Words have meaning (or they don’t). Who decides?

Fight for meaning is necessary. 

Are our freedoms and rights unalienable; granted by the Creator? (Isaiah 14:24b KJV “...as I have purposed, so shall it stand...”) Or are our rights malleable; “shape shifters”according to the whims of a tyrannical State?

Linguistic philosophers, and some psychological disciplines (Neuro-Linguistic Programming), assert that if we do not have a word for something then in fact we have no experience of it. 

By extension, improper definitions or usage of words result in altered realities. You can demonstrate this for yourself by looking up definitions for “gender”, “marriage”, “law”, “republic” (and a host of others) in a modern dictionary (or just considering your everyday experience of how they are used) versus the accepted definitions found in Webster’s 1828 “American Dictionary of the English Language”. 

Nobody wants to being defined by his opponent, but we allow opponents of our culture, values, and civilization to define them for us by twisting the meanings of words at the very foundation of everyday life. The sanity of society depends on its members being moored to shared understanding about what things mean and what matters. Cut loose and set adrift from that common mooring  — and in the midst of an epic storm — navigation of daily life becomes dangerous or impossible. 

It has been demonstrated that we must value something to be able to experience it. If something has no value to us, we actually are unable to see it. Valuing something highly makes it the focus of our lives. Devaluing something makes it less and less likely that we shall take notice of it. Our words and their accepted definitions are how we communicate values to ourselves and others. Altered definitions clearly bring forth altered realities. The way in which the public narrative is being manipulated to elevate and denigrate deserves our close attention and determined action to correct pop-culture proclivities to “redefine deviancy downward” — not to be understood solely as individual behavioral deviancy, but, more threateningly, deviancy from the overarching cultural protections of ethical, moral and aesthetic norms.

Quality Manifesto: “If something is exceptionally well done, it has embedded in its very existence the aim of lifting the common denominator rather than catering to it.”

[It should not be necessary from the arguments above to state that corrupt modern versions of Holy Scripture, marketed as “Bibles”, are particularly dangerous for souls. Their inherent impurities — from omissions, substitutions, and mistranslations — alter meaning with both deliberate and unforeseen, unintentional redefinition. The corrupted seed sown in the revisions must necessarily yield a harvest of much defective fruit.]

           

Quotes by Noah Webster:

“The Bible [Webster is speaking about the King James Bible] must be considered as the great source of all the truth by which men are to be guided in government as well as in all social transactions.”

“It is the sincere desire of the writer that our citizens should early understand that the genuine source of correct republican principles is the Bible, particularly the New Testament or the Christian religion.”

“In my view, the Christian religion is the most important and one of the first things in which all children, under a free government ought to be instructed.”

“All the miseries and evils which men suffer from vice, crime, ambition, injustice, oppression, slavery and war, proceed from their despising or neglecting the precepts contained in the Bible.”

[A prophetic statement] “If the citizens neglect their duty and place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted; laws will be made, not for the public good so much as for selfish or local purposes; corrupt or incompetent men will be appointed to execute the Laws; the public revenues will be squandered on unworthy men; and the

rights of the citizen will be violated or disregarded.”

https://webstersdictionary1828.com/