Well, well, well. Here it is, at long last: “The Diversity Style Guide is a resource to help journalists and other media professionals cover a complex, multicultural world with accuracy, authority and sensitivity.”

What took so long?

Worried about using the incorrect race/ethnicity terminology, or the wrong disability definition, a bad immigration word, an outdated term for sexuality or gender identity? Concerned you might make an embarrassing drug and alcohol reference or a geographical faux pas? I assure you, your troubles are over. If you are a journalist who wants to be sure you are politically correct, this is the latest and greatest gimmick to keep up with the changing world of self-censorship.

I once concerned myself with such things. But it got too crazy to keep up with everyone’s pet peeve. Language changed on a dime. It became too cumbersome, too rigid, too strict. As even the author of this guide says: “No one person can determine the correct usage of a word.” That worried me. Would we need to have committees assembled then? Well, sort of …

Just look at the panoply of consultants and references they employed for this work:

Whatever happened to the simple and elegant “Elements of Style”?

This latest guide is a regular “Rule for Radicals.”

How many diversity guides does this world need?

The Diversity Style Guide was edited by Rachele Kanigel, a professor and chair of the Journalism Department at San Francisco State University. Where else? Notice that the editors use the term “chair” to avoid the use of the word “chairman.” Is she a chair or the chairman? That’s what I hate about the kind of prig who wastes time with this kind of activity.

I got stopped by the very first item listed in this guide. It was “B.C.”

“Literally, before Christ or the Christian era. Scholars and textbooks are increasingly using the abbreviations B.C.E. for ‘before the common era’ and C.E. for ‘common era’ to avoid using terms defined by their relation to Christianity. See A.D.” No thanks! I’ve read the definitions before. I prefer B.C. and A.D, if it’s OK with the “scholars” – or even if it’s not.

And then there was this entry: “Bible-believing.”

“A term used by some Christians to describe their emphasis on the authority and primacy of Scripture, as in Bible-believing Christians. By definition, however, all Christians believe the Bible. Thus, journalists should avoid using this term except when it is clear people are using it to describe themselves.”

All Christians believe the Bible? Many Christians have not even gazed at one – like many in, say, China, where they are banned outright. There they often cling to one page or so and share it with others. Plus, as hard as it to believe, Amazon agreed not to sell Bibles inside China. That more of less puts the kibosh on the editor’s definition of all Christians.

I guess when you have to keep track of so many pronouns and gender identities in the Diversity Style Guide, they couldn’t have afforded to be too careful with the definition of Christians.

This article was originally published by the WND News Center.

This post originally appeared on WND News Center.