Mincing words

I really cannot comprehend these days what it is with the masses of the "politically correct/elite" and their refusal to deal with the English language. What exactly is the purpose of having a language with words if every time a word is used in it's proper context it is deemed offensive? Or, if in the case of evolutionary debate, when you point out to the atheist that they are using the word design and in doing so by the very definition they are implying a designer. (Design demands/requires a designer) Otherwise it is a clear misuse of the word. They like to accuse you of "haggling" or "quibbling" over terminology.



But then what is it's purpose? I know those on the "left" side of the spectrum like to redefine terminology and words every time they begin to trip on their own words. This somehow allows them an "out" from the proverbial corner they just painted themselves in to. Either the terminology is minimized, redefined, or dismissed all together.

I have decided that is NOT how I am going to play the game. Words have definition for a reason. So we know what the (Bleep!) the other person is trying to say. Let me elaborate my point. Today's word is a very offensive word. But that is not what matters. What matters is this...is the word applicable? That word is "Whore".

Whore as defined in the English language is as follows:

1. A prostitute.
2. A person considered sexually promiscuous.
3. A person considered as having compromised principles for personal gain.

Now let's look at the following true story in Canadian politics. Her name is Belinda Stronach. She has been referred to as a whore. Is the term justified?



After a failed leadership bid for the conservative party (most likely because she was a rookie MP) an inexperienced Belinda decided that she wanted to have it all in politics. As a spoiled little rich girl who was used to getting whatever she wanted, losing the leadership bid to Stephen Harper was too much. She had designs on being a somebody in politics. To the point of compromising who she claimed to be. On May 17, 2004, Belinda "crossed" the floor over to the Liberal party. What's the big deal you might ask? Timing! This was the day of a crucial budget vote. Budget votes, when lost by the reigning party in power, bring the house down. This is considered a vote of non-confidence and the government in power must now call for an election because in it's current state it cannot do business in the house without the support of the opposition parties.

The 2004 budget would have brought down the governemnt. Except Belinda crossed the floor that day and voted with the Liberals. She blabbered about her "moral" reasons but it seemed rather questionable that the moment she crossed the floor she was handed a very lucrative Cabinet position. Usually these positions are reserved for those with expeirence and are known for their loyalty to the party. Belinda had neither and then serving Prime Minister Paul Maritn was desperate to cling to power. So he dangled a a carrot in front of her. Essentially he bought her vote. Under the term "Whore" Belinda fit both 1 &3. 1 because she was "paid" off for her actions and 3 because she was willingly to compromise her principals for personal gain. If you will she was a "political whore" of sorts.

But the definition does not just end there. This past year she has been relationally (IE sexually) linked to NHL hockey player Tie Domi. I guess that would not be such a big deal EXCEPT Tie Domi is married and it is not to Belinda.



Speculation does cross one's mind when rumors start to fly and I will usually dismiss them but there were some factors that contributed to the reality of this relationship. One, neither of them denied it. . Two, Tie Domi's wife discovered recently that when he was supposedly with his team on a few occasions he was actually in New York or Calgary with Belinda. Three, Oh Yeah! The photograph taken of Tie with Belinda in public areas confirming these (ahem!) stories.



Aside from Belinda's adulterous relationship with Tie Domi she has also been known to "other" men in the House of commons. Peter Mackay for example. At this rate, Belinda also qualifies for definition number two when applying the word whore. So let's not minimize reality by mincing words because we are supposed to be sensitive towards those who incapable of displaying the same quality.

Her actions speak loud and clear of who she is and how she lives. I always say "If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck...then it's a DUCK!"

Belinda...your a whore!

Until next time...

Check it out!

Alright, no fighting words today. I have officially been pimped out. Or another way of putting it...I have been profiled.

It is always cool when one hooks up with another blogger. I would love to personally meet everyone who continues to visit my site. Unfourtanetly that is not always reality.

If you would like to satisfy your curiousity then check it out here!

Maybe one day you and I will hook up as well.

