Let's call the whole thing off

Lie vs. lay. Sit vs. set. Refugee vs. evacuee. I know this is a weak comparison, but it's the only one I could think of. Lie vs. lay is a purely grammatical distinction, but apparently refugee vs. evacuee is a more tender subject. Why else would this story be on the top half of the front page of the Missourian? Don't misunderstand me. As a former CX debater and future journalist I know the value of using the right word. I see why the Missourian ran the article. I am not convinced, however, that it deserved the front page. It took precedence over articles about gas prices and the confirmation hearings of John Roberts. At any rate, the debate certainly is an interesting one. I definitely don't think the two terms are interchangeable. Actually, survivor vs. victim in rape cases is a good comparison. Those involved in preventing rape and spreading information prefer the word survivor because it makes the person who was assaulted seem less weak. Going along those lines, I guess I can see why people would be offended by the term refugee. The word conjures up images of starving children and people wearing tattered clothing before a backdrop of a barren landscape. Most of all, though, I think it does bring to mind foreigners. The word refugee makes me think of someone seeking asylum. If the people in the south see themselves as being persecuted, I would say they could be called refugees. I suppose you could think of Katrina as "natural persecution" if you really wanted to. Evacuee has its own problems, but I think carries far less emotional weight than refugee. Overall, I suppose I have to agree with those who think it's proper to use evacuee. There is no reason to potentially offend those from the affected area. Better safe than sorry.