It is no longer politically correct to ask, no, to expect people who come to this country to learn our language.
Language can be either unify a nation, or divide it. David Simpson, in his book, The Politics of American English wrote, "Language, in other words, is seen from the start as a potential element in constituting a political and cultural unity among the citizens of the new republic; or, if it goes wrong, a means of prescribing or perpetuating disorder."
John Adams, the second President of the United States, once wrote a letter to the President of Congress saying that Americans should, "force their language into general use." However, since we had just fought a war with England the founders were hesitant to declare English the official language, as there was no distinct 'American' language.
Nevertheless throughout much of our history it was commonly accepted that English was the official language, and all business would be done in English. In 1795 the House of Representatives failed to pass a bill that would require the printing of 3,000 sets of the laws of the U.S. in German "for the accommodation of such German citizens of the United States, as do not understand the English language."
That all began to change in the 1970's. In 1974 the Supreme Court ruled in Lau v. Nichols, 414 U.S. 563 that federal civil rights statutes required schools to provide special educational assistance to students with limited English language skills.
Did you know that according to the U.S. Census that there are 311 languages spoken in the United States? http://www.nvtc.gov/lotw/months/november/USlanguages.html
Are we to be required to print our laws, our documents, and provide teachers fluent in all these languages to appease those who come to this country who are not equipped to function in society?
That my friends is political correctness at work. We are made out to be the villains because we refuse to change our beliefs or our behavior to accommodate others.
Just the other day at work I got lectured because of the mistake made by another person who happened to be East Indian. This person relieved me at my line so that I could take a scheduled break. I explained to him what I was doing and he just smiled and waved his hand at me as if to say, ‘just go’. I was gone for just ten minutes and when I returned it took me almost half an hour to clean up the mess that he had made. Yet I could not say anything about this individuals inability to understand English for fear of being written up for discrimination. This is what political correctness does to our country people, and the sooner we do away with it the better.
Scottish author George MacDonald once gave a fitting description of political correctness. He said that the two pillars of political correctness are:
a) willful ignorance
b) a steadfast refusal to face the truth
Doris Lessing, the 2007 Nobel Prize winning author writes, “Political correctness is the natural continuum from the party line. What we are seeing once again is a self-appointed group of vigilantes imposing their views on others. It is a heritage of communism, but they don’t seem to see this.”
It is not merely the acceptance of languages other than English that have been forced upon us by political correctness. We are told that we must accept and tolerate perversion. In fact our thoughts are legislated in such a way that if we speak out against these abominations we may be charged with discrimination or even a hate crime.
Our nation and our laws were built upon principles contained in the Bible. James Madison, once of the primary writers of the Constitution once said, ‘We have staked the whole future of our new nation, not upon the power of government; far from it. We have staked the future of all our political constitutions upon the capacity of each of ourselves to govern ourselves according to the moral principles of the Ten Commandments.’
John Adams once said, ‘We have no government armed with the power capable of contending with human passions, unbridled by morality and true religion. Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.’
In 1782, Congress voted on a resolution which stated, ‘The congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.’
John Jay, or First Supreme Court Justice, stated, ‘Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers and it is the duty as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian Nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.’
Up until 1963, the McGuffey Reader was used in all our public schools. It was written college professor William Holmes McGuffey, and in it he wrote, ‘The Christian religion is the religion of our country. From it are derived our notions on character of God, on the great moral Governor of the universe. On its doctrines are founded the peculiarities of our free institutions. From no source has the author drawn more conspicuously than from the sacred Scriptures. From all these extracts from the Bible I make no apology.’
However, in 1947 political correctness found its way into the Supreme Court. In that year the Court ruled on the case of Everson v. Board of Education. The Court ruled that, “The ‘establishment of religion’ clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever from they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect ‘a wall of separation between Church and State.’”
Yet for over 150 years from the time of the ratification of our Constitution, the use of teachings from the Bible was permitted, indeed it was considered the foundation upon all that sets our nation apart from so many others. Why the sudden change in direction taken by the Supreme Court?
Since Everson v. Board of Education the Court has consistently ruled to restrict the rights of Christians by limiting our ability to profess our faith. In 1948 the Court heard the case Illinois ex rel. McCollum v. Board of Education. The Court ruled that religious instruction could not be conducted in public schools. In 1963, in the case of Abington School District v. Schempp, the court ruled that passages from the Bible or the Lord’s Prayer could not be recited in schools. In 1965 it was ruled that a student can not bow his head in prayer and pray audibly for his food. In 1980 in Stone v. Graham, the Ten Commandments were outlawed from public schools. In their ruling they said, ‘If the posted copies of the Ten Commandments were to have any effect at all, it would be to induce school children to read them. And if they read them, meditated upon them, and perhaps venerated and observed them, this is not a permissible objective.’yer. How would James Madison feel about that?
What has this wrought for America? Sin is now something that we are to tolerant of and evil does not exist. When someone does something that used to be considered evil and sinful the blame is shifted away from them and onto the society that produced them.
Albert Einstein once said, "Man must cease attributing his problems to his environment, and learn again to exercise his will - his personal responsibility."
Nowhere is this nonsense about political correctness more apparent than in the way we are forced to accept, what is now called, alternative lifestyles. Homosexuality, according to the Bible, is a sin. Leviticus 20:13 states, "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them."
Yet since we are told that we need to be tolerant, this is no longer a sin. It is a lifestyle choice, or even more ludicrous, that people are born this way. Can anyone who is a Christian believe that God would make such a terrible mistake as to place the soul of a woman into the body of a man, or vice versa? Yet these same people want the churches to be allowed to perform gay marriages. It is pure hypocrisy!
Political correctness has ruined our ability to see things as they are, or at least to speak out against wrongdoing when we are confronted with it. I remember growing up that gay was not a word to describe homosexuals, they were called queers. What is the definition of queer?
According to Merriam Webster's, queer is defined as, "1 a: worthless, counterfeit
Political correctness should be categorized as a mental illness, if you want my honest opinion. It blinds people to the truth, or at least causes them to fear speaking out against perceived wrongdoing. It stifles a persons first amendment right to free speech. I would like for everyone to ponder something, if they would. If the goal of political correctness is tolerance, why then are people taught not to be tolerant of the views of those who stand in opposition to the agenda of the political correct movement? Why is it that all that used to be considered good and decent is now viewed as being unacceptable?
Political correctness only exists because we allow it to. If we refuse to bow down to them, refuse to remain silent when we witness something we find offensive, the political correct movement would have no power over us.
There is right and there is wrong. William Lloyd Garrison once asked, "Are right and wrong convertible terms, dependent upon popular opinion?" No, the Ten Commandments were written in stone, they are Gods laws for us to follow. Therefore, as Anthony J. D'Angelo said in The College Blue Book, "Transcend political correctness and strive for human righteousness."
As I stated in the beginning, political correctness is something that appeases people, makes them feel comfortable with their deficiencies, their abnormalities, and gives them an excuse for errant behavior. It is up to you whether or not to be politically incorrect or not. For me, I will do what my father used to always tell me to do, call a spade a spade. That is the only way I know how to be, and, as far as I am concerned, those who push political correctness can stuff it.