Showing posts with label political correctness. Show all posts
Showing posts with label political correctness. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 20, 2026

Police chief: Politics, progressive D.A.s enable gang violence in Minnesota | Wake Up America

Police chief: Politics, progressive D.A.s enable gang violence in Minnesota | Wake Up America

Newsmax

Oct 20, 2026  

NEWSMAX Crime Correspondent Jason Mattera investigates concerns over Somali gang violence in Minnesota, where local law enforcement officials warn that political correctness is hampering police efforts to combat crime and hold offenders accountable.


Friday, August 21, 2026

The GREAT FEMINIZATION: The Real Reason Everything Went Woke

The GREAT FEMINIZATION: The Real Reason Everything Went Woke

Human Nature by Roni Fouks

Aug 18, 2026

The Great Feminization is here. In this video, we talk about how feminine values, ways of cooperation, and ways of competition have taken over our society. And how they have made everything woke. 

We look at Helen Andrew's excellent article on the subject:

https://www.compactmag.com/article/th...


0:00   The Great Feminization Theory Explained 1:13   Feminine Norms and the Woke Shift 
3:31   Cancel Culture is Feminine 
7:14   Universities, Censorship, Safe Spaces 
12:51 The HR Example 
22:35 Feminine Takeover of the Law


Thursday, December 04, 2025

Christian OU student flunked after calling gender ideology 'demonic'


By Jon Brown, Christian Post Reporter Wednesday, December 03, 2025

A Christian pre-med student has gone viral in recent days for filing a religious discrimination complaint with the University of Oklahoma after a trans-identified teaching assistant allegedly flunked her for an essay stating that gender ideology is "demonic."

Samantha Fulnecky, a junior at the University of Oklahoma who is majoring in psychology, received a zero out of 25 for a 650-word opinion essay she was told to write in her "Lifespan Development" class in response to an article about social gender expectations, according to The Oklahoman.

According to a copy of her essay published by the local outlet, Fulnecky asserted that God created two distinct genders with different roles, and that the idea of changing one's gender is a satanic assault against that design.

"I strongly disagree with the idea from the article that encouraging acceptance of diverse gender expressions could improve students' confidence," she wrote. "Society pushing the lie that there are multiple genders and everyone should be what they want to be is demonic and severely harms American youth."

Graduate teaching assistant William "Mel" Curth, who uses "she/they" pronouns, took apparent offense at Fulnecky's claims in the essay, and was especially upset at her use of the word "demonic" to describe gender ideology.

"To call an entire group of people 'demonic' is highly offensive, especially a minoritized population," Curth reportedly wrote in an online grading portal.

"Please note that I am not deducting points because you have certain beliefs, but instead I am deducting point [sic] for you posting a reaction paper that does not answer the questions for this assignment, contradicts itself, heavily uses personal ideology over empirical evidence in a scientific class, and is at times offensive," Curth also said.

"I implore you [to] apply some more perspective and empathy in your work," Curth added.

Thursday, April 11, 2024

Overton Window


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about the political concept. For the 2010 novel, see The Overton Window.


An illustration of the Overton window, along with Treviño's degrees of acceptance

The Overton window is the range of policies politically acceptable to the mainstream population at a given time.[1] It is also known as the window of discourse.

The term is named after the American policy analyst Joseph Overton, who proposed that an idea's political viability depends mainly on whether it falls within this range, rather than on politicians' individual preferences.[2][3] According to Overton, the window frames the range of policies that a politician can recommend without appearing too extreme to gain or keep public office given the climate of public opinion at that time.
Summary[edit]

Overton described a spectrum from "more free" to "less free" with regard to government intervention, oriented vertically on an axis, to avoid comparison with the left/right political spectrum.[4] As the spectrum moves or expands, an idea at a given location may become more or less politically acceptable. After Overton's death, his Mackinac Center for Public Policy colleague Joseph Lehman further developed the idea and named it after Overton.[5]

The political commentator Joshua Treviño has postulated that the six degrees of acceptance of public ideas are roughly:[6]

