Warp wrote:
>   Why does it matter what was used as an example? What does it matter if it
> was ethnicity, weight or show size? Ethnicity happened to be part of the
> original discussion.

All of those examples have nothing to do with whether you're in the country 
legally.

>   I think your problem is that you are too obsessed with ethnicity. Whenever
> someone talks about ethnicity, it must always be "racism".

Not at all.

>> And why would you argue against the *best* example of distinguishing 
>> feature, which happens to be probable cause?
> 
>   And why would you invent arguments I have neved presented?

OK. At this point, you're again not answering the questions that would clear 
up the confusion, so have a good one.

>> And, in this instance, "racism" isn't necessarily a bad word. It's just 
>> using someone's race to target them for presumtions about the likelihood 
>> they'll behave in a certain way.
> 
>   "Racism" is exclusively used as a negative and derogatory term. There are
> no neutral uses in practice.

Yet you're suggesting exactly that there are neutral and even beneficial 
uses of the *act* of racism.

>>>> I'm confused. The only distinguishing feature you have mentioned in this 
>>>> whole thread is ethnicity, and my bringing up other distinguishing features 
>>>> is called "outrageous", and we're talking about how to catch criminals.
>>>   What the fuck are you talking about?
> 
>> Sorry. You said "outlandish", not "outrageous."
> 
>   Yes, "outlandish" as in "strange", something which confuses because it
> seems so out-of-place. In this case referring to an argument which seems
> so detached that it's hard to understand how it's connected to anything.

It seemed pretty obvious to me.

First, you suggest that if many illegals are of a particular ethnicity, then 
police should concentrate on that enthnicity when doing checks of illegals. 
I ask whether, if many illegals are of a particular religion, police should 
concentrate on that religion when doing checks for illegals. You refer to 
that as "so detached it's hard to understand how it's connected."

Often, around racists (and not to imply you are one), their racism seems 
perfectly normal and rational, just like around religious people their 
prejudices against other religions seem perfectly normal and rational. When 
one substitutes something other than "race" into the same formula, the 
racist will say "Why in the world do you think that's anything similar?"

>> Why did you say that targeting people in churches is outlandish and 
>> incoherent even if most illegals are christian, while it's perfectly 
>> reasonable to target ethnicities if most illegals are of a particular ethnicity?
> 
>   I didn't say that "targeting people in churches is outlandish and
> incoherent". I said that your question was so strange that I had hard
> time understanding its connection to anything.

My question was about targeting people in churches.

OK, I think I'm done here.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Linux: Now bringing the quality and usability of
   open source desktop apps to your personal electronics.

Post a reply to this message