Because there are no perfect detectives
The modern mark of Cain.
Which one? Extremely Loud and Incredible Close? 9/11? Farenheit 9/11? Zero Dark Thirty?
Usually false. In any and all languages the "th" sound is extremely uncommon, english is one of the few languages that does have it, but even many english speakers replace the "th" with an F, T, or D sound. It'd be hard to believe "the" is any baby's first word.
There is no moral inconsistency. It very much is okay to verbally abuse people for some reasons, but not others.
Verbally abusing a black person for being black? Immoral. Verbally abusing someone for their damage to your property? Moral. If a gay person steps on your shoe, it's politically correct to call him a dick or a jerk or careless or inept, it's politically incorrect to call him a fruit or a fairy or anything that demonizes his homosexuality instead of his rudeness or lack of thought. Verbally abusing someone or something isn't innately wrong. I think anyone can attest to having used mean words without regret, they exist to express anger/frustration/bitterness. Saying a sports team sucks is politically correct, saying it's a team full of any racial slurs is politically incorrect. It's extremely straight forward, attacking someone on the basis of being rude, malicious, thoughtless, etc. is completely politically correct, attacking someone for their intrinsic identities such as race or gender is politically incorrect.
I don't know the UK constitution, so I don't know what their stance is on free speech, but thanks for the anecdotal tidbit I guess.
Anyway, yes, politicians in office cannot block people on twitter, I don't see why you had to detract it away from the President who has a very public track record of blocking. I figured it'd make sense to stick to well-known instances or common occurrences, Trump's blocking being both.
Lastly, UKIP's twitter is literally still active and running, thus I don't see what you're talking about.
You can be impolite and politically correct. Calling someone stupid or ugly or useless is politically correct. Using slurs is politically incorrect. Again, it's just about using language to attack aspects of someone's innate identity, mainly those that are used to oppress them. Also using your free speech to be a bigot is stupid, if you hear "free speech" and think you have to use it to belittle black people or those with disabilities then you're trash. Not to mention that free speech and political correctness have nothing to do with each other, there is literally no example of the government stepping in to arrest someone for poor word choice, the only free speech encroachment we've faced as a nation is Trump blocking people on twitter.
Being politically correct is literally just using respectful language. It's largely universal and determined by the victims of marginalization. The only political correct "ideal" is that all humans deserve the same treatment based on their innate identities. Their gender, sex, race, ethnicity, class, height, weight, nationality, etc. shouldn't be a basis for mistreatment. That's literally all it is. Advocating socialism is politically correct, the same way that advocating all sheep be moved to mars is, the same way that shoes should be worn indoors is, the same way that literally anything that doesn't devalue a human being based on their identity is. It's not subjective.
The original use of hashtags was just to group peoples thoughts and make them all easily accessible. If you wanna know what people are saying about california on twitter or instagram, you use #California.
It's not a slur, but it's obviously objectifying and wack.
I know some of those, if not all of them, require the singers to be 18+ so the child singers can stay, but everyone else can go.
That'd be an even better analogy if both stores were furniture stores, or hardware stores.
Yes, especially because of how uncommon IQ tests actually are and how worthless they are.