I think the author realises this, and he states that he wants to reclaim (or claim) the word.
Yes he wants a word to mean something it does not mean. Does he really think using "heathen" instead of "atheist" will be some sort of PR coup?
Once upon a time the word "gay" definitely did not mean homosexual in any way shape or form. And you would probably have been there claiming it was being incorrectly used. But the word has taken on an alternative meaning, which now, to all intents and purposes has become its primary meaning
that's the beauty of language. It's not set in stone. It's fluid. It changes.
This is a ridiculous argument. "Gay" is a slang term. If you could show the same for the word "homosexual" you may have a point. Show me how "homosexual" has morphed into something else and you would have a point.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts