Christian values.

PointOfViewGun got it. Surprised you didn't.

I wouldn't say objection to drug use, a crime as for as the authorities were concerned has anything to do with PC, likewise refusing to work with people who will wreck your kit. that is commonsense. (Did you actually read the list? )The term 'politically correct didn't enter usage in the UK until the mid 1970s, soi whatever issues the BBC had with Elvis, it could not have been down to PC. The obvious motive was social conservatism.

In passing, having provided dates, one can see that such behaviour existed before the term PC even existed. Think how the Hays Code impacted early US cinema. I'm not blaming minorities for that either, as I can safely say that it was run by white males. Try finding a depiction of a black female who isn't chubby, wearing and apron and a headscarf. It took until 1968 for a depiction of a white man getting some ebony action, and even then it was considered risky. Thankfully by then Uhura didn't have to be chubby or wear a maid's uniform .

I'm talking about modern times, not Satanic Panic era.

So you are ruling out the whole of rock history prior to 2015, how convenient is that. You were utterly debunked, lets face it.

[Knight of Heaven]

Well i dont remember Christians killing people because of music or any other forms of art, lets say like cartoons. In modern times anyway.

[95thrifleman]

Not really. Another good example would be metal music, where nobody is outraged by "kill Jesus!" in lyrics, but a another Satanic band was called "Nazis" for calls to "impale Muhammad" in their lyrics.

Really? My Cradle of Filth "Jesus is a " T-shirt will get me arrested if I wear it in public.

[mongrel]

Well i dont remember Christians killing people because of music or any other forms of art, lets say like cartoons. In modern times anyway.

The USA only ever existed in modern times, Christians weren't allowed to kill people over music, yet in living memory people were killed simply because they wuz black in a white town and were allowed to carry on without fear of punishment.

[PointOfViewGun]

Actually the political correctness in that situation is the removal of Christmas iconography itself, with the aim of being bland and inoffensive to appear to be more inclusive and sensitive to other cultures.
Alhoon put it like this:

Nope. There was no removal of Christmas iconography from the cup (since 1997 the cup design changed every year and it never had distinctively Christian iconography), not that it really matters though. The fact that you're jumping to that exposes the Christian political correctness. A private company has to confirm to biases of the Christians...

Well i dont remember Christians killing people because of music or any other forms of art, lets say like cartoons. In modern times anyway.

Well, there is the case of Piss Christ from 2011 that was vandalized with the gallery bending under the threats and removing the piece... However, overall you're making a too simplistic comparison. For starters, the Christian world and the Muslim world are two distinct spheres. You don't have multitude of Christian countries where they were bombed to stone age or had the government meddled with for decades by Muslim countries. Christians are able to steam off by having their governments bomb or undermine such countries on a daily basis. If the roles were reversed we'd probably have a Muslim say what you say about the Christians... Also, the tend about art have been deliberately advertised in the West as well as in the East to get such responses. The Danish cartoon debacle turned violent months and months after they were printed and pushed into the public's eyes over and over again. You have hardly had a case that was similarly advertised in the Christian world. For centuries Turkish museums in Istanbul contained centuries of depictions of Muhammad as they were common especially from Persian artists. Not one attack occurred. To portray such incidents (ie. Charlie Hebdo) as mere Muslim attitude against art or religious criticism misses the picture.

[Knight of Heaven]

Obviously. But lets not deflect the issue, that the biggest evil in our times, seems to come in the form of Islamic terrorism for the most part.

You don't have multitude of Christian countries where they were bombed to stone age or had the government meddled with for decades by Muslim countries. Christians are able to steam off by having their governments bomb or undermine such countries on a daily basis.

I used to believe that. But this days i take this with a grain of salt, this countries are rarely pacific, with or without Western intervention. Lots of times Western intervention is even asked and called upon by said countries.
It is a complex issue, to say the least.

The USA only ever existed in modern times, Christians weren't allowed to kill people over music, yet in living memory people were killed simply because they wuz black in a white town and were allowed to carry on without fear of punishment.

What has that have to do with Christianity? I was under the impression those things happened in the US for other reasons. Not exactly religious ones.
Look im agnostic here, but historically, besides the middle ages, or in a distant past i dont recall Christianity being a force for destruction, and barbaric deeds.Well not on this global scale anyway.

On the topic of political correctness, i fail to see how it is Christian political correctness in western countries really problematic this days. I think people are way less sensitive towards it, then other groups or religions in our societies Imo.

[95thrifleman]

The USA only ever existed in modern times, Christians weren't allowed to kill people over music, yet in living memory people were killed simply because they wuz black in a white town and were allowed to carry on without fear of punishment.

Many Americans try to exist in a world where no social history existed prior to the 80's. That way they do not have to admit that they adopted nazi style eugenics laws in the 30's and banned black and white couples from getting married right into the 60's and numerous other outrageous human rights abuses that living people still remember.

[95thrifleman]

Obviously. But lets not deflect the issue, that the biggest evil in our times, seems to come in the form of Islamic terrorism for the most part

Really?

Between 2000 and 2017 126 people where killed due to terrorist acts.

Between 1985 and 1999 (before islamic terror became a "thing" in the UK btw) 1094 people where killed due to terrorist acts, the vast majority due to Northern Ireland.

Today the UK is the safest it has been since the 50's.

[Knight of Heaven]

Between 2000 and 2017 126 people where killed due to terrorist acts.

Really?
2996 people died in 9/11 alone...
in the Bataclan was 89 alone...
how many in the London subway attack of 2005? 52 i think it was..
In 2004 at Madrid train bombings 193 people died...
In what world you live in to think we are safer now then we were in the 80s and 90s? from this kind of violence?

Not to mention the jihadist wars that have been ongoing in several places in the world since early 2000s....How many people died or are dying, due to religious Islamic extremism as a flag of war?
How many decapitations at the hands of jihadists? Right...
How do you even compare something so localized as the Northern Ireland issue, to a global menace?
At any case we aren't in the 80s now, Islamic terrorism is muh more prevalent now. Not the IRA.

[PointOfViewGun]

Obviously. But lets not deflect the issue, that the biggest evil in our times, seems to come in the form of Islamic terrorism for the most part.

Biggest evil? Isn't that too ambitious? You'd have to include invasions like Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as civil wars like Syria or Libya. Many more people died in those.

I used to believe that. But this days i take this with a grain of salt, this countries are rarely pacific, with or without Western intervention. Lots of times Western intervention is even asked and called upon by said countries.
It is a complex issue, to say the least.

You can't really look at these countries in a vacuum. Vast majority of them suffered Western interventionism of some sorts. All are connected. Why do you think that back in 19th century various Europeans fled to Middle East to avoid the intolerance they experienced in their homelands and today they wouldn't think about doing that? Various families in such countries asking for Western interventionism is not a good argument as well. Just because a ruling family asked for Western support doesn't make it a good influence. The region as a whole experienced foreign dominance at a global age where self determination was valued over most.