I found the program discussion engrossing; I followed up by listening to the extended interview. I have been thinking about this since then. First, kudos for bringing this topic to an examination of ethics. Specifically about the language, I have both a personal and a generational perspective. Personally, I prefer direct language. People die, not pass away. People are killed, not casualties of war. Women and children are killed, not 'collateral damage was done.' Women are battered, not 'victims of domestic violence.' Our government planned and carried out torture, not 'interrogation techniques.'But I have been somewhat surprised not to hear in the public discourse the perspective of my generation, raised during the cold war. I can't be the only person who remembers hearing about the terrible tortures practiced by the Soviets and North Koreans on our solders, as part of the propaganda campaign against the communists. Am I alone in instantly associating what my government has done with those heartily condemned practices 50 years ago? I, like many of my peers, read 1984 when I was in college. Don't many of us remember and reference RealSpeak? thanks again for your work in bringing the real issues of our day to ethical and spiritual examination.
More information about text formats