I recently ran across these "working definitions" that go beyond politics to
one's personal philosophy:
conservative: Anything not expressly allowed is prohibited
liberal: Anything not expressly prohibited is allowed
Tim
On 9/27/05 16:34, John Forbes wrote:
> So an innocent word has been highjacked by the illiberal to mean something
> else?
>
> Perhaps we need language police.
>
> John
>
> On Wed, 28 Sep 2005 00:19:33 +0100, Tom Reese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> John Forbes asked:
>>
>>> The word (liberal) comes from Old French, and originally meant
>>> "pertaining
>> to a free
>>> man". Its very root means "free".
>>>
>>> So why is it that in the land of the free, many people seem to like
>>> freedom for everything except thought, and consider "liberal" to be a
>>> dirty word? This baffles the rest of us, many of whom tend to accept,
>>> more or less, the definition of the Oxford Dictionary (original
>>> edition),
>>> which states:
>>>
>>> "Of political opinions: Favourable to constitutional changes and legal
>>> or
>>> administrative reforms tending in the direction of freedom or
>>> democracy."
>>>
>>> Surely this is what all Americans want? Isn't it? So what's wrong with
>>> being liberal?
>>
>> It's almost impossible to answer your question without setting off the
>> politics powderkeg.
>>
>> When used as a dirty word, "liberal" is an accusation that means "one who
>> advocates higher taxes and excessive government." That is what the person
>> making the accusation wants the electorate to believe. It can go much
>> deeper.
>>
>> This touches on issues that people are extremely passionate about and it
>> could easily turn ugly. Abortion, guns, separation of church and state
>> and
>> economic policy are some of the issues.
>>
>> I tried to keep this opinion free to avoid setting off the arguments.
>>
>> Tom Reese
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
