On the recordDecember 6, 2016
over the weekend, syndicated columnist George Will wrote about a disturbing ruling in a French court. The court ruled that a video called ``Dear Future Mom,'' produced by the Global Down Syndrome Foundation, must be banned from television. It cannot be viewed on television anywhere in France. What, you might ask, triggered this draconian act of censorship? Was it speech inciting violence? No. Was it a hate speech? No. Was it discrimination? In fact, it is the opposite, as it turns out. I will let Mr. Will tell the story as I read the words from his column. The column is entitled ``The `right' to be spared from guilt.'' The word ``inappropriate'' is increasingly used inappropriately. It is useful to describe departures from good manners and other social norms, such as wearing white after Labor Day and using the salad fork with the entree. But the adjective has become a splatter of verbal fudge, a weasel word falsely suggesting measured seriousness. Its misty imprecision does not disguise, but advertises the user's moral obtuseness. A French court has demonstrated how ``inappropriate'' can be an all-purpose device of intellectual evasion and moral cowardice. The court said it is inappropriate to do something that might disturb people who killed their unborn babies for reasons that were, shall we say, inappropriate. Prenatal genetic testing enables pregnant women to be apprised of a variety of problems with their unborn babies, including Down syndrome.…