AIDS: A gay man's disease

I am quite sure as one reads the title to this latest article many of you almost immediately had your blood levels boiling to a very dangerous point. Some of you, without even reading what I am about to present, may be thinking "Boy do I ever want to throttle this guy for his redundant ignorance" Or maybe you are thinking "Here we go again. Another Christian right wing (nut) blaming a killer disease on the homosexuals"

But what if I told you that I am not the one spreading this message? What would you think if I told you that it was a message being spread by a homosexual advocate organization? Would you even believe it? To be honest with you I would not even believe it....if I had not seen it for myself.



A new ad campaign being sponsored by the Gay and Lesbian Center is now going back on it's original position of the last 25 years that AIDS is not a gay disease and now claiming that it is.

I am not going to rub this in anyone's face with childish "I told you so" retorts. Because that would not be conducive to discussing a very serious fatal illness. Nor do I accept that it is entirely true. HIV is not soley a homosexual disease. It is, however, and always has been predominantly found in homosexuals, mostly gay and bi-sexual men. The facts support the reality that AIDS and the practice of homosexuality are closely linked. Which is why I do not find it a contradictory statement to suggest that HIV is indeed a gay disease.

Let's review, not my own findings (I would just be accused of looking up research that favored my view anyway) what Lorri L. Jean, Chief Executive Officer, of the L.A. Gay & Lesbian Center has to say regarding this campaign that his organization is spearheading.

"In Los Angeles, the data are very clear: though gay and bisexual men make up less than 7% of the population, they account for more than 75% of those living with HIV and AIDS. The hugely disproportionate impact of the epidemic on our community is undeniable and unacceptable, and has been so for 25 years."

Yikes! Those are indeed scary statistics. But it is not just in L.A. alone that we find this trend. For example, in my own home country of Canada where the entire population of the country is 32,650,175 (still a million and half less then the entire population of the state of California) the numbers are very similar.

In Canada homosexuals make up less then 2% of the population (although we will just round it off to 2). 57,780 Canadians are infected with HIV. 55% of infected Canadians are homosexual men. Once again, clearly in the majority. It is also suspected, although not proven, that a number of those in Heterosexual/endemic category (individuals with an origin in a country where HIV is endemic (mainly sub-Saharan Africa and the Caribbean) engaged in same sex encounters in their own homeland but never viewed this as something they needed to share with their wives. A common practice within certain African cultures that is never spoken about among it's citizens only known that it does indeed go on. This of course, if proven, could inflate the numbers.



(Canadian statistics, MSM representing male gay sex)

Why such high numbers within the gay community? For one thing, anal penetration is not conducive to natural design. Linings in the human body are torn, sometimes beyond repair. This certainly allows for higher chance of infection to occur. The other reason has to be the intentional behavior of some within the homosexual community. These are not people who are not educated on the dangers of sexual promiscuity. The practice of "so-called" safe sex has permeated society to the point that you would have to be dead not to have heard about it at least 5 times within your life time.

Yet there is a continual, intentional, rebellion to all the warnings that go with this lifestyle. A practice known as "Bare backing" where gay men literally throw caution to the wind to engage in unprotected sex with a complete stranger because of the supposed "rush" they get from knowing they could be having sex with an HIV positive male. Potentially playing the proverbial game of "Russian roulette" for the sake of a few fleeting moments of sexual climax suggests that their is something more to it then just two people wanting to engage in same sex.

This is a dangerously psychological problem as well. To know that your sexual lifestyle is a high risk even with protection and yet to willingly choose to throw even that away to have unprotected sex, to the point of looking for it, with a complete stranger has me questioning one's mental stability. The following is taken from the About: Aids/HIV website:

But what of the positive man who infects the willing. What drives them to knowingly give an illness to an otherwise healthy man? One "gift giver", as positive men are often called, reported,

"It was the most incredible feeling of power. I was going to take something from him, and that power gave me a rush I'd never known."



This is truly disturbing and sad. I applaud the Gay and Lesbian center for it's very bold, and I am quite sure controversial, approach to addressing this epidemic especially among the gay community. Their response was mature after 25 years of denying what was reality. They have now stepped up to the plate to take a degree of ownership. And I say good for them. As I reviewed statistics at various sites the trend , every four years, continues to rise rapidly within the homosexual community. The facts are there. This indeed is a dangerous sexual activity to engage in. HIV, for the most part, is a gay man's disease.

Until next time...