Does Trump/Govt have the right to dictate words used?

[wildmaven]

Trump just banned the Center for Disease Control from using 7 particular words in their upcoming budget report. "According to the Washington Post, CDC policy analysts were told at a meeting on Thursday with senior agency officials that seven words - "vulnerable", "entitlement", "diversity", "transgender", "fetus", "evidence-based" and "science-based" - were banned from being used in documents related to next year's budget."



www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/12/transgender-banned-cdc-budget-report-171216094802697.html



In fact, the suggested alternative to "evidence-based" and "science-based" is ""science in consideration with community standards and wishes".

This is extremely alarming. What right does Trump have to tell the CDC what words they can and can't use? 

[private]

Dec 16, 2017 8:13:49 GMT -8 wildmaven said:

Trump just banned the Center for Disease Control from using 7 particular words in their upcoming budget report. "According to the Washington Post, CDC policy analysts were told at a meeting on Thursday with senior agency officials that seven words - "vulnerable", "entitlement", "diversity", "transgender", "fetus", "evidence-based" and "science-based" - were banned from being used in documents related to next year's budget."



www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/12/transgender-banned-cdc-budget-report-171216094802697.html



In fact, the suggested alternative to "evidence-based" and "science-based" is ""science in consideration with community standards and wishes".

This is extremely alarming. What right does Trump have to tell the CDC what words they can and can't use? 

Trump bans CDC from using 'science-based' words in official reports
twitter.com/i/moments/941881800435093504
My Reply:
On what grounds? Does Trump's ban sound logical to you?
What happens if those words are accurate and needing to be used?

[angeldeb82]

It's as if Trump doesn't want men to become women in the CDC or vice-versa. The alternative could be "men-turned-women" or "women-turned-men", huh?

[Søren]

I don't know if he has the right or not but it seems a very stupid thing to ask for, and strange from someone who seems to want to be able to get away with saying anything again, and forgetting PC things, now seems triggered by words enough to ban them when he doesn't like them.

[wildmaven]

Dec 16, 2017 8:48:15 GMT -8 private said:

Dec 16, 2017 8:13:49 GMT -8 wildmaven said:

Trump just banned the Center for Disease Control from using 7 particular words in their upcoming budget report.

On what grounds? Does Trump's ban sound logical to you?
What happens if those words are accurate and needing to be used?

The stupid thing is that part of the CDC's report addresses the effects of the Zika virus on the fetus and now, because they can't say 'fetus', what word are they supposed to use? 

Stupid, stupid, stupid. 

[Tumbleweed]

Dec 16, 2017 9:52:16 GMT -8 wildmaven said:

Dec 16, 2017 8:48:15 GMT -8 private said:

On what grounds? Does Trump's ban sound logical to you?
What happens if those words are accurate and needing to be used?

The stupid thing is that part of the CDC's report addresses the effects of the Zika virus on the fetus and now, because they can't say 'fetus', what word are they supposed to use? 

Stupid, stupid, stupid. 

First, this is the Washington Post so who knows if this is even true since, as usual, it is an anonymous source: "....according to the CDC analyst, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the person was not authorized to speak publicly. " (Washington Post) Every article I found about this, all references the WP.  But if it is true, I imagine fetus will be replaced with maybe "unborn baby" or something. I think the idea is that using "fetus" makes it seem it's a inanimate object (or a thing that can just be thrown away) and they want people to fully realize we are talking about a baby. (Remember, republicans are Pro-life people.)

The word entitlement does need to be changed to something more descriptive because social security, foodstamps and welfare have all been lumped as "entitlement programs" and they are not all entitlements. Plus the word entitlement has taken on a negative tone.

Obama did the same thing. Negro, Oriental and Islamic Terrorists/Radical Islamic Terrorist references were taken out of any federal government documents.  There were other words he banned as well but I can't remember them now.

But for now, I'm not trusting WP until I hear directly from some Trump administrator. Before everyone goes nuts over this, first, wait to hear if it is actually true (I'm sure reporters will be bombing Sanders with questions Monday) and if it is, let's wait to hear the reasons behind the changes and what words they should use instead. Trump is all about not being PC and no doubt those words were pushed to be used instead of other words in the first place.

[mmhmm]

Frankly, I don't believe people are so ignorant they don't fully recognize what a fetus is! I don't know whether this story is true, or not, and will await further clarification. However, I reject the idea that the American people are so stupid they don't know what a fetus is! That is just plain ludicrous and anyone who thinks that's true has no respect for their fellow Americans.

