Evergreen faculty to vote to ban word ‘covenant,’ says term reflects ‘cultural genocide’

[rangerrebew]

 Evergreen faculty to vote to ban word ‘covenant,’ says term reflects ‘cultural genocide’

Jennifer Kabbany - Fix Editor •December 4, 2018
 

The faculty union at Evergreen State College is slated to vote on a resolution to ban the word “covenant” from official documents, saying the term reflects “cultural genocide.”

“[T]the word ‘covenant’ represents for many members of the Evergreen community the efforts at cultural genocide of Native Nations through the federal Indian boarding school system,” the motion states.

https://www.thecollegefix.com/evergreen-faculty-to-vote-to-ban-word-covenant-says-term-reflects-cultural-genocide/

[mountaineer]

The word has nothing to do with genocide. But then, I don't expect anyone at Evergreen - one of the looniest of left wing looneytune institutions - to have the slightest comprehension of the Bible.

All true theology is based on some form of a divine covenant. The Christian religion must be understood covenantally, for that is how God has chosen to relate to man, whether in the garden or after the entrance of sin into the world. The goal of all divine–human covenants is summed up in the words found throughout the Bible: “I will be your God and you will be my people, and I will dwell among you” (Ex. 6:7; 29:45; Ezek. 11:20; 2 Cor. 6:16; Rev. 21:3).

What Is a Covenant?

Scholars have defined covenant—translated from the Hebrew berith and the Greek diathÄ“ke—in various ways, and the context in which the word is used in Scripture will also inform our understanding of its meaning. At its most basic level, a covenant is an oath-bound relationship between two or more parties. Thus, human covenants (for example, marriage) fall under this general definition. In divine covenants, God sovereignly establishes the relationship with His creatures.  ...

More at Ligonier Ministries

[ConstitutionRose]

Their school is failing and they have nothing better to do.

[godblessRonaldReagan]

"Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten."

[Wingnut]

Their school is failing and they have nothing better to do.

Even though Evergreen is the only four-year college in the state of Washington to see a decrease in applications, the school’s president, George Bridges, instead of pointing to the race-based protests as the problem, said it is “really complex and not attributable to any one factor.”

In May, to prepare for the drop in enrollment, Evergreen cut $6 million out of its budget – a little over 10 percent of the total – and laid off 20 faculty and staff, as well as not filling 19 vacant staff positions, the Seattle Times reported.

Man these people just don't "get it".

[The_Reader_David]

"Don't you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten."

That's one point that Orwell got wrong.  In the real-world analogue of Newspeak, the meaning of words is destroyed by being made malleable or even fluid and able to be changed at a moment's notice (and even retrospectively) as serves the interests of the Party (read the left or the Democrats as the Party).

Take for instance, "racist":  it can mean the dictionary definition, any person of (predominantly or entirely) European ancestry, a critic of any program or policy the left fancies benefits racial or ethnic minorities, an honest reporter of Islamic doctrine concerning jihad or sex slavery, or a host of other things as serves the interests of the left (but all of them are supposed to have the near-universal condemnation of the dictionary definition attached to them).

Or "health care":  it can mean the services provided by physicians and allied-health professionals, health insurance, or government mandated and defined health insurance plans.  Thus changing Obamacare in any way is called "taking away people's health care", making it sound like doing so would ban them from engaging the services of physicians and allied-health professionals, when in fact the changes might well make it easier for them to do so.

Orwell assumed that the corruption of language in the service of a one-party state (don't doubt that's what the Democrats really want -- oh, they'll be happy to have a rump GOP the way there are tolerated political parties besides the Communist Party in China, but they want to be the ruling Party) would proceed on the basis of reason.  In the playing out of history since he wrote 1984, it turns out it works on the basis of emotion:  a word with strong positive or negative associations has its meaning expanded so that that emotional reaction will attach to something else in a way that serves the Party.

[Sanguine]

Well said, @The_Reader_David.