Have we become a nation of slugs, so offended by a simple old-time Christmas song that we want to ban it from the radio? Where does this leave us in real life?
So, with the current controversy about "Baby Its Cold Outside" raging on the radio and social media I got to thinking and thinking and thinking....are we as a country just becoming too PC?
"Baby Its Cold Outside" was originally written in 1944 by Frank Loesser's as a jazz standard. Is it a song about date rape or just a catchy tune? Should it be "banned" from the airwaves? I vote NO! This is just a catchy tune, nothing more, written in a more innocent time in our history. Here is a video that depicts the song first as a man trying to convince a woman to stay a little while longer which has garnered criticism and a second version where its the man that wants to leave and the female is trying to convince him to stay. Do you feel differently about each version? Or again, is it just a catchy tune?
Being PC isn't a new idea. In another life in the 1970's early 1980's, I was a USN broadcaster serving in Japan. We had what was called, "host country sensitivities." For instance, when giving the weather, we were not allowed to say, "there's a nip in the air." Some other issues: we weren't allowed to discuss the nuclear bomb attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And we couldn't call the Emperor by his first name as this was considered disrespectful. I can see how we need to be sensitive when we serve in the military overseas and need to blend in. However, here in the US nowadays we seem to be resorting to not wishing to offend anyone.
And it seems as though others agree with me. "The most recent national survey from Fairleigh Dickinson University's PublicMind finds that 68 percent agree with the statement: "A big problem this country has is being politically correct."
So, how does this relate to nursing and medicine? "After 25 years, the MCAT is being revised, becoming longer (by three hours) and covering a broader range of topics than simply chemistry, physics and biology. One quarter of the new test covers "psychology, sociology and the biological foundations of behavior." More specifically, students will be tested on "social inequality, class consciousness, racial and ethnic identity, institutionalized racism and discrimination, and power, privilege and prestige." Most of us would agree that widening the scope of physician education is important. There are many more social issues nowadays, more poverty, more people that feel disenfranchised. In this venue, it's important to be inclusive. Can we be inclusive without crossing over into not offending anyone?
And, most of us have had to sit through in-services about cultural awareness, even generational awareness. Has this resulted in stilted communication? Must all our communication be so "aware?" Do you think before you speak? Do you consider generational differences when communication with co-workers, patients?
Where do patients fit in? Should patients expect all of their needs to be met? Where do we draw the line between being PC and enabling? When discharging patients from the hospital nowadays, follow up appointments are made, prescriptions electronically sent to pharmacies, perhaps home health arranged and other case management needs that are met. Then, the patient states, "I need a ride to my appointments." When did this become the responsibility of the healthcare system? While we are all striving to reduce readmission rates, when does the responsibility of transportation become the patients' responsibility? Or is it PC to say, "Oh I can get you a cab voucher"? Are we making healthcare too accessible?
As a nation, shouldn't we "man up" and be responsible for our own lives? That means taking care of ourselves, communicating our needs in a clear manner, being honest in our dealings with others and overall being a worthwhile citizen?
So? The 10 Commandments are carved into the doors (I think its the doors) of the Supreme Court building. They're all over Washington, DC. Like it or not the origin of the United States was in the context of a very specific religious world view. Change that, change the US. Not claiming something else would not be better, but if you remove that context, you own whatever comes next..
Interestingly, there are multiple figures around the entrance to the Supreme Court, one of which is Moses, but there is also Confucius and Solon. Plus several supreme court justices.
I have visited Washington D.C. a couple of times and have not seen carvings of the 10 Commandments. The origin of the USA was in part based on Christianity, but also on slavery, which to me indicates sometimes its okay to move away from the founders.
Interestingly, there are multiple figures around the entrance to the Supreme Court, one of which is Moses, but there is also Confucius and Solon. Plus several supreme court justices.
I have visited Washington D.C. a couple of times and have not seen carvings of the 10 Commandments. The origin of the USA was in part based on Christianity, but also on slavery, which to me indicates sometimes its okay to move away from the founders.
