Texas joins the Third World

[straffo]

Originally posted by rpm
No kidding, MT. It just shows the true colors of our "conservative" friends.
I'm surprised Skuzzy hasn't pulled out the PNG stick.

Won't happen.

[storch]

spot on 73

[storch]

Originally posted by AKIron
I think most dictionaries define racism as holding that one race is superior to another. I'm holding the NBA to be pretty darned racist.

heh

[bustr]

Oakland California asked Juneteenth to go else where after the last 2 years of it turned into gang banger riots and general looting. The previous 10 years the juneteenth revelers setteled for the festivel on the lake and simple vandalizim in the surrounding neihborhoods. Breaking and entering, weeing and defecating on walls and parked cars. Harrassment and intimidation of citizens on the street and in their yards. Theft, pickpocketing, assault and battery, public sexual harrassment, some alleged rapes, drunken disorderly, under the influence of controled substances, loss of life that never made it in the news.

But then we just didn't understand the spirit of the celebration not being decendants of slaves and such as we were lead to beleive by community leaders in those days. I think that was during the rein of the Elihu M. Harris cleptocracy in Oakland. Butttttt, we were being afforded ample oportunities to feeeeeeeeeeel their anger and pain over what our ancestors had done to them, or some garbage like that.

[Shuckins]

And that's all I got to say about that.

[lazs2]

mt.. I got to ask....

Is it fun for you or does it cause you constant agony to be looking for racists in every facet of life?  Every statement anyone makes?

In your world...  is it better to treat some people better than others?   Is it a better world if facts are ignored in the interest of PC?

In families of mixed races of children... would you like the ones of one race to be treated differently than the other by not only others but the parents as well?

MT world must either really suck or be really strange with all sorts of rationalizations for doing unfair things.

lazs

[midnight Target]

I don't look for them lazs. I just shine a light on them once in a while. Why do you think every thread is about guns?

And JB73, what is what gonna be? You think my observations are any less or more serious than yours? You must be attaching some added significance to mine. Maybe it is some kind of conscience kicking in or something?

[lazs2]

The difference is of course.. that you want to treat people differently and you want to censor based on... based on what?    Firearms are a necessary part of the god given right to defend oneself and are protected by the constitution.

What you defend is the right to treat people differently based on race.  If what one race (only if it is a black race) does something percieved to be good... then it is alright to say that race is superior (like basketball or other stupid sports) ... if that race does something evil..

We are all supposed to ignore the makeup of the rioters or idiots or face your instant witch hunt for KKK members who have merely left their sheets at the cleaners...  Since the KKK was/is made up of white people exclusively... it is a form of racism for you to bring them up all the time by your standards.

You never answer the question tho.. the one about how a family should treat their mixed race kids...  How the rest of us should.   Based soley on race.. you would have to treat the black kids with extra rights by your logic.

The black kids would and could use the (horror of horrors) "N" word but the white would be punished.   Hitting the black kids by the whites would be a "hate crime" while the black kid hitting the white would just be... kids hitting their brother.

the black kids would be accepted no matter what their grades to higher learning but,, conversely... the white kids no matter what their grades would not be so long as it was percieved that not enough black kids had qualified or wanted in.

lazs

[midnight Target]

People should be treated INDIVIDUALLY based on their actions. I've never said differently. You want the right to hate a group of people based on their skin color I can't stop you, but I can most certainly point out that it is wrong.

[lazs2]

I do not hate people based on their skin color nor do I think that people and society should treat people differently based on skin color.

I treat people that I don't know more on how they carry themselves than the color of their skin.   I generalize...  it works and is logical.

If I am in a drunken crowd full of black people I will generalize that it is far more likely that something bad will happen on a grand scale.

You call this racist.  I call it pragmatic and using the power of observation and history.

I will be better off than you or the person who pretends that there is no danger.

but.. I already gave you examples of reverse racism and it's bad effects... I would only add that these racist policies like hate crimes and affirmitive action only increase the resentment and real biggotry.

lazs

[lasersailor184]

Originally posted by midnight Target
People should be treated INDIVIDUALLY based on their actions. I've never said differently. You want the right to hate a group of people based on their skin color I can't stop you, but I can most certainly point out that it is wrong.

Do you mean wrong to do so?  Or their assumptions based off of race are wrong?

[storch]

take that example to the next level.

if you were in a very dark alley alone would you feel better if

a. you were approached by a group of lilly white, white short sleeved shirt and black necktie wearing mormon missionaries

or

b. a group of black or hispanic youths?

what would you do as the group approached? would you prepare for the encounter differently between one and the other group?

[Maverick]

Originally posted by midnight Target
People should be treated INDIVIDUALLY based on their actions. I've never said differently. You want the right to hate a group of people based on their skin color I can't stop you, but I can most certainly point out that it is wrong.

MT that is actually what I wanted to get into here and you already put it into words. The secondary point I wanted to make is to assume that an individual is bigoted just on the observation of a situation consisted of a monogamous skin colored part of the population could be erroneous. To make that assumption and then label them as members of a hate group of no redeeming value is also an example of a bigoted act itself, particularly in the assumption that the other group does hate a specific part of the population.

FWIW I was not picking on you personally, just that you came up with the reverse side of the "racist" equation in the post you made. I don't see either side of that equation as any better than the other. Assumptions based on skin color, size, hair color, eye color etc. are all faulty IMO. I feel it's better to base opinions on an individuals actions rather than the outward appearance they happened to be born with. Bigotry is bigotry no matter what the color of the person who is expressing it. It's equally wrong to apply it based on how or what appearance a person is born with.

[RedTop]

Somehow ....in the back of my mind...I knew this is where this thread would end up going.

[Fulmar]

Originally posted by lasersailor184
Uhhh, if it's a Texas thing, why is it celebrated in Milwaukee?

There's quite a large Hispanic population in Milwaukuee.  Milwaukuee's population would have decreased majorly 10 years ago if a large immigrant population didn't move in.  Most of the white folk moved to the suburbs and the immigrants took what was left.