The other night while responding and debating with a good friend, (whom had probably recently rolled one way too fat that evening ), about words their meanings and such, I responded to him with the following:
" A word is very much something real and objective. It is the agreed meaning of an idea, fact or object....the collective attributes of the said thing. If you disagree with the definition, then you are the one violating the agreed contract; you do not get to change the attributes of the definition to keep a word!!! If the word desired (attributes that are represented) does not exist it is up to you to create and use a new word or add a new definition that can be agreed on. One has no right to destroy words(definitions) of the past. Words of the past mean what they mean at the time of being stated (the agreed definition of the time)... To change the meaning is to destroy the thought, be it agreeable, contrary, or indifferent."
This got me to thinking on how the progressive non-critical thinking left continually twists language to fit their ideas. Ethnicity becomes race, free speech becomes terrorism, and a failed web architecture, design and implementation becomes a glitch. So why do they do this? Hmmmm? I say it is to intentionally mislead us. It is meant to invoke an emotional response from the recipient favorable to the speaker with little or no intellectual effort on the part of the speaker/author. It is meant to get one to come to a conclusion they might not have otherwise if they had the true and correct information. So when I hear the "political bastardazations" of words I take it as an admittance of the speakers failure of the idea or thought.
Words mean things.....and more importantly how words are used reveals intent, character and integrity.