Why Should Jesus Love Me?

“Love much, trust none”

Since: Jul 11

There

#589044 Sep 12, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
I have to disagree here. While you brought some things that should be understood as the background and history is important, you are essentially minimizing and excusing racism.
First of all it would be a very different situation if anger expressed by blacks was directed directly at an oppressor. A slave master, an outspoken bigot, a perpetrator of a hate-crime, etc.
The biggest flaw in racism is the absolute lack of knowledge about the individual(s) it is directed at. By your reasoning someone black could engage in terrible racism against someone white who is for civil rights and an all around decent person solely by the color of his skin and a guilty by association mentality.
Second in today's age there is no guarantee someone black has suffered harm or oppression from whites so to assume that and to assume bigotry towards whites is a response has no basis
Lastly being racist towards entire groups because some people in those groups were racist is a terrible idea to put forth. If racism is wrong then the proper moral response is to be better.
And how do you know the slur would be ineffectual? Just because whites have historically had the power doesn't mean all have. And regardless of power someone may feel very victimized if they were to be called a racial slur
It's important people understand the historical and institutional racism and atrocities done in its name so they can understand what may be causing a divide even today. Perhaps they were taught about these things and taught to hate white people and simply need some life experience and interaction to see many whites are not what they assume them to be. Or maybe they won't care and will continue to be racist against whites
Either way, racism is racism. And regardless of the harm done or the perceived excuse, it's no better or more excuses for one group then another
Agreed!

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#589045 Sep 12, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Correct.
But why do you use the quotation marks around whites?
I do that to indicate that I'm talking about an imaginary racial category with no real definition.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
I don't think I've ever seen you write "blacks". You surely don't do it with "minorities", as seen below...
I may not have written anything about "blacks".

I don't put "minorities" in quotes unless I'm talking about the word "minorities" instead of actually talking about minorities. "Minority" is fairly well defined and understood by everyone. "Black" and "white" races are not.

Don't you think "pedantic" is an interesting word?
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Strange. You're basically saying that racism towards whites is ok because some white people "keep the man down", as it were.
Straw man fallacy.

Next time I'm going straight to "liar" and you'll deserve it.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
I thought you were avidly opposed to racism.
I am.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Why? A person's feeling is a person's feelings. What difference does it make if it's a person of majority race or minority race.
Being reminded of your level of advantage in society only hurts when you're disadvantaged.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
And on that note, let's say I live in Atlanta, where the majority population is black. Would it then be ok for me to racially abuse them but not them to me?
No.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Then you should take down your "rules of racism"...
Save your commentary for when you understand something.

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#589046 Sep 12, 2013
lil whispers wrote:
<quoted text>
Cap unless I misunderstood correct me if I have. lil whimpers and lil whispers are two different posters. lil whispers is a woman.
I know.

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#589047 Sep 12, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>
I have to disagree here. While you brought some things that should be understood as the background and history is important, you are essentially minimizing and excusing racism.
First of all it would be a very different situation if anger expressed by blacks was directed directly at an oppressor. A slave master, an outspoken bigot, a perpetrator of a hate-crime, etc.
The biggest flaw in racism is the absolute lack of knowledge about the individual(s) it is directed at. By your reasoning someone black could engage in terrible racism against someone white who is for civil rights and an all around decent person solely by the color of his skin and a guilty by association mentality.
Second in today's age there is no guarantee someone black has suffered harm or oppression from whites so to assume that and to assume bigotry towards whites is a response has no basis
Lastly being racist towards entire groups because some people in those groups were racist is a terrible idea to put forth. If racism is wrong then the proper moral response is to be better.
And how do you know the slur would be ineffectual? Just because whites have historically had the power doesn't mean all have. And regardless of power someone may feel very victimized if they were to be called a racial slur
It's important people understand the historical and institutional racism and atrocities done in its name so they can understand what may be causing a divide even today. Perhaps they were taught about these things and taught to hate white people and simply need some life experience and interaction to see many whites are not what they assume them to be. Or maybe they won't care and will continue to be racist against whites
Either way, racism is racism. And regardless of the harm done or the perceived excuse, it's no better or more excuses for one group then another
No.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#589048 Sep 12, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
There are millions of non-white racists, Annie.
I grew up a few miles from places where you could get killed just for being 'white'.
'Reverse racism' isn't any better.
I agree

How many people today have been hung from a tree, made to sit at the back of the bus, or been denied an education?

And to excuse taking anger out on people that had nothing to do with it doesn't make any sense.

The seriousness of what happened in the past needs to always be remembered. And there is still a lot of progress that needs to be made in society to rid it of remaining racism. But giving one side an excuse to engage in racism simply encourages the divide between the races to remain

There is no reason to assume someone white deserves to be treated in a racist manner or that there is a legitimate firm of racism. It just continues a vicious cycle between two groups

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#589049 Sep 12, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
There are millions of non-white racists, Annie.
I grew up a few miles from places where you could get killed just for being 'white'.
'Reverse racism' isn't any better.
On that, I agree with you.

There's a neighborhood just a few miles from my house called Casa Blanca. If you're white, you just don't go there.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#589050 Sep 12, 2013
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text>
I know.
Just did not want any misunderstanding between us. Thanks.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#589051 Sep 12, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
No.
Yes.

Skom is right.

