Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cbsck.UUCP
Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!cbsck!pmd
From: pmd@cbsck.UUCP (Paul M. Dubuc)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Re: Louis Farrakhan, Jesse Jackson, Jerry Falwell and Reagan
Message-ID: <1704@cbsck.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 16-Dec-85 11:57:27 EST
Article-I.D.: cbsck.1704
Posted: Mon Dec 16 11:57:27 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 17-Dec-85 05:43:04 EST
References: <1979@akgua.UUCP> <1689@cbsck.UUCP>, <11246@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories <SCCS>, Columbus
Lines: 24


>"Fundamentalist" is not at all pejorative; it is used by fundamentalists
>themselves and refers to a literal belief in the Bible.  Evangelist and
>evangelical are not equivalent to fundamentalist; they imply dissemination
>of Christian thought.
>
>Fundamentalist may just seem pejorative because of the particular political
>beliefs of some of its most visible examples.

... and the way it is used by those who style themselves as the enemies
of those political beliefs.  Come now.  When you hear someone called a
"fundamentalist" do you precieve it as a complement (or even as being neutral)?
Are those so labeled being cast in a favorable light?

The very definition of "pejorative" has to do with what "seems" derogatory
as opposed to its orininal connotation.  I undertand that, in the strictest
sense, the term "fundamentalist" is not inherently derogatory.  But the
popular use is its pejorative sense.  Call someone a fundamentalist and
others automatically pick up the stereotype.

>andy
-- 
Paul Dubuc 	cbsck!pmd 	\/-\
				/\-/