University Bans Use Of ‘Mr., Mrs. Or Ms.’ In The Name Of Political Correctness

Wikipedia/Alex Irklievski

According to recent reports, the Graduate Center of the City University of New York has handed down a decision that will force its staff to ditch certain honorifics when addressing others. The new policy prohibits the use of “Mr., Mrs. or Ms.” due to their potentially discriminatory characteristics.

CUNY Interim Provost Louise Lennihan distributed a memo touting the “respectful, welcoming and gender-inclusive learning environment” the new policy will help preserve, explaining the absence of these titles serves to “accommodate properly the diverse population of current and prospective students.”

While another university source suggested the policy shift was part of the school’s compliance with federal law, however, at least one expert in anti-discrimination legislation confirmed no such policy is required.

“They are not mandated to do this,” attorney Saundra Schuster said.

Regardless of legal requirements, though, CUNY staff members took the memo as a direct order to curtail the use of certain gender-based titles.

“My interpretation was that I was being asked to adhere to this policy,” said professor Juliette Blevins, “as were the professors who received the letter.”

Another CUNY professor, Joseph Borelli, indicated that he is open to embracing whatever titles his students prefer, though he opposes limiting speech with this restrictive policy.

“If a student asked me to call him Godzilla, I would happily call him Godzilla,” he said, “or whatever anyone asked to be called. But we do not need another ultra-PC policy change.”

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Look What One Of The World’s Biggest Schoolbook Publishers Just ‘Banned’ To Avoid Offense


It could hardly have come at a worse time — the notice from one of the world’s biggest publishers of schoolbooks and teaching materials that its authors should avoid using the word “pigs” and should not write about anything that could be perceived as pork-related…including sausages.

Right in the midst of the Paris-centered celebration and defense of freedom of expression that’s drawn millions to stand up for the liberties that radical Islam would try to destroy, along comes this “guidance” from Oxford University Press.

As reported by London’s Daily Mail, “Schoolbook authors have been told not to write about sausages or pigs for fear of causing offense…among Jews and Muslims.”

Many millions of students and teachers use books from Oxford University Press, which, according to its website, publishes more than 6,000 titles a year worldwide.

“Our range includes dictionaries, English language teaching materials, children’s books, journals, scholarly monographs, printed music, higher education textbooks, and schoolbooks.”

An article in the International Business Times notes that the no-pig, no-pork publishing guidance was disclosed during a BBC radio show on free speech in the wake of the brutal Islamic terrorists’ attack on Charlie Hebdo. One of the show hosts ridiculed the advisory:

Now, if a respectable publisher, tied to an academic institution, is saying you’ve got to write a book in which you cannot mention pigs because some people might be offended, it’s just ludicrous. It is just a joke.

A spokesman for the prestigious Oxford University Press reportedly defended the new guidelines in light of heightened “sensitivities” to cultural differences around the world and the potential for creating an offense.

“Our materials are sold in nearly 200 countries, and as such, and without compromising our commitment in any way, we encourage some authors of educational materials respectfully to consider cultural differences and sensitivities.”

On the BBC radio program, as reported by The Daily Mail, Tory MP Phillip Davies lambasted the publisher’s “nonsensical” no-pig guidelines, especially in textbooks and academic works where freedom of expression should be at its fullest display.

On the one hand you have politicians and the great and the good falling over each other to say how much they believe in freedom of speech and on the other hand they are presiding over people being unable to use and write words that are completely inoffensive.

We have got to get a grip on this nonsensical political correctness.

h/t: International Business Times

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

Top Conservative Signs And Bumper Stickers Of 2014

Dads bumper sticker FI

The top conservative signs and bumper stickers of 2014 are enough to please any conservative and anger any Democrat…

1) Our first sign was placed on the premises of Shiloh Brew and Chew by owner Sharma Floyd. The eatery is located in Maryville, Tennessee. She put out a big welcome sign to anyone who wants to pack heat in her restaurant…



2) This school in Argyle, Texas, put up a sign that rubbed liberals the wrong way…

Photo Credit: Twitter/Oliver Darcy

3) This sign at a military surplus store didn’t shy away from political incorrectness but embraced it…

4) This conservative plastered what he called the Influences of Heaven and Designs of Satan on his back windshield…

car windshield

5) This conservative bumper sticker for dads is sure to irritate Democrats everywhere…

Photo Credit: youngcons


6) Sadie Robertson of Duck Dynasty shared the love in the LOVE Is Project by sporting a LOVE bracelet…



7) This conservative bumper sticker may irritate some birthers, but it makes a point all conservatives can agree upon…

Conservative Tribune

Conservative Tribune


Which one was your favorite? Let us know by leaving a comment below!

