 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan wrote:
> So you're willing to say that the majority of African Americans are
> not moderate?
I have no idea what's up with that. People whose fathers weren't allowed to
marry who they wanted because of prejudice are voting to remove the right to
marry from people because of their prejudice.
>> Sure, and I see a whole bunch of pictures of people holding up signs,
>> and I see riots and people burning down buildings, and etc.
>
> The majority of them do this?
I didn't say they do. Don't put words in my mouth. I said "have you any
evidence?"
> If you merely want to point out that a big portion of them do this,
No. Why do you assume me asking a question is also me asserting the answer?
> I once again invoke African Americans, and point you to their really
> high over-representation in violent crimes in the US. In 2005, for
> example, normalized to their proportion of their population, African
> Americans committed more than 7 times as many homicides as their white
> counterparts.
I have no idea what point you're trying to make.
> If you want to have a reasonable conversation, it helps if you don't
> editorialize by using words like "subhuman", because I'll be happy to
> counter-obfuscate.
I'm equating it with every other bit of politicized prejudice.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
much longer being almost empty than almost full.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12/14/09 21:49, Darren New wrote:
> Neeum Zawan wrote:
>> While many like Sharia, they don't view it in the absolutes that you do.
>
> I never said anything about how I view Sharia. :-)
I think you misunderstood. You said:
"or that Sharia should replace democracy as a governmental form"
That's suggestive of a mutual exclusion. I was merely pointing out that
they didn't seem to feel that way.
> (Note that I never said it goes one way or another. I just said it's
> worthwhile to find out.)
True...
--
If you think nobody cares, try missing a couple of payments.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12/14/09 21:55, Darren New wrote:
> Neeum Zawan wrote:
>> So you're willing to say that the majority of African Americans are
>> not moderate?
>
> I have no idea what's up with that. People whose fathers weren't allowed
Nor do I.
Actually, I found a report that suggested that the numbers were
overstated, and it was more like 57-59% (or near there) instead of 70%.
The report suggested that religion was most likely the issue for them as
well. I just looked at the summary - didn't bother reading it.
>>> Sure, and I see a whole bunch of pictures of people holding up signs,
>>> and I see riots and people burning down buildings, and etc.
>>
>> The majority of them do this?
>
> I didn't say they do. Don't put words in my mouth. I said "have you any
> evidence?"
And I didn't put words in your mouth.<G>
It went like this: You asked if I had evidence that the majority were
moderate. I clarified by saying I used the word moderate in terms of
violence. You responded with examples of violence. I responded with a
remark (perhaps a bit sarcastic) suggesting that those examples could
hardly be used in a discussion of the majority.
>> If you merely want to point out that a big portion of them do this,
>
> No. Why do you assume me asking a question is also me asserting the answer?
Pre-emptive strike. Bad habit of mine when it comes to Internet
arguments. It usually goes along the lines of me responding to precisely
what the person says, with him tweaking what he said a bit so that my
response is no longer valid, and so I have to respond again to the
tweaked version. I got tired of this so I just go for pre-emptive
strikes when I feel that what the person said was not what he meant.<G>
Usually not a big issue on these newsgroups.
>> I once again invoke African Americans, and point you to their really
>> high over-representation in violent crimes in the US. In 2005, for
>> example, normalized to their proportion of their population, African
>> Americans committed more than 7 times as many homicides as their white
>> counterparts.
>
> I have no idea what point you're trying to make.
Oh, I was just wondering if you'd say "sure, maybe not the majority,
but it seems a substantial portion of them", and I was drawing an
analogy with African Americans. Since the overall topic was about laws
being passed, I was curious as to what laws targeting African Americans
would be considered OK if their behavior was bad enough. (Part of the
unnecessary pre-emptive strike referred to above).
Reading it all again, it's clear you were just thinking aloud/asking
questions. Still - it's a public forum, and just because it's a reply to
you doesn't mean all of it has to be for your eyes. I can throw out
ideas as well.<G>
>> If you want to have a reasonable conversation, it helps if you don't
>> editorialize by using words like "subhuman", because I'll be happy to
>> counter-obfuscate.
