Debate on Racism? [Archive] - Debate Policy

ConHog

01-29-2012, 12:47 PM

Thunderknuckles wrote the following in another thread:

And then ConHog offered to debate, but I believe he is of the same belief.

You can discuss a potential debate here and maybe someone will pop in that thinks differently, then maybe we can stage a one-on-one debate which we haven't had in quite some time!

I believe TK was saying that racism can't be defended, I believe it can be. Now mind you I'm talking about defending the feelings of racism, I'm not at all interested in trying to defend people who do stupid and or illegal shit because of racism

A one-on-one between Gabby and CH? Neither one of them could debate their way out of kindergarten.

A) Gabby wasn't even part of this discussion , picking on women again Gunny?

B) I've slapped you around numerous times on this forum in many debates so mayhaps you shouldn't cast stones.

OCA

01-29-2012, 12:54 PM

B) I've slapped you around numerous times on this forum in many debates so mayhaps you shouldn't cast stones.

I'm not a big fan of Gunels right now but that might have to be the dumbest fucking statement so far this year. I'd bet my business, mortgage etc. etc. etc. on Gunsel. You can't debate your way out of a wet paper bag.

Sir Evil

01-29-2012, 01:01 PM

I'm not a big fan of Gunels right now but that might have to be the dumbest fucking statement so far this year. I'd bet my business, mortgage etc. etc. etc. on Gunsel. You can't debate your way out of a wet paper bag.

But he has three degree's, sure you wanna go there? :lmao:

OCA

01-29-2012, 01:08 PM

But he has three degree's, sure you wanna go there? :lmao:

I think he means "third degree" from the time he burned himself hard boiling eggs.

Sir Evil

01-29-2012, 01:22 PM

I think he means "third degree" from the time he burned himself hard boiling eggs.
:laugh2:

Shadow

01-29-2012, 01:26 PM

I believe TK was saying that racism can't be defended, I believe it can be. Now mind you I'm talking about defending the feelings of racism, I'm not at all interested in trying to defend people who do stupid and or illegal shit because of racism

A) Gabby wasn't even part of this discussion , picking on women again Gunny?

Yes ...Gabby was. The original debate challenge went out to her first...before you offered yourself up. Read the original quote in Jim's post.

Sir Evil

01-29-2012, 01:29 PM

Yes ...Gabby was. The original debate challenge went out to her first...before you offered yourself up. Read the original quote in Jim's post.

I think it was a tough equation even for the highly educated.....:laugh:

fj1200

01-29-2012, 01:30 PM

I believe TK was saying that racism can't be defended, I believe it can be. Now mind you I'm talking about defending the feelings of racism...

You're going to have to define racism. The belief that one race is superior to another or how culture has changed the definition into hatred/discrimination/etc.

ConHog

01-29-2012, 04:03 PM

You're going to have to define racism. The belief that one race is superior to another or how culture has changed the definition into hatred/discrimination/etc.

That's a good point FJ because I don't believe racism must equal hatred or even . And it doesn't necessarily mean believing your own race is superior to others either. It probably always is manifested with discrimination, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing, it can of course be bad, but isn't always.

Yes ...Gabby was. The original debate challenge went out to her first...before you offered yourself up. Read the original quote in Jim's post.

Gabby's NAME certainly was part of this thread, Gabby herself was not. That seems pretty obvious. If she had posted something in here THEN she herself would have been involved.

Shadow

01-29-2012, 04:21 PM

Gabby's NAME certainly was part of this thread, Gabby herself was not. That seems pretty obvious. If she had posted something in here THEN she herself would have been involved.

Unfortunately you do not get to decide which parts of the conversation people are allowed to comment on. OCA certainly wasn't a part of my movie thread either. Didn't keep you from "bringing him up" in it though.

I think you just need to relax and let the conversations flow, without trying to direct traffic....and I don't mean that in a bad way...so, don't get all bent out of shape.

ConHog

01-29-2012, 04:34 PM

Unfortunately you do not get to decide which parts of the conversation people are allowed to comment on. OCA certainly wasn't a part of my movie thread either. Didn't keep you from "bringing him up" in it though.