Unthinkable
Radical
Acceptable
Sensible
Popular
Policy

The Overton window is an approach to identifying the ideas that define the spectrum of acceptability of governmental policies. It says politicians can act only within the acceptable range. Shifting the Overton window involves proponents of policies outside the window persuading the public to expand the window. Proponents of current policies, or similar ones within the window, seek to convince people that policies outside it should be deemed unacceptable. According to Lehman, who coined the term:

The most common misconception is that lawmakers themselves are in the business of shifting the Overton window. That is absolutely false. Lawmakers are actually in the business of detecting where the window is, and then moving to be in accordance with it.[5]

According to Lehman, the concept is just a description of how ideas work, not advocacy of extreme policy proposals. In an interview with The New York Times, he said:

It just explains how ideas come in and out of fashion, the same way that gravity explains why something falls to the earth. I can use gravity to drop an anvil on your head, but that would be wrong. I could also use gravity to throw you a life preserver; that would be good.[7]

Criticism

Laura Marsh of The New Republic argued that:

Viewing politics through the Overton Window reinforces liberal notions about the moderate center, even as that center ground erodes. ... Overton did little more than repackage the basic negotiating principle that if you ask for a lot, you will likely get more than if you ask for a little.[8]



Monday, February 17, 2020

Georgetown University Library Bans Books that Offend Students




Videologia/Getty

TOM CICCOTTA 14 Feb 2020


The library system at Georgetown University announced this week that it is banning several books that students have deemed “offensive.”

According to a report by the College Fix, Georgetown University officials have removed hundreds of books from campus libraries after students argued that they were riddled with bigotry.

Student Alexandra Bowman complained to administrators after noticing that a book in one campus library prominently featured a Native American on its cover. Shortly thereafter, Georgetown’s Reynolds and McCarthy libraries were almost cleared out.

“While some were simply raucous crime noir murder mysteries representative of the literary and cultural time in which they were written, other books included extremely problematic and damaging elements, including the glamorization of rape, including that of underage girls,” Bowman said in a short comment. “Completely naked women of all races were frequently featured on these books’ covers. Further, many books fetishized young nonwhite women.”

“Upon looking further at the collection of books in the library, we noticed other serialized books, most published in the mid-20th century, with similar pornographic, racially derogatory themes,” Bowman wrote during correspondence with a Georgetown student newspaper. “Ultimately, the removal of the books was what we expected to come as a result of our inquiry.”

The Georgetown Review, an independent student newspaper associated with Georgetown University, also contributed to the university’s decision to remove the books from the library. After hearing of Bowman’s complaint, the newspaper published a report detailing the most offensive books in the two campus libraries. Some of the books featured sexually provocative cover pictures. The seemingly innocuous book included in the report was Legion, William Peter Blatty’s sequel to The Exorcist was included in the list.

A Georgetown spokesperson told a student reporter that the decision to remove the books from the libraries was made out of concern for the sensitivity of the university’s students and staff.

Administrators “led an investigation into the content of both libraries’ collections” following outreach from the crack research team at the Hilltop and Review. The Residential Life team removed books whose “titles, topics, and images … raised concerns for students and staff,” the spokesperson said.





Saturday, December 01, 2018

PC GONE MAD: Criticising migration could become CRIMINAL offence under new plan



A LEADING MEP has warned EU citizens they could be “jailed” for criticising migration policies if a new United Nations agreement is acted upon.


PUBLISHED: 11:13, Sat, Dec 1, 2018 | UPDATED: 19:35, Sat, Dec 1, 2018


Marcel de Graaff: Criticism of migration will be criminal offence
Speaking about the global compact on migration, Marcel de Graaff said: 'One basic element of this new agreement is the extension of the definition of hate speech. Criticism of migration will become a criminal offence.'



The United Nations Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration seeks to make immigration a universal human right. MEP Marcel de Graaff said: “I would like to say some words on the global compact on migration. On the 10th and 11th of December there will be an international congress in Marrakesh Morocco. The participating countries are set to sign this agreement and although this joint agreement is not binding it is still meant to be the legal framework on which the participating countries commit themselves to build new legislation.


“The compact for migration is legalisation of mass migration.





