Political Correctness is counterproductive

My opponent seems intent on missing the point. The relevance of my links is that, in all of these examples, minorities are being given rights that are being denied to whoever is seen as "privileged". This is quite the opposite of the equality that is allegedly being strived for. I could have, and perhaps should have, posted countless other links of examples, but was trying to avoid posting so many links that my opponent could not properly address them all. My opponent also seems to be implying that I am a bigot, simply because I do not appreciate the changes being made to Huck Finn. Not only is this an ad hominem fallacy, it is patently untrue. As my previous link proves, there are many black activists that also do not want to see these changes made, for the reasons I had mentioned. They, and I, feel it is important to teach, and remember, how black people were treated back then. By editing the book to remove all racist terms, we do a great injustice to the novel, the author and to all of the students that could learn from it. "Which leads me to a question still unanswered by my opponent for two rounds now – how does a book being reprinted with a single word change in it suddenly puts our intellectual well being at risk??" Actually, I have answered several times, you are just choosing to ignore my answer. First of all, it is not a single word change; the new editions will have all references to "nigger", "injun" and any other racist terms removed. The reason this is harmful is two-fold: first, it will take a lot away from the message of the novel. Second, pandering to sensitivity in this way reduces our ability to grasp irony, to understand context and puts political correctness above literature, free speech and education. It is pretty self-evident to me that this is not to the benefit of our intellects. "Coming back to my point that treating one other equally (and not looking at their gender, religion etc) is what PC is about." And my point is that the PC movement has failed to do this, and has, in fact, been counterproductive to this goal. "Those books that were banned are the ones that had the F and N words used in them. Good they were banned." You clearly failed to read the lists, and you also clearly agree with censorship and book banning. This is another debate altogether, so sufficient to say, I very much disagree with this for reasons I have already stated several times. "Provide me with prove that vever since the PC came about, IQ in Canada for instance went down." This statement leads me to believe that you don't even know what an IQ is, let alone understand how banning books and pandering to sensitivity is likely to be damaging intellectually. I think the fact that people don't even understand the moral of Huck Finn or the irony of the use of the word "faggot" in "Money For Nothing" because they are so consumed by political correctness offers a minor example of a major issue. "Your argument is that of a 7 year old" You say this, yet, you have not attempted to refute it in any way. Why is that? Also, after demanding that I answer your questions, I notice that, for the second time, you have completely ignored mine. _______________________________________________________________________________________ I believe my opponent has failed to adequately refute my arguments, instead resorting to ad hominem attacks and ignoring questions that get to the bottom of the issue. It seems that the refutation being offered is "you are a naive bigot", which, as a logical fallacy, should ensure my opponent's loss. To sum up my position, I believe it is clear that political correctness is counterproductive. We can see countless examples of rights being given or denied based solely on gender, race and religion, we can see education and free speech suffering, we can see further divides between races, genders, sexualities and religions and we have actually given *more* power to derogatory terms and bigoted ideas by pandering to oversensitivity. This is the complete opposite of what PC claims to strive for, thereby proving it counterproductive.