I think you just need to relax and let the conversations flow, without trying to direct traffic....and I don't mean that in a bad way...so, don't get all bent out of shape.

You're right Shadow he wasn't, and you chastised me for mentioning him just the same as I chastized Gunny for bringing Gabby up in a conversation; so I ask again what's the difference other than who did it? Oh that's right , none. So just as there was no reason for someone to come into THAT thread and try to chastise you for speaking out to me about bringing OCA into a conversation he wasn't part of, there was no need for YOU to come into this thread and chastize ME for saying something to Gunny.

It's called consistency of action. This board seems to be lacking in it lately.

Just noticed this thread has been moved to the one on one forum... WHo's debating who?

Shadow

01-29-2012, 04:45 PM

You're right Shadow he wasn't, and you chastised me for mentioning him just the same as I chastized Gunny for bringing Gabby up in a conversation; so I ask again what's the difference other than who did it? Oh that's right , none. So just as there was no reason for someone to come into THAT thread and try to chastise you for speaking out to me about bringing OCA into a conversation he wasn't part of, there was no need for YOU to come into this thread and chastize ME for saying something to Gunny.

It's called consistency of action. This board seems to be lacking in it lately.

I asked you not to derail my thread. The end. I don't go around making a habit of lecturing you or anyone else on their posting etiquette. I understand completely why you are so touchy on this subject. But you really need to let it go now...you are making mountains out of molehills at this point.

jimnyc

01-29-2012, 04:46 PM

Just noticed this thread has been moved to the one on one forum... WHo's debating who?

Been where it is since I created it, in the debate topics discussion forum. This is where potential one on one debates are discussed and where we hopefully find members that want to debate those subjects.

Sir Evil

01-29-2012, 04:48 PM

ConHog

01-29-2012, 04:51 PM

Been where it is since I created it, in the debate topics discussion forum. This is where potential one on one debates are discussed and where we hopefully find members that want to debate those subjects.

Oh, I just clicked on it from the new threads , didn't even notice what forum it was in to begin with.

In either case, I'm willing to debate whomever that there is nothing wrong with racism in and of itself.

jimnyc

01-29-2012, 04:51 PM

Wanna debate racism nigger?......:laugh2:

If my reply was to call you "Barack Obama", who's post would be more racist? :slap:

jimnyc

01-29-2012, 04:53 PM

Oh, I just clicked on it from the new threads , didn't even notice what forum it was in to begin with.

In either case, I'm willing to debate whomever that there is nothing wrong with racism in and of itself.

Maybe come to "terms" with fj1200 and see if he's interested. Or if I read thunderknuckles wrong, shoot him a PM or do what it takes to get him to join in. As I said earlier, I think this subject has the making of a good one on one, and in that format that flaming is not allowed, and only the 2 participants are allowed to reply.

Sir Evil

01-29-2012, 04:55 PM

If my reply was to call you "Barack Obama", who's post would be more racist? :slap:

I think it would be equal...:laugh2:

ConHog

01-29-2012, 04:57 PM

Maybe come to "terms" with fj1200 and see if he's interested. Or if I read thunderknuckles wrong, shoot him a PM or do what it takes to get him to join in. As I said earlier, I think this subject has the making of a good one on one, and in that format that flaming is not allowed, and only the 2 participants are allowed to reply.

Either one of those guys would be fine with me. I agree, could be a good discussion.

fj1200

01-30-2012, 10:27 AM

Maybe come to "terms" with fj1200 and see if he's interested.

I don't know if I want to debate it but I am interested in the opening argument. :croc:

ConHog

01-30-2012, 10:39 AM

I don't know if I want to debate it but I am interested in the opening argument. :croc:

I view racism as perfectly natural. We all tend to congregate with our own. Not necessarily out of hatred or fear but just b/c people prefer to be with people who think/act/behave the way they do.

Just the same as I don't hang out with criminals, not because I fear or hate them, but because we have nothing in common, you could also say I have nothing in common with black people so I don't hang out with black people. Now of course there are exceptions to this, some blacks obviously enjoy being around whites more and visa versa. And then of course it is true that many times our racism leads us to believe that we have nothing in common with certain people when in fact we DO.

And then of course racism can be taken to a different level, and I don't condone that at all. No one has a right to inflict harm on another person simply b/c of their race.

