Comments on: Pennsylvania Threatened With Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment

By: Zeke

Zeke — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 03:35:32 +0000

Oh, I just caught what werdna was pointing out and although I agree with his/her explanation Mr. Kincaid’s original post wouldn’t have struck me as odd or out of line.

To be honest I don’t think I would have even caught that one or thought it was out of line.

It’s only “Democrat Party” that rubs me wrong because of the intentional use of it as a taunt by conservative media pundits and radio talk show hosts.

Again, great post!

By: Zeke

Zeke — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 03:23:55 +0000

I came to leave a comment to say how much I appreciated the well written and informative commentary.

I didn’t even notice the “ic-less” thing when I read it. Maybe it was fixed before I got here.

I have to say, in its current form, this commentary was quite impressive in its fairness and ability to inform without preach.

Thanks Mr. Kincaid.

By: Charlotte

Charlotte — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 16:28:29 +0000

Marriage is a basic civil right that should be attainable by all Americans if they choose. For the truth about gay marriage check out our trailer. Produced to educate & defuse the controversy it has a way of opening closed minds & provides some sanity on the issue: http://www.OUTTAKEonline.com

By: Jim Burroway

Jim Burroway — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 13:53:56 +0000

Hey, have you heard? I read somewhere that the Pennsylvania legislature is poised to pass an overly broad anti-marriage constitutional amendment.

By: werdna

werdna — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 08:16:06 +0000

Using a capital “D” makes it clear that you are referring to the Democratic Party. Using a lower-case “d” would imply a majority that is democratically elected or democratically inclined.

Regardless, context makes it obvious what you mean. In the preceding paragraphs you refer to the Republican majority in the Senate, so it’s clear that you are referring to the Democratic Party when you discuss the “narrow Democratic majority” in the House.

Why wait for an English teacher to weigh in? There are plenty of perfectly sound resources on the web that explain the proper use of adjectives and nouns. Any dictionary should help you understand that democrat is a noun and democratic is an adjective.

There are, of course, some instances where it is accepted for a noun to modify another noun (phone call, toothpaste, Iraq war, etc.). In this case, however, the choice to use “Democrat” rather than “Democratic” is, as has been discussed at great length in previous posts, seen by many as provocative and partisan. The adjectival form is the neutral and preferred form.

By: Jason D

Jason D — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 21:37:53 +0000

democratISH?

democrat-oriented?

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 21:31:25 +0000

I started to argue because I think Democrat in this usage is a noun (as in a majority of Democrats)… but now I’m not sure. “Democratic majority” may be correct, but it sounds confusing, like it was a majority that was democratically selected rather than a majority of Democrats.

But I’ll change it to “Democratic” for now. And if some English teacher is reading, tell me if it should be changed back to “a Democrat majority”.

By: werdna

werdna — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 21:16:30 +0000

That would be a “narrow DemocratIC majority” in the House.

Democrat is a noun–a person can be a democrat or a Democrat. Democratic is an adjective–you use it to modify a noun like majority or party.

Just saying it so Zeke doesn’t have to… At this point it’s kind of an endearing tic.