[Tumbleweed]

Dec 16, 2017 12:13:11 GMT -8 mmhmm said:

Frankly, I don't believe people are so ignorant they don't fully recognize what a fetus is! I don't know whether this story is true, or not, and will await further clarification. However, I reject the idea that the American people are so stupid they don't know what a fetus is! That is just plain ludicrous and anyone who thinks that's true has no respect for their fellow Americans.

I don't think it is a matter of being ignorant. Using the word fetus was pushed to be used in association with abortion, so it makes it something that doesn't matter and something, supposedly, different than a baby. (There are people who like to live in denial.)  If this story is true, it's like giving a better visual. Like saying "oak tree" instead of "acorn sprout". We can fully envision what an oak tree looks like but not so much what a acorn sprout might look like. But I'm just speculating.

[daniel]

Defense of this is reprehensible. There's the old story, "first they came for..."

Censoring scientists and the agency charged with protecting our health is just outrageous. This type of thing smacks of dictatorships and authoritarian regimes, not a democratic republic that values speech and science. It's Orwellian.

[Beck]

If it turns out to be false that is great, and hopefully the report is untrue. No we shouldn't be outraged until we know whether it is actually true. However I agree with Daniel, there is no defense to this. None. This has nothing to do with anything Obama did or didn't do, this is about something Trump is allegedly doing. This is slipping dangerously into dictatorship if this is true.

Fetus is the medical term, it is not always associated with abortion and even for those it is that doesn't make it any less the medical term. For medical and scientific reports it is ludicrous to ask them not to use medical and scientific words because some people may jump straight to abortion. What exactly is the defense of banning "science-based" or "evidence based" then? Or any of the other words on that list? What negative connotation is this giving people? This is similar to the ban government agencies were given about using the words Climate Change. If true, disgusting.

[Tumbleweed]

Maybe Trump just wants people to use whatever words they feel are appropriate and not what the over-kill PC police demand we should say. 

[Beck]

That makes no sense sorry. If that were true, why ban medical and scientific terms from medical reports? Banning words does the exact opposite of what you are saying, why not actually let them use the words they feel are appropriate instead of words that the right want to hear? Medical terms aren't PC terms, they are simply the medical description for things. Evidence-based and science-based are also not PC terms.

[daniel]

Dec 16, 2017 15:35:47 GMT -8 Tumbleweed said:

Maybe Trump just wants people to use whatever words they feel are appropriate and not what the over-kill PC police demand we should say. 

Then he wouldn't need to censor any words. Science isn't about political correctness. It's about SCIENCE, and in this case the ability for legitimate scientists to use words that are most appropriate.

This type of thing is a method of control, a way to steer narrative and, if taken further, to silence people. This is the type of thing one expects from the Soviet Union/Russia, China, North Korea, and similar. This action, and defense of it, are anti-American.

[Tumbleweed]

Dec 16, 2017 15:43:22 GMT -8 Beck said:

That makes no sense sorry. If that were true, why ban medical and scientific terms from medical reports? Banning words does the exact opposite of what you are saying, why not actually let them use the words they feel are appropriate instead of words that the right want to hear? Medical terms aren't PC terms, they are simply the medical description for things. Evidence-based and science-based are also not PC terms.

If it makes no sense, how can you say "if it were true"? Now that makes no sense. Ha ha ha. It's o.k., maybe neither of us gets where the other is coming from.

Honestly, I don't really care at this point until we hear explanations or if it is true. I guess I keep coming back to this thread in amazement at how outraged everyone is before they even know the facts and then I find myself speculating too (yes, I'm a hypocrite) so I'll speculate some more, but mostly because I'm bored and have time on my hands.
 
There are people who believe in God, so "science-based" conflicts with many religions (Evolution for example).  When one uses "science-based" that comes across as the be- all, end-all and no differing opinions can be considered. It's a cased closed mindset. The assumption certain people want made is if it "science-based" then that means it id indeed fact and everyone who thinks otherwise needs to shut up about it. But the fact is, "fact" means it is indisputable and sorry, lots of people dispute things that are so called, "science-based" or considered fact by science.  And by the way, "science-based" can change at the drop of a hat when new discoveries are made or new studies done and is far, far from absolute. So in a way, the term is deceptive and is in fact pushed by the PC police because they think their way is the only way and how dare anyone think otherwise.

Again, I'm just speculating and am not super serious about any of this. I'm more amused than serious.

[Shady]

Surely this is going to turn out to be false? Whatever your views on abortion are, a fetus is a fetus. It’s the scientific name for that stage of human development. Evidence-based is commonly used in scientific papers where evidence has been collected, and what’s wrong with that? What’s the problem with vulnerable? And how else would you describe transgender? Unless the intention is to ignore trans issues altogether.

Some things need changing with time, and political correctness isn’t always a bad thing, but changing medical and scientific terms seems bonkers.