By Gerrit Newton
“Politically correct” secularists are masters of manipulating language to achieve their ends. Their tactical brilliance in changing their own language is only exceeded by their success in getting you to change yours.
Have you succumbed to the cultural pressure to use terms you ultimately don’t believe? To accept issue framing that excludes your worldview? Is it euthanasia or murder? Is the issue choice or the value of human life? Were we all once unborn children or “fetuses”? To use politically correct language is to adopt its inherently false assumptions.
The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” (Psalm 14)
Do not answer a fool according to his folly,
or you yourself will be just like him.
Answer a fool according to his folly,
or he will be wise in his own eyes.
– Proverbs 26:4-5
Which is it then? Do you answer a fool according to his folly, or don’t you?
And indeed, what kind of reply makes you just like a fool?
If the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, then it can be said that the negation of God is the beginning of foolishness. Ideas proceeding from the faith assumption that there is no God are foolish. To reply to a fool within the framework of such presuppositions is to become just like him. To challenge or refute those false presuppositions is to prevent him from being wise in his own eyes.
The most important tenet of secularism is that God is either nonexistent or irrelevant. The (re)interpretation of the world by secularists following this assumption has led to the development of various ideologies and “-isms.” A new language has been developed to express these ideas – politically correct English.
The believers in the various PC ideologies, controlling the cultural gateways as they do, have had enormous success in popularizing their beliefs and language, and in silencing the opposition. The most insidious side of their success, however, has been their success in persuading even their opponents to adopt PC English, thereby solidifying control over how issues are framed. This language change has been a Trojan horse, drawn into too many conservative minds, effectively silencing counterarguments before they can even be marshaled. How can truth be proclaimed using terms that are inherently false?
For instance, if you believe that marriage is a God-ordained union of opposites, then how can you refer to a same-sex civil partnership as a “marriage”? The U.S. Supreme Court’s Obergefell ruling did not suddenly allow same-sex couples to “marry.” What it did was to redefine the meaning of the word “marriage” for purposes of the U.S. government and all those naive enough to go along with it. Governments may recognize marriage, but have no authority to change it, as it has preexisted them all by thousands of years. Although the proponents of “gay marriage” could have achieved all they wanted for same-sex civil partnerships without describing them using the term “marriage,” they insisted on adopting the word, perhaps to obtain a semblance of respectability, but in the end encouraging the destruction of the institution it refers to.
To those who believe in the divine origins of marriage, the Obergefell ruling should be seen as akin to a ruling allowing penguins to fly. Are we going to suddenly start scanning the horizon hoping to spot the new denizens of the skies? Are we going to enter into discussions about how fast or how far or how high penguins should be allowed to fly? Are we going to waste our energy being against that which does not actually exist? There is no way to win, of course, when adopting a false premise. We become like the fool, within whose worldview a truthful reply becomes impossible.
Some organizations have a PC name that is intentionally misleading and obscures their true mission. A prime example of this is “Planned Parenthood,” which is all about NOT being a parent, because what they are about is aborting unborn children precisely to avoid parental responsibilities. In fact, they are about undoing the parenthood that has already taken place. At conception, the father (conveniently removed from all further discussion and responsibility with surgical precision) has contributed all he biologically ever will. Biologically he is a father. PP is about undoing all that. What if we start calling the organization by its true name and refer to it as Planned UnParenthood?
Some conservatives choose to “use the common terminology so that people know immediately what it’s about.” This concession to culture is deemed justified because it ostensibly aids communication. What it really communicates, however, is that the speaker/author submits to the secularists’ definition of reality. It communicates an elevation of the secularists’ worldview over the biblical worldview. It communicates a capitulation of the voice of moral authority Christianity once held.
We cannot prevent secularists from changing their own language, but we become fools if we allow them to change ours. Purge your speech of the Trojan horse.
Gerrit Newton is a freelance mechanical design engineer based in Europe. He tries to simplify things, be they ideas or mechanical concepts.
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].
This article was originally published by the WND News Center.