89
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 12:
Line 12: + +
Talk:Conservative Dictionary Project (view source)
Revision as of 17:25, September 3, 2011
, 17:25, September 3, 2011no edit summary
:: I agree that this shouldn't become a conservative redefinition, which is kind of an oxymoron. If we are to take back words liberals have changed the meanings of, we have to use the original conservative meaning, not some new meaning. --[[User:KenN|KenN]] 13:12, 3 September 2011 (EDT)
:: I agree that this shouldn't become a conservative redefinition, which is kind of an oxymoron. If we are to take back words liberals have changed the meanings of, we have to use the original conservative meaning, not some new meaning. --[[User:KenN|KenN]] 13:12, 3 September 2011 (EDT)
:::Well, we're already doing it. "Liberal" is the classic example. We can all agree that liberals like big government, are anti-Christian and reject logic. But has that ever been the definition of liberal? We might all agree that Muslims reject Christianity, and as such, are going to hell. But we do not define Muslim as someone who is going to hell. The idea posted above about 'lawn' is textbook revisionism. The idea that, because people have come to use 'grass' as a term for drugs, it is no longer a conservative thing to do to consider your 'lawn' to be 'grass' is preposterous. If grass ORIGINALLY meant that, and now means something else, then claiming back the true meaning is not to call it something else. Also, when talking about using the word lawn, to say, " remember that the process of changing our language is slow and insidious. It begins with trivial, laughable things and ends up with Christians in death camps." is absurd and unnecessary. [[User:AlycaZ|AlycaZ]] 13:25, 3 September 2011 (EDT)