The United Nations Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration could be signed next week (Image: GETTY • EU)


“It is declaring migration as a human right so it will, in effect, become impossible to criticise Mrs Merkel’s welcome migrants politics without being at risk of being jailed for hate speech.”

In 2015 Angela Merkel pushed for an open-door migration policy across the EU. Critics said the move was motivated by Germany’s need to boost its workforce by at least one million.

The document is an "intergovernmentally negotiated agreement, prepared under the auspices of the United Nations, that covers all dimensions of international migration in a holistic and comprehensive manner”.

Austria, Australia, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Italy, Israel, Poland, Slovakia and Switzerland have already stated they will not sign the agreement.


Thursday, November 29, 2018

Jesuit university blocks Ben Shapiro event, saying it prompts ‘hateful speech’ from protesters




By Avery Anapol - 11/29/18 07:20 PM EST 34




A Jesuit university has blocked a proposed event featuring conservative writer Ben Shapiro, citing the possibility of “hateful speech” by protesters.

Officials at Gonzaga University in Washington state rejected a request from the school’s College Republicans chapter seeking to bring Shapiro to campus, according to conservative college news site Campus Reform.

Judi Biggs Garbuio, Gonzaga’s vice president of student development, reportedly said in the denial that Shapiro’s speeches “routinely draw protests that include extremely divisive and hateful speech and behavior, which is offensive to many people, regardless of their age, politics or beliefs.”


Biggs Garbuio also cited the school’s Christian mission, as well as safety and security concerns about the event.

“Gonzaga University is committed to the human dignity of every individual,” Biggs Garbuio wrote. “This is the core of our mission based on the teachings of Christ Jesus, and the foundations of the Society of Jesus. We stand in solidarity with vulnerable members of our community who may be targeted for discrimination, ridicule, or harassment by others.”

Shapiro, the editor of conservative website the Daily Wire, has been blocked from speaking by a number of universities, including DePaul and California State University, though Shapiro showed up at the latter anyway.

Olivia Johnston, president of Gonzago College Republicans, told Campus Reform that the school’s response to the event shows that they “have made it clear diversity of thought [is] not welcome.”

“I refuse to accept a University that only supports strictly liberal thinking,” she added. “The hypocrisy must end.”

The Hill has reached out to Shapiro for comment.




Tuesday, March 27, 2018

Christian Colleges Are Tangled In Their Own LGBT Policies



March 27, 20187:26 AM ET
Heard on Morning Edition


TOM GJELTEN




Calvin College in Michigan is affiliated with the Christian Reformed Church, which holds that "homosexual practice ... is incompatible with obedience to the will of God as revealed in Scripture."Noah PreFontaine/Calvin College



Conservative Christian colleges, once relatively insulated from the culture war, are increasingly entangled in the same battles over LGBT rights and related social issues that have divided other institutions in America.

Students and faculty at many religious institutions are asked to accept a "faith statement" outlining the school's views on such matters as evangelical doctrine, scriptural interpretation and human sexuality. Those statements often include a rejection of homosexual activity and a definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Changing attitudes on sexual ethics and civil rights, however, are making it difficult for some schools, even conservative ones, to ensure broad compliance with their strict positions.

"Millennials are looking at the issue of gay marriage, and more and more they are saying, 'OK, we know the Bible talks about this, but we just don't see this as an essential of the faith,' " says Brad Harper, a professor of theology and religious history at Multnomah University, an evangelical Christian institution in Portland, Ore.

LGBT students at Christian schools are also increasingly likely to be open about their own sexual orientation or gender identity.



Thursday, March 08, 2018

UCLA 'Social Justice Advocates' resume fight against 'privilege'



Toni AiraksinenNew York Campus Correspondent@Toni_Airaksinen

Today at 9:54 AM EDT



UCLA's "Social Justice Advocates" program is once again paying students to fight “whiteness, privilege, and heteronormativity” on campus.

The program appeared to have gone defunct as of January, even being scrubbed from the school's website, but the SJA Facebook page has lately shown renewed signs of life.



