Gotcha! Ethics: Senate Democrats’ Obnoxious “Preference” For Political Correctness Over Substance, As Miriam-Webster Reveals Its Integrity Deficit

And they’re coming around the turn in the 2020 Asshole of the Year Derby! Senator Hirono is making her move! Here she comes out of the pack! It’s going to be a photo finish!

At Tuesday’s confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D–Calif.) asked Barrett if she would roll back protections for LGBT citizens. Barrett responded that she “never discriminated on the basis of sexual preference and would not discriminate on the basis of sexual preference.” Hawaii’s Senator Mazie Hirono then accused Barrett of using “outdated and offensive” terminology. (Later, so did Senator Cory Booker, who said Barrett was implying by the term that being gay was a choice and not an immutable characteristic.)

“Sexual preference … is used by anti-LGBTQ activists to suggest that sexual orientation is a choice,” the Democratic scold intoned.  “It is not. Sexual orientation is a key part of a person’s identity. If it is your view that sexual orientation is merely a preference, as you noted, then the LGTBQ should be rightly concerned whether you would uphold their constitutional right to marry.”

Barrett was forced into apologizing, insisting  that this was not her intention. I say “forced,” because when you are in a confirmation hearing and the vote is going to be a squeaker, you can’t say, as she justifiably could have, “Really Senator? You’re dictating politically correct words and language now? It was quite clear what I meant, and that kind of phrase policing is a cheap shot. You should be ashamed of yourself.”

It was also stupid on Hirono’s part, but then, this was Mazie Hirono.  It was stupid because she should have known that thousands of inquiring minds would immediately hit the web to find out just how hypocritical this particular “gotcha!” was.

Sure enough, In a May roundtable discussion Joe Biden promised to “rebuild the backbone of this country, the middle class, but this time bring everybody along regardless of color, sexual preference, their backgrounds.” The late Justice Ginsburg, whom Hirono called “our champion” during remarks the day before, said during an interview in 2017, “Our society has come to respect people, whatever their sexual preference.” Clearly, this suggested that she would oppose the marriage rights of…oh. Right. Senator. Richard Blumenthal (D.- Conn.) and Senator Dick Durbin (D.- Ill.), both current members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, also have used have used “sexual preference.”

This was a contrived “gotcha!” at best. I prefer “sexual orientation,” but I have also used “sexual preference” in a broader sense, which legitimately describes preferences regarding sexual practices. I also have friends who describe themselves as bi-sexual, and some will say they “prefer” one gender over another for rolls in the hay, or that they prefer rolls in the hay to standing in the shower, or being dangled by cables.

Ann Althouse was in fine pedant form, writing,

“I don’t think it’s true that we choose our preferences. It might suggest that who we love — and who we feel sexually attracted to — is lightweight, more like which flavor ice cream we like better than another. Yes, you prefer to have sex with a blonde, but if you can’t have the blonde, the brunette will do just as well. Why not get bent out of shape about “sexual orientation” then? Orientation suggests pointing east or west on a landscape. All you have to do is turn around and you’ll have a different orientation. And why the focus on immutability anyway? I think even if sexual attraction is a matter of choice,  your choice is worth of respect. Choices are important and a good foundation for rights in a free society. Think of freedom of religion, freedom of conscience, freedom to have political opinions and to speak about them. These things matter in part because they can change and you do have a choice. Indeed, the right to have an abortion is referred to as the right to choose.”

All true, and way too much thought and erudition to be wasted on a dumb and desperate comment by a deeply nasty and stupid woman. The Senator’s low blow does demonstrate just how desperate and principl-free Democrats have become, and the level of combat they now prefer. Using choice-of- word “gotchas” to substitute for a substantive argument is gutter-level discourse on blogs, never mind Senate confirmation hearings.

But wait! There’s more!

Miriam-Webster, the dictionary people, just provided one more example of just how biased and unscrupulous supposedly objective arbiters are in the 2016 Post Election Ethics Train Wreck. The online definition of sexual preference was changed from the top version to the bottom version after Hirono’s objection!

Preference 1

Preference 2

This is the kind of coordinated thought- and word- control those who vote blue in the upcoming election will be endorsing.

19 thoughts on “Gotcha! Ethics: Senate Democrats’ Obnoxious “Preference” For Political Correctness Over Substance, As Miriam-Webster Reveals Its Integrity Deficit

  1. Merriam-Webster has done this before. They are actively bastardizing the definitions of existing words so they reflect the utter ignorance claims of the social justice hive mind when they should be actively trying to correct the utter ignorance. Merriam-Webster will do this again.

