Why be a stickler for words and process?

As for words, we need accurate use of the language.  What else is language but the tools of thought, and of communication?  Unless an idea be transmitted according to a standard, what hope do you have in the accurate transmission of that thought from one mind to another, when the meaning of those words are not clear and agreed upon?

In other words, the word "gay" is not standard English.  If it were, it would mean homosexual.  But gay is not homosexual, homosexual is homosexual.  We don't change the use of words just because we don't like it for whatever reason.  If you do, then what is the dictionary meaning of that word?  Let's see:

"Gay" now has three shades of meaning.  Go back in time, and you don't see that.  In 1970, the Mary Tyler Moore show used the word "gay" with its original meaning.  Culture changed the word meaning, but why did this happen?  Was it because the public at large was asleep at the switch?  Is it happening now, but along a more broad and pernicious scope?

Fast forward to today, and we see the meanings of words changing and morphing into whole new meanings.  It is happening so fast that it breathtaking.

Rule of law now means mockery of the law.  Why?  Well, that is where the process comes in.  You cannot call it a House impeachment inquiry if only part of the House agrees to it.  The House is a collective body, and therefore all members should have a vote.  But what we have seen here is that no vote is allowed, but the representation of it as a "House" decision is still being made.  We have the metamorphosis of the word "House" to the new meaning, which is only a small part of the House.  It doesn't stop with the word House, either.  Inquiry is being redefined to suit the impeachment partisans.  An inquiry was once synonymous with an investigation.  And an impeachment inquiry is more restricted than your ordinary inquiry.  There is a doctrine called "separation of powers" which handles this kind of inquiry.  It gives "impeachment inquiry" its very meaning then.  The absence of this formerly defined process makes the Democrat partisan faction efforts more accurately defined as a Star Chamber.

A Star Chamber with secret proceedings.  A Star Chamber without defense witnesses and cross-examination.  A Star Chamber without even a probable cause ( 4th amendment ) in order to begin an investigation.  The DOJ shot down the notion of a secret witness with hearsay as evidence.  It isn't a matter for debate.  In this society, as long as the CONUS (constitution ) survives, and if there is respect for precedent and the law, none of this would be allowed.  But here it is anyway.  Therefore, "whistleblower" isn't the correct term, either.  Rather, it should be "a leaker of classified information", which is in itself, a violation of the law.  Therefore, the correct term is a criminal leaker, whose leaks are justifying the existence of this illegal Star Chamber, which has no basis in the law, but is instead making a mockery of it.

The lack of respect for the meanings of words and the process in the law is resulting in an earthquake of change in our government.  What was once a free people living under the rule of law is now a country in which entertains the notion that Star Chamber treatment for those accused of wrongdoing is somehow the new standard for how we should arrive at justice.  How can that be "justice" unless the notion of justice has now be stood upon its very head?  It is like redefining the entire culture.  Words don't mean anything at all in such an environment, nor does the law.

Perhaps sanity can prevail and we can once again return to that more calmer time when a man received fair treatment under the law, and the outcome was one in which we can have reasonable confidence as being correct.