Image via Facebook: UCLA Social Justice Advocates


The University of California-Los Angeles (UCLA) has resumed a program that pays students to fight “whiteness, privilege, and heteronormativity” on campus.

The UCLA “Social Justice Advocates” program initially sought to hire 8-10 students last May to promote social justice, in line with a trend seen at other schools including Washington State University, the University of Arizona, and Oregon State University. 


Tuesday, February 06, 2018

Prime SJW Justin Trudeau scolds young woman: We say 'peoplekind,' not 'mankind'




Elias Hubbard


February 7, 2018





She used the word "mankind", and while Trudeau appreciated her question, he did interject to correct her choice of the word, suggesting "peoplekind" is more "inclusive".

"But now a clear victor has emerged in the form of Trudeau, the handsome young politician publicly drooled over by numerous same women who claim to find male objectification of female flesh so demeaning".

Trudeau took a question about religious nonprofits from a woman affiliated with the World Mission Society Church of God. As she goes on to explain the issue she mentions that maternal love is the love that is going to change the future of "mankind". Because Trudeau prefers "peoplekind".

At this point Trudeau made a decision to dive into political correctness headfirst."We like to say peoplekind", he said, interrupting her.

"Well, we're gonna find out because you believe it's coming to us, here in America, and you've been in both countries frequently", Kilmeade said.

Canada's head SJW, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, has outdone himself in his Orwellian crusade to purge gender differences from the English language.

An off-the-cuff remark by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau during a town hall has caught the attention of U.S. President Donald Trump's favourite TV show.




Friday, January 26, 2018

People Outraged as Google Home Identifies Buddha, Muhammad and Satan but Not Jesus Christ




(Photo: REUTERS/BECK DIEFENBACH)Google Home is displayed during the presentation of new Google hardware in San Francisco, California, U.S. October 4, 2016.


Smart Audio technology, such as Google Home and Amazon's Alexa, has quickly become the dominant go-to source of information for this generation but some consumers are now speaking out about the fact that Google Home devices refuse to share information on Jesus Christ.
Google Home is a new self-proclaimed "powerful" speaker and voice assistant. The device can play your music, call your friends, and answer almost any question that can be found on the web. However, when asked who is Jesus, Jesus Christ or God the smart speaker says it does not know the answer.

"Sorry, I'm not sure how to help" or "My apologies I don't understand," Google Home responds.
What has some people up in arms is that if you ask the device who other religious figures are such as Muhammad, Buddha and even Satan the device gives a full breakdown on what it has found on the web.

Television producer, author, and speaker David Sams took it upon himself to compare the answers of his Google Home and Amazon's Alexa during a Facebook Live video. He showcased that the Amazon device pulled up the online information on Jesus while Google Home still claimed it did not have anything to say about Jesus.

"I even asked Google who is David Sams? Google knew who I was, but Google did not know who Jesus was, Google did not know who Jesus Christ was, and Google did not know who God was," Sams told the local Nashville Fox 17 News. "It's kinda scary, it's almost like Google has taken Jesus and God out of smart audio."

"I don't know if there's some kind of wizard making these decisions or if it's some kind of oversight," Sams added. "But whatever it is, they need to address it immediately."

According to NPR and Edison Research, one in six adults in America (or around 39 million people) now own a voice-activated smart speaker.

Although other Google devices pull up a description of Jesus and God there has been no response from the company on why Google Home does not. The speaker does reference Jesus, though, when asked about the Last Supper or Saint Peter.

Nashville resident Martin Collins told the news outlet that he thinks this feeds into a bigger problem of political correctness.

"They took prayer out of schools, they think just taking Jesus out of everything is politically correct these days and I think that's the stem of a lot of our problems," Collins maintained.
As reported on The Christian Post last year, Amazon's Echo assistant named Alexa was also under fire for reportedly responding to the question "who is Jesus Christ" by replying that He "is a fictional character."

Conservative media personality Steven Crowder posted a video online showing Amazon's Alexa calling Jesus a "fictional character." But many others argued that their Alexa just pulled up the web description of Jesus.

"We have plenty of tweets and videos from people who asked it the question and they got the exact same answer," Crowder said on his program.

