Kristy. Well said. Quoting the words and pointing out they are offensive to some, is rational and reasonable. I don’t like the word “queer” because that is what those who beat me up, breaking ribs and kicking me, and cutting me with a knife, used during my bashings. But I had heard it used as a hate word before then. But perhaps I’m a bit biased.
I prefer “gay” as a generic term for LGBT, even though there are those who currently use it in a derisive manner. More important than the actual words, it the way in which they are used. Stopping hate speach requires pointing it out.

A word only has the power that people give it. Context is crucial in determining what power a word has. As many have noted, when being called “queer” by one’s friends, it is generally not offensive because no offense was meant. I totally agree that the N-word is offensive in every instance because of the long and dark history of its use. However, what Mr. Gibson, aside from his rather blundering observations, has failed to understand is that the N-word is not being used by black people among themselves for the most part. Instead, the word has been modified to replace the -er with -ah, creating a different word. This modified word is used similarly to the way “queer” is used in gay circles.

While I, as a white male, would not feel comfortable using either word for fear that I might be misunderstood and inadvertently give offense, my point is that there are layers of meaning to words and the context makes a difference, in most cases, as to how that word will be interpreted by its audience.

Thus, a statement that using the words “X” “Y” or “Z” will not be tolerated by management in a work environment is far different than a statement that John or Jane Doe is an “X” “Y” or “Z”.

Groups that criticized the Department of Transportation for attempting to prevent these kinds of offensive epithets from being used as weapons by employees, I think, have become so focused on the words themselves that they failed to notice their context.