I know,lets codify language. we'll set up committees to moniter word usage, and only the proper word can be used to describe a thing (or action or state of being)

NOTHING will be permitted to change.

Language will be become like stone.

Only stones are not living things are they?

and language is.

That's nice.

I still object to it being used to equal lame because, unless I'm mistaken, it started from the derogatory meaning towards homosexual men.

Imagine that you (anyone) have a sister whom you cherish, love dearly, and want to protect. Say her name is Emma. Say she has some condition that makes her a target of derision; maybe Tourette's. Early on, her classmates began using her name to represent any out-of-place sound, and now the entire school says, for ex., "I did an Emma" or "he's so Emma". Emma may have long been gone from that school, but it's still derogatory, and I'll bet you wouldn't like it.

Edit: I have no relatives who are gay that I know of; I just think it's wrong to put people down.

Hydra: Thank you for that, I had no idea. To an ancient creature such as I ten years ago seems like yesterday

Ads a former prescriptivist, however, I would have wholeheartedly agreed with Jackie. But now as one converted, with my fellow descriptivists I merely assume the position of symbolic capitulation recently sanctioned by the otherwise conservative State of Massachusetts if not Vermont and Connecticut

To take Jackie's example one step farther, let's say you start at this school ten years after the original Emma has graduated. Your name is Emma. People say "That's so emma." Then they look at you and say, "Oh, I don't mean you, Emma. In fact, until you started here, I didn't even realize emma was a person's name - it's just an emma word. I feel so emma now." No amount of pleading will get them to stop using it, even if it's only to stop using it to your face. How do you feel now?

i have an Aunt Gay, and sister who is gay. (and several cousing who are too!)