Government to save Year of our Lord from BBC's 'Common Era'

[rug]

By Chris Hastings
Last updated at 12:00 AM on 2nd October 2011

The Government last night moved to safeguard BC and AD after The Mail on Sunday revealed they were under threat because they were considered offensive to non-Christians.

Last week this newspaper reported that the BBC had replaced Anno Domini (the Year of our Lord) and Before Christ with the obscure terms Common Era (CE) and Before the Common Era (BCE).

The Corporation believes BC and AD are offensive to non-Christians and has started to use the ‘religiously neutral’ alternatives on websites and in programmes including University Challenge and Radio 4’s In Our Time.

The decision has prompted an avalanche of complaints from viewers, Christian groups, politicians including London Mayor Boris Johnson, and even some of the BBC’s own star presenters, who have vowed to stick with the traditional terms.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2044219/Government-stop-BBC-attempt-replace-Christian-terms-AD-BC.html

[frazzled]

1. BCE and CE are not obscure

They are widely used, and their origins in English date back to 1708.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Era

[Igel]

9. They're widely used in some settings.

Which is another way of saying that they're not really used as widely as some would like.

I've seen both used. It was obvious to me what the distribution was. Wiki nailed it. The distribution was relatively stable for a long time. Now CE/BCE are gaining greater currency simply because there's a really pressing desire to assume that a lot of people will be offended by AD/BC and it's evil to risk offending them. Not that we think of things in terms of good and bad or archaic, outmoded terms like "evil." We have euphemisms for such terms.

It's one thing to use CE/BCE because you want to avoid "anno domini" or "before Christ" and want to avoid offending people who would be offended by AD and BC. It's another thing to expect those who aren't offended by it to use them because some sensitivities are more important than others.

What's humorous is when the distribution of concern over offending sensibilities becomes obvious and people take offense at it. Then, suddenly, some people deserve to be offended. Purely in the name of avoiding bias, of course.

[enlightenment]

2. Gads, how I despise the Daily Fail.

"Obscure"? Obscure??

GOOD GRIEF.

Mountains and molehills. Don't these people have anything better to do?

[struggle4progress]

10. I just searched for another recent example of their faux concern -- and found

their online story about pictures of female students "in raunchy poses" from a university calendar ending up online "where they have been viewed ... thousands of times," which the Mail naturally illustrated by reposting the photos online

:eyes:

[darkstar3]

3. Unrec for the shitmonger source.

[LeftishBrit]

4. I wish someone would save the British people from the Daily Mail!

Yikes. The economy is down the tube, with threats of worse; unemployment figures especially for young people are through the roof; benefits for poor and sick people are being drastically cut; the government is wrecking the NHS; we are in a long and unwinnable war in Afghanistan - and the Hate-Mail's biggest priority is whether the BBC uses 'BC' or 'BCE'.

[laconicsax]

5. Considering how often it's used here on DU, you'd think it was a legitimate news outlet.

:crazy:

[Jim__]

6. It's 2011 both under both AD and CE, isn't it?

It's a change of label; but the actual measure is the same.

[Tanuki]

7. Why not chamge the days of the week as well

Wednesday, Thursday and Friday honor the deities Odin, Thor andFreya, after all. I'm surprised nobody has worked up any indignation over that.

[cleanhippie]

8. Quick, someone call the WAAAAHHMBULANCE!

I can understand how difficult it must be, having your religious privilege and relevance mean less and less, year by year, but the human race is leaving its superstitions behind.

Welcome to the enlightenment.