“Rainbow: God's covenant ”

Since: May 07

Clearwater and Honolulu

#589052 Sep 12, 2013
Richard Dawkins has an opinion and therefore thinks everyone else should share it. Gee, what a shock. What’s surprising this time is that it’s not about religion.

In an interview with the Times magazine this past weekend, the author revealed that he and some of his peers had experienced “mild pedophilia” at their boarding school in Salisbury, and that it was no big deal. Recalling how one of his teachers “pulled me on his knee and put his hand inside my shorts,” he declared,“I don’t think he did any of us lasting harm.”

more on such an "enlightened" person here.

http://www.salon.com/2013/09/11/richard_dawki...

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#589053 Sep 12, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Please post the link to the page and comment where I've said I abused my own child.
Do that......and I'll leave Topix forever.
(pssst: you won't be able to because I never abused my kids)
Go.
Or shut the f_ck up about it.
I'm calling you out, bitch.
Of course you didn't acknowledge that it was "abuse."

But it was.

And you even offered to talk to your kids about your improper corporal punishment at six months of age.

No dude, you have it backwards.

I have called YOU out.

You've been busted, RiversideRacist, and you know it.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#589054 Sep 12, 2013
trifecta1 wrote:
<quoted text>No you don't. And yes it obvious these fake atheists get their motivation and ego trip from being in the "pack". But the pack is only as strong as the [perceived] leader of the pack.
I think the [perceived] leader of the pack is a insecure inferior stunted idiot. What does say for the rest of the pack? dead meat.
There you go.

RiversideRacist's support groupie pipes up.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#589055 Sep 12, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
Agreed!
:)

I just wrote another post continuing from yours as a reply

I would also add the effectiveness may depend largely on the situation. If someone white was confronted, particularly maybe someone older or a woman but it could be anybody really, and were subjected to racist comments I doubt their line of thought would be "we'll no big deal because whites have historically been in power"

I am sure for many people, being subjected to hatred and over nothing they did us disconcerting to say the least.

If something is morally wrong then it's morally wrong. Imagine if the word 'rape' was substituted for racism and the argument was white people had raped slaves so its understandable if someone black wanted to rape someone white

Obviously that's not a precise literal comparison but point being if something causes harm then it causes harm. Saying that guilty by association is ok and revenge of two wrongs makes a right is a very dangerous road to travel. And while some may understand how one could lead to the other it still doesn't make it right

People shouldn't be forced to carry the burden of responsibility for things they never did just because of a common skin pigment

Since: May 11

UK

#589056 Sep 12, 2013
Well look at that...the Klan next door has had another hard day at the coal face...LMFAO

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#589057 Sep 12, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Yes.
Skom is right.
I stopped reading after he propped up a straw man just like you did.

If you two want to argue with your own imaginations, that's fine, but leave me out of it.

I'm getting more than a little tired of that particular dishonest tactic.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#589058 Sep 12, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
"Hello! Hello! I need some help, please...I'm caught in a... OH MY GOD!... I'm in a word jumble! Oh please please... send help!"
Hold on!!

Trifecta is on the way.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#589059 Sep 12, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
No.
So just another example how you don't really mean you are against titles and labels then.

You would create two sets of rules and two different moral codes based on the very division you claim to be against

What's worse is you would allow people to be victimized that may be totally innocent by people who may not even have a reason to hate anybody.

At this point I can't say I'm surprised though. If the choice is defend and excuse your friends or stick by your principles you have been very consistent in only doing the former

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#589060 Sep 12, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:

Please post the link to the page and comment where I've said I abused my own child.
Do that......and I'll leave Topix forever.
(pssst: you won't be able to because I never abused my kids)
Go.
Or shut the f_ck up about it.
I'm calling you out, bitch.
Catcher1 wrote:
Of course you didn't acknowledge that it was "abuse."
But it was.
And you even offered to talk to your kids about your improper corporal punishment at six months of age.
No dude, you have it backwards.
I have called YOU out.
You've been busted, RiversideRacist, and you know it.
So you have no link, no post, no quoted text....

You fail.

What's new.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#589061 Sep 12, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
I stopped reading after he propped up a straw man just like you did.
If you two want to argue with your own imaginations, that's fine, but leave me out of it.
I'm getting more than a little tired of that particular dishonest tactic.
Ya....

The truth hurts, don't it?
dzyndzelek

Baltimore, MD

#589062 Sep 12, 2013
BenAdam wrote:
<quoted text>
Agreed!
I am sure all Skombolis posts
are good without of your crazy agreements- you are simple nut?

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#589063 Sep 12, 2013
Skombolis wrote:
<quoted text>So just another example how you don't really mean you are against titles and labels then.
You would create two sets of rules and two different moral codes based on the very division you claim to be against
What's worse is you would allow people to be victimized that may be totally innocent by people who may not even have a reason to hate anybody.
At this point I can't say I'm surprised though. If the choice is defend and excuse your friends or stick by your principles you have been very consistent in only doing the former
Your violence against the poor defenseless straw men will not soon be forgotten.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 5 min ROCCO 866,068
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 10 min middleman1 2,791
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 10 min RADEKT 272,468
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 16 min hojo 600,209
Can you think of any creative usernames? (Apr '09) 23 min sdadsada 34
The Christian Atheist debate 39 min Critical Eye 2,125
White Lives MATTER 1 hr RFD 119
Sleeping with mother (Oct '13) 2 hr RainbowLength 47
More from around the web