That part of the US economy depended on slavery is not equivalent to the constitutional basis for the government being founded on slavery. There were founding fathers that were anti-slavery, but because of weakness and expediency, they acquiesced. The United States was no more founded on slavery than it is sustained today by abortion.
That part of the US economy depended on slavery is not equivalent to the constitutional basis for the government being founded on slavery. There were founding fathers that were anti-slavery, but because of weakness and expediency, they acquiesced. The United States was no more founded on slavery than it is sustained today by abortion.
Hmm, okay. I thought you were talking about the origins of the United States, and now you have switched to the constitution. You do realize that many of the founders/writers were slave owners, right? (Washington and Jefferson were, at least). And that they wrote in a clause (article 1, section 2) to allow slave owners to count 3/5 of their slaves for the purpose of representation.
Sorry, I am not understanding you equating slavery to abortion. Slavery allowed much of this country to be settled and generated a lot of wealth for white landowners. How do you compare that to the loss or removal of a pregnancy?
Hmm, okay. I thought you were talking about the origins of the United States, and now you have switched to the constitution. You do realize that many of the founders/writers were slave owners, right? (Washington and Jefferson were, at least). And that they wrote in a clause (article 1, section 2) to allow slave owners to count 3/5 of their slaves for the purpose of representation.
Sorry, I am not understanding you equating slavery to abortion. Slavery allowed much of this country to be settled and generated a lot of wealth for white landowners. How do you compare that to the loss or removal of a pregnancy?
People like offlabel are the reason I don't want to be around Christians who wear their religion on their sleeves. I hope that I would not encounter a nurse like that person. When I am sick, the last thing in my mind is to respond to "I will pray to Jesus for your soul" with "I am not a Christian. You are a jerk."
I bet with you that Christians like offlabel would aggressively protest when they see these monuments instead of the 10 commandments.
Quote
Truth is eternal.
Brahman is Truth and Reality.
The Vedas are the ultimate authority.
Everyone should strive to achieve dharma.
ndividual souls are immortal.
The goal of the individual soul is moksha.
Quote
Four noble truths
Suffering
The cause of suffering
The end of suffering
The path
Even though I was not born in the USA, I don’t remember ever seeing any mention of the 10 commandments when I studied for my citizenship exam. I guess some Christians including nurses are butthurt with the fact that they have to share space with people who practice a religion different from theirs.
Do you remember about the incident of Rajan Zed’s invocation and Venkatachalapathi Samuldrala's prayer receiving protest from Christians?
Question “are we too pc” can be applied in this incident. Are we too pc? No, we aren’t.
In fact, Christians protested all over the place because a spiritual invocation came from a Hindu priest. They were not too pc at all. When people pushed back at them by stating that this country is not a Christian theocracy, Christians said they were forced to be pc.
Hmm, okay. I thought you were talking about the origins of the United States, and now you have switched to the constitution. You do realize that many of the founders/writers were slave owners, right? (Washington and Jefferson were, at least). And that they wrote in a clause (article 1, section 2) to allow slave owners to count 3/5 of their slaves for the purpose of representation.
Sorry, I am not understanding you equating slavery to abortion. Slavery allowed much of this country to be settled and generated a lot of wealth for white landowners. How do you compare that to the loss or removal of a pregnancy?
Not to be too off topic but although Jefferson was a slave owner, as were many wealthy individuals living in Virginia at the time, he actually attacked slavery and desired an end to the practice. Unfortunately, the southern colony economies required slavery at the time due to labor intensive agricultural practices, so abolishing slavery would have meant there would have been no union between north and south. The hope was that in a generation or two the union would figure out a way to abolish slavery.
nursej22, MSN, RN
4,854 Posts
Interestingly, there are multiple figures around the entrance to the Supreme Court, one of which is Moses, but there is also Confucius and Solon. Plus several supreme court justices.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/buildingfeatures.aspx
I have visited Washington D.C. a couple of times and have not seen carvings of the 10 Commandments. The origin of the USA was in part based on Christianity, but also on slavery, which to me indicates sometimes its okay to move away from the founders.