As seen in Sams' video, the Alexa issue might have been resolved but people are now demanding Google Home give Jesus fair treatment.




Wednesday, January 17, 2018

International Court Pushes Gay Marriage on 20 Latin American Nations



Michelle Riestra / January 17, 2018





The autonomous Inter-American Court of Human Rights has faced growing resistance from Latin American countries in recent months. (Photo: iStock Photos)



Commentary By




Michelle Riestra



Michelle Riestra serves as legal counsel for ADF International in Washington, D.C., where she engages in legal advocacy at the Organization of American States.




The Inter-American Court of Human Rights called last week for the recognition of same-sex marriage and of proclaimed “gender identity” as a protected category for nondiscrimination under the American Convention on Human Rights.

Although the decision is not binding, 20 countries throughout the Americas have accepted the jurisdiction of the court, and will now be pressured to implement its decision.

The 20 countries are Argentina, Barbados, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, and Uruguay.

Same-sex marriage is already legal in some of those countries, including Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Uruguay, and others recognize civil unions, but still others do not recognize either and will be expected to change their laws.

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. But this can't be done alone. Find out more >>

The case originated from Costa Rica, which requested an advisory opinion from the court on whether its domestic law violated international law, as it does not facilitate name changes based on gender identity, nor recognize patrimonial rights of same-sex partnerships.

Advisory opinions are not even binding on the country that asked the question, let alone the other 19 nations that have accepted the court’s jurisdiction. However, the court ignored this legal reality and called upon the countries to issue temporary decrees recognizing same-sex marriage until new legislation can be enacted by those countries.

The court has no authority to order such a thing, and the decision goes against the clear wording of the American Convention on Human Rights, as well as several national constitutions. However, the court’s decision is just the latest example of judicial activism, which stretches back more than a decade.

The court is tasked with interpreting the American Convention on Human Rights and operates within the broader Organization of American States framework.

Faced with stubbornly conservative member nations that are slow to follow the legal and cultural liberalism flowing out of Canada, the U.S., and much of Western Europe, the court has taken it upon itself to force its own liberal agenda on a reluctant region.


Monday, January 08, 2018

More than 1,000 churchgoers complain of spiritual abuse




The respondents were from denominations including Anglicanism Credit: Charlotte Graham




Olivia Rudgard,
Religious Affairs Correspondent 8 January 2018 • 4:53pm


Church-goers at mainstream churches have said they are being "spiritually abused" by leaders.

Research showed that more than 1,000 British Christians said they had experienced the abuse, which usually involves members invoking God's will or religious texts in order to punish or control and coerce a worshipper.

Two thirds of respondents to the survey carried out by Dr Lisa Oakley of the National Centre for Post Qualifying Social Work at Bournemouth University said they had experienced spiritual abuse in the past.

Respondents said church leaders were also experiencing abuse from members of their own congregations.

Dr Oakley said: “There has been a focus in previous work in this area on leaders controlling and coercing those they lead, but a strong message in this research is that ministers and leaders also experience this form of abuse.


We do have to be mindful as to the way we deliver messages that are based on our own theological or doctrinal position


Saturday, December 16, 2017

Pope: Media sins by dredging up, sensationalizing old news






•December 16, 2017






Pope Francis stands during the audience with Ecuador's President Lenin Moreno at the Vatican, Saturday, Dec. 16, 2017. (Andreas Solaro/Pool Photo via AP)




VATICAN CITY (AP) — Pope Francis is criticizing journalists who dredge up old scandals and sensationalize the news, saying it's a "very serious sin" that hurts all involved.

Francis, who plans to dedicate his upcoming annual communications message to "fake news," told Catholic media on Saturday that journalists perform a mission that is among the most "fundamental" to democratic societies.

But he reminded them to provide precise, complete and correct information and not to provide one-sided reports.

The pope said: "You shouldn't fall into the 'sins of communication:' disinformation, or giving just one side, calumny that is sensationalized, or defamation, looking for things that are old news and have been dealt with and bringing them to light today."
He called those actions a "grave sin that hurts the heart of the journalist and hurts others."