Little did I know, a few days ago, when I wrote the article “They Ain’t Heavy” how some folks would react. I know, and expect, everyone will not agree with what I have to say. But I did not expect this bit to cause the emotional break down that I witnessed in response to my writing. The article was intended to be a satirical piece based on facts. Immediately upon posting the article I was challenged to provide a source, which I easily did. I did not make it up and numerous references to the idea could be found via a web search. So, I asked my self why this reaction and the only answer I have is “I don’t know”.
If you find yourself at all curious about this verbal exchange, you can find it on the Townehouse Voice Facebook Page. * The original article was based on two concepts, the intent of the Congress to impose gender neutral nouns and pronouns in the house and the use of the term “Awomen” by the Democratic Representative Emanuel Cleaver, who is also a Methodist Minister and should know better. But he got a pass. The outrage seems to have come from the fact that a mere mortal, such as I, would dare to question the actions of the Great and Powerful Nancy Pelosi for authoring the restrictions on the House. (It is a good thing they did not see my Facebook Post where I said, “The new definition of insanity: Reelecting Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House and expecting different results.” I suspect that would have really put their panties in a bunch.
The point of contention seems to have come down to my lack of clarity or inability to defend my stance when I said that this was a slippery slope. I will try to do better. I realize the Pelosi restrictions only refer to language to be used in the House. I will add to that the phrase “for now”. My concern is the concept that anyone who holds power feels they can impose, on others, restrictions on what words are, or are not, acceptable. It was quickly pointed out to me that her restrictions only were with regards to language in the house, the idea being the house would be more inclusive. That to me seems contradictory that terms must be excluded so the House can be more inclusive. I believe she is entitled to feel this way, that she is entitled to ensure only gender-neutral ouns and pronouns are used in anything she or her staff authors but leave the rest of us alone. I want to decide if I want to say he or she or they. I do not want to be told which I can and cannot say. To reiterate, I am aware these inclusive exclusions only affect language in the House of Representatives Again I say, “for now”. That is, until a bill is written and passed making it the law of the land. That is the slippery slope that concerns me.
There are those who will say I am being foolish, perhaps even paranoid. You have the right to say that. I bet if somebody in the past had said that some day in the United States of America, we would be tearing down historical statues, they would have been called foolish. Or if someone in the past had said that lawless groups would be free to occupy portions of our cities and nothing would be or could be done to prevent it, it would have been said they are being paranoid. I would rather the lawmakers concentrate on that which is important, such as reducing poverty, legislating for veterans, and more importantly finding relief for homeless veterans. I could go on and on with what I think they should be working on but for the most part what needs to be done is self-evident. I should not have to tell them.
*Comments posted on the Townehouse Voice have been removed by the commenter. I wonder, was he ashamed of what he wrote?
Those are my thoughts, what are yours?
Feel free to comment, like, share, agree or disagree with this post. Please consider a free subscription. Options to subscribe can be found elsewhere on the page. Thank you for reading the Townehouse Voice.