>
> I'm equating it with every other bit of politicized prejudice.
I must admit I don't understand.
--
If you think nobody cares, try missing a couple of payments.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan wrote:
> That's suggestive of a mutual exclusion. I was merely pointing out
> that they didn't seem to feel that way.
I see. I feel the urge to say something more, but it's too late at night to
be clear.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
much longer being almost empty than almost full.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan wrote:
> being passed, I was curious as to what laws targeting African Americans
> would be considered OK if their behavior was bad enough. (Part of the
> unnecessary pre-emptive strike referred to above).
See "Black Panthers, History." :-)
> Reading it all again, it's clear you were just thinking aloud/asking
> questions. Still - it's a public forum, and just because it's a reply to
> you doesn't mean all of it has to be for your eyes. I can throw out
> ideas as well.<G>
Certainly.
>> I'm equating it with every other bit of politicized prejudice.
> I must admit I don't understand.
Almost every other form of prejudice actually brought into existence and
legitimized by politics that I can think of wound up making those you were
to hate "subhuman" as the reason for the hatred. Black slavery in America,
gassing Jews in Germany, killing Gooks in 'Nam, women getting stoned for
going outside without an escort or being too hysterical to vote, etc.
When it's not prejudice but merely differentiation (i.e., when you can
actually move out of the group people are prejudiced against), people in the
"out" group might get treated badly, but it doesn't seem the same. Such as
keeping non-land-owners from voting - those without land were discriminated
against but not particularly treated as inherently worth less, methinks.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
much longer being almost empty than almost full.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12/15/09 00:24, Darren New wrote:
> Neeum Zawan wrote:
>> being passed, I was curious as to what laws targeting African
>> Americans would be considered OK if their behavior was bad enough.
>> (Part of the unnecessary pre-emptive strike referred to above).
>
> See "Black Panthers, History." :-)
What laws were passed against African Americans as a result of the
Black Panthers (honest question)?
--
If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan wrote:
> What laws were passed against African Americans as a result of the
> Black Panthers (honest question)?
Mostly laws about carrying firearms in public. The black panthers took to
carrying shotguns because so many of them had the crap beat out of them by
police while other police threatened the rest of the group to keep them from
intervening.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
much longer being almost empty than almost full.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12/15/09 19:11, Darren New wrote:
> Neeum Zawan wrote:
>> What laws were passed against African Americans as a result of the
>> Black Panthers (honest question)?
>
> Mostly laws about carrying firearms in public. The black panthers took
> to carrying shotguns because so many of them had the crap beat out of
> them by police while other police threatened the rest of the group to
> keep them from intervening.
OK. I take it these were laws that forbade carrying them in public, or
vice versa?
--
If you try to fail, and succeed, which have you done?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan wrote:
> OK. I take it these were laws that forbade carrying them in public,
> or vice versa?
Yep.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
much longer being almost empty than almost full.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Neeum Zawan wrote:
>> I thought the idea that there would actually be enough votes to modify
>> the CA constitution to treat gays as sub-human would never have passed
>> either.
>
> If you want to have a reasonable conversation, it helps if you don't
> editorialize by using words like "subhuman", because I'll be happy to
> counter-obfuscate.
BTW, they're treated as "subhuman" because the majority actually passed laws
to remove from them the right to marry who they wished, which they already
had. I'd say passing a law to allow enslaving a particular group of people
would be treating them as "subhuman" also. They aren't human enough to get
the same rights to marriage as the other humans get.
As for muslims and democracy, I think I was using "democracy" to include
basic human rights. Of course you can have a democracy in which the majority
vote to stone apostates, outlaw freedom of speech, burn suspected witches,
castrate homosexuals, presume non-Muslims are unable to tell the truth in
court, kill female relatives who go out in public without an escort, etc.
Hence it's perfectly reasonable that a majority of people who want Sharia
also want democracy. They just don't want the usual human rights that go
with democracy in most democratic countries. I'm not sure what the right
word for the group of behaviors would be.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Human nature dictates that toothpaste tubes spend
much longer being almost empty than almost full.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