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

This May Be The Craziest Example You’ve Ever Seen Of Racially Charged PC On A College Campus

Smith Prez

“All lives matter.”

It’s a simple three-word sentence that you’d think is a positive and life-affirming declaration with which everybody would agree. Well, think again.

The president of a prestigious institution of higher education — a private, independent, women’s liberal arts college in Northampton, Massachusetts — has bent over backwards to apologize for saying that “all lives matter.”

According to a post at, the head of Smith College was forced to fall in line with the politically correct notion that proper racial guidelines for the Ferguson protest must be honored:

Kathleen McCartney wrote the phrase in the subject line of an e-mail to students at the school….

McCartney was attempting to show support for students protesting racially charged grand jury decisions in which police in Missouri and New York were not charged in the deaths of unarmed black men.

But in trying to be more inclusive in her wording — noting that “all lives matter” — McCartney reportedly ran afoul of the students and faculty for whom “black lives matter” is a slogan that cannot be altered.

The college president was chastised and chastened for daring to modify the protestors’ battle cry, even though she had shown great deference to, and sympathy for, the Ferguson protest movement.

The Daily Hampshire Gazette, which first covered the story, quoted one Smith sophomore, Cecelia Lim, as saying, “it felt like she was invalidating the experience of black lives.”

In response to student backlash, McCartney apologized in another campus-wide email Friday, saying she had made a mistake “despite my best intentions.”

In her quickly issued apology email, the humbled president of the school quoted one student whose racially charged remarks were apparently representative of a widely held view at Smith College.

The Fox News post quotes the offended student as saying:

“It minimizes the anti-blackness of this the current situation; yes, all lives matter, but not all lives are being targeted for police brutality. The black students at this school deserve to have their specific struggles and pain recognized, not dissolved into the larger student body.”

The shocking nature of the “all lives matter” offense was not lost on social media commenters:

Image Credit: twitter

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom

The Attacks On National Morale And Morality In America Continue…

Family 3 SC

Though it should now be painfully obvious that the policies of those in our government’s highest offices are initiating a decline in America’s national security and economy, increasing evidence suggests that these concerns are only subsidiary effects of a much deeper, more sinister attack that is being unleashed upon the country.

As evidenced through social media and public polls, a growing number of Americans believe that this national erosion of prosperity and personal liberties cannot be explained away as the result of rampant incompetence in poor leadership–but instead that it is all a part of an intentional attack on the fundamental makeup of our country.

What’s worse is that the heart of the attack is focused upon social issues, and more importantly, the traditional family unit.

Throughout a decades-long gradual slope, the size, scope, influence, and power of our federal government has grown by leaps and bounds at the expense of the individual liberties of private citizens.

The progression of this slippery slope has only accelerated, at unprecedented levels, under the direction of the country’s current leadership.

While it was founded by noble but imperfect men, America’s entire system of government, a new republic, was originally based upon Judeo-Christian precepts that became the foundation for our nation’s laws.

A recurring theme in our Declaration and other founding documents was a recognition of Almighty God as the sole proprietor of this new nation, with “We The People” as it facilitators and an honor system of good will toward our fellow man as we endeavored to build the greatest nation on earth, bound and motivated by a universal pursuit of coexisting freedoms and patriotism, and preserved by our Creator with honor given to him and the founding documents that He inspired.

America’s framers were learned men who took into account the lessons provided by history.

As a majority, they conceded that a democracy, however attractive to the citizenry, could never survive as a system of government that both allowed for personal freedoms, as well as to adhere to an unwavering rule of law.

That is why they decided instead that a republic was a more fitting system for this new government. They knew that it could stand the test of time, so long as the federal government, state governments, and private citizens continued to share their vision and worked in cooperation among themselves to ensure the nation’s survival in the form in which it was originally intended.

As we have witnessed, our government no longer represents the will of the people according to the fundamental laws of the land, but simply finds loopholes in laws, ignores them altogether, and/or works in unison with activist judges and slanted media outlets that have been bought and paid for to help them carry out their dishonest agenda.

Over time, we’ve lost the help of would-be patriots to a lack of overall education (especially an accurate instruction in American and World histories); and they have slowly been brainwashed by these united destructive forces to believe the opposite of what is true, as well as reversed definitions of right and wrong.

Pages: 1 2

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Informing And Equipping Americans Who Love Freedom