  2. The non-heteronormative* populous appears to have been whipped into an irrational frenzy based on the completely ludicrous notion that Judge Barrett will waltz into the Supreme Court and single-handedly overturn gay marriage by means of a memo to the rest of the court on her first day at work.
    *I first heard “heteronormative” a week or so ago. It’s evidently a new lefty attack buzzword like “privilege” or “reactionary.” It appears to refer to any aspect of society non-heterosexuals are unhappy about and want changed to their liking. Pretty nifty, eh?

  3. I am pretty sure they did this with assault rifle, it has a very specific meaning, which they then changed to let assault weapon apply as well. As I am sure many here know, an assault rifle is a specific term meaning an intermediate caliber select fire centerfire rifle. They changed that to the following:

    Definition of assault rifle
    : any of various intermediate-range, magazine-fed military rifles (such as the AK-47) that can be set for automatic or semiautomatic fire
    also : a rifle that resembles a military assault rifle but is designed to allow only semiautomatic fir

      • I guess that is the issue I have with the living document types on the court. I like originalists because they look at what the words meant at the time the law/document was written, not what some activist changes a word to mean after the fact.

  4. How silly of Senator Hirono. Some people are oriented towards the same sex and some have a preference. Some people indeed choose to be in same sex partnerships or claim gay identity as a political statement (think of the acedemic feminists of the 70’s who chose to call themselves lesbian though they most certainly weren’t and dragged gay rights down with them). The term sexual preference may offend some but I bet many of those people are not even gay themselves.

    • Strangely enough, I am an old, non-functional heterosexual white male and NONE of the terms applied to to other groups offends me. I do find some of them laughable but none override the designation ‘ my friend.’

    • Territory? If Hirono is the best that Hawaii can offer as their representation in the senate, then that’s a pretty strong case for talking to the volcanos about returning Hawaii to underwater status…

  5. By the power vested in me by my fabulous fashion sense, and participation in the depths of the homosexual agenda, I hereby do bequeath unto thee, the participants of this comment section, a complete and lifetime pass on the term “Sexual Preference”.

    You’re Welcome.

    • Thanks, HT. I feel better already.

      A heads up though. Are you sure you wanted to say “depths” of the homosexual agenda. Isn’t that kind of a heteronormative adjective? (I mean, aren’t adjectives kind of heteronormative in and of themselves?) Wouldn’t “august heights” of the homosexual agenda or something along those lines have been preferable? Shouldn’t you check your privilege?

    • Tom R asked, “Am I the only one disturbed by Merriam-Webster doing this?”


      I’ve been complaining for quite a while about how the political left has been bastardizing the definitions of terms/words to control the discussion. Even Merriam-Webster Dictionary has jumped on the bandwagon and has been virtue signaling by changing word definitions to better support the arguments of far left totalitarian extremists in and effort to rhetorically disarm the political right.

  6. This is the kind of coordinated thought- and word- control those who vote blue in the upcoming election will be endorsing.

    When I alluded to the shortcomings of libertarianism earlier, I had this universal synchronization of the government bureaucracies and the small circle of all-encompassing megacorps specifically in mind. The old liberal ideals of limiting only governments in their thought-coercion are beginning to crumble with age as the encroaching sect universalizes its control. A war over good and evil, in those terms, seems inevitable now, and I hardly need any obscure private revelation prophecies to make the point anymore.

    Maybe a war is the best case scenario. I shudder to think that the meager, half-hearted resistance which still exists might just shrug and give in.

  7. Tangentially related to the circus in the Senate from a September, 2017 Washington Examiner article at

    Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg did not hold back from talking about gender politics and partisanship Monday night at Roosevelt University in Chicago, but avoided discussing current events after a controversy last year.

    “There will be enough women on the Supreme Court when there are nine,” Ginsburg said, according to the Chicago Sun-Times.

    She added, “I think there has not been a better time to be a woman in the legal profession because no doors are closed.”

    She also decried the partisanship that she believes was evident at recent Supreme Court justice nomination hearings.

    “I can only hope that in my lifetime they will stop that nonsense,” Ginsburg said, according to the Sun-Times. “Partisanship in selections of justices is a dangerous thing.”

  8. Since the arguments have already been well made by several people for why “preference” is a decently respectful word to use in reference to human sexuality, and why it is a superior word to use for this purpose than “orientation,” I merely wish to express my utmost and longstanding contempt for people who manufacture excuses to be offended by respectful and reasonable people.

    The lesson these people wish to impress upon us is that if you want to control someone you dislike but lack the capacity to justify it (whether or not such justification exists), simply take offense to everything they do. They are obligated to accommodate your emotional immaturity.

    This has been a Barren [sic] Blauschwartz public service announcement.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.