Just my 2 cents.

Thunderknuckles

01-30-2012, 10:44 AM

Sorry, was away over weekend. My original intent was to say that there is a legitimate defense to be made regarding one race discriminating against another. History is littered with mistrust, discrimination, and even hatred between races. In many cases there is a legitimate reason for it. However, the more I think about it I guess it depends on what you define to be Racism and I suppose more of the conversation would geared towards that than anything else.

ConHog

01-30-2012, 10:45 AM

fj1200

01-30-2012, 01:56 PM

I view racism as perfectly natural.

You still haven't defined it.

Sorry, was away over weekend. My original intent was to say that there is a legitimate defense to be made regarding one race discriminating against another. History is littered with mistrust, discrimination, and even hatred between races. In many cases there is a legitimate reason for it. However, the more I think about it I guess it depends on what you define to be Racism and I suppose more of the conversation would geared towards that than anything else.

Not when one race has power over the other.

ConHog

01-30-2012, 02:04 PM

You still haven't defined it.

I certainly gave my opinion of what it is.

I view racism as perfectly natural. We all tend to congregate with our own. Not necessarily out of hatred or fear but just b/c people prefer to be with people who think/act/behave the way they do.

Just the same as I don't hang out with criminals, not because I fear or hate them, but because we have nothing in common, you could also say I have nothing in common with black people so I don't hang out with black people. Now of course there are exceptions to this, some blacks obviously enjoy being around whites more and visa versa. And then of course it is true that many times our racism leads us to believe that we have nothing in common with certain people when in fact we DO.

And then of course racism can be taken to a different level, and I don't condone that at all. No one has a right to inflict harm on another person simply b/c of their race.

Just my 2 cents.

fj1200

01-30-2012, 02:13 PM

I certainly gave my opinion of what it is.

About three different ways I'd say.

We all tend to congregate with our own. ... b/c people prefer to be with people who think/act/behave the way they do.

... it is true that many times our racism leads us to believe that we have nothing in common ...

... racism can be taken to a different level... No one has a right to inflict harm on another person simply b/c of their race.

And it doesn't even look like you hit on the actual definition. Racism has a traditional definition and then it has definitions that people have applied to it over time. Definition is really not a matter of opinion.

Thunderknuckles

01-30-2012, 02:21 PM

Not when one race has power over the other.
The problem is you view this only from the side of one who has power over the other. The position where racism is legitimate comes largely from the viewpoint of those on the other end.

fj1200

01-30-2012, 02:30 PM

The problem is you view this only from the side of one who has power over the other. The position where racism is legitimate comes largely from the viewpoint of those on the other end.

As in? Actually, I'm trying to look at it from the viewpoint of those who don't have power. As in the NAACP is NOT racist where the NAAWP IS racist because "colored people" are trying to make up for years of discrimination and a trampling on of their rights.

ConHog

01-30-2012, 04:31 PM

As in? Actually, I'm trying to look at it from the viewpoint of those who don't have power. As in the NAACP is NOT racist where the NAAWP IS racist because "colored people" are trying to make up for years of discrimination and a trampling on of their rights.

Do what?

First of all, I would argue that we owe blacks NOTHING for what their parents , or in some cases grandparents suffered in terms of real discrimination. I didn't discriminate and they didn't suffer. Maybe my great grandfather discriminated and MAYBE their great grandfather suffered. But that is them and then not us and now.

In the second place, ANY organization that promotes giving extra benefits to one race or the other is racist. Now I happen to believe we have the right to be racist, and see nothing wrong with the NAACP in most cases, but at the same time your own definition of racism would suggest that the very existence of such a group while at the same time saying whites can't have such a group is racism in and of itself without the NAACP doing ANYTHING.

Where is the White Caucus at?

jimnyc

01-30-2012, 04:45 PM

Where is the White Caucus at?

http://bit.ly/MRnSN

OCA

01-30-2012, 04:57 PM

http://bit.ly/MRnSN

LMFAO!:laugh2:

cadet

01-30-2012, 07:02 PM

The problem is you view this only from the side of one who has power over the other. The position where racism is legitimate comes largely from the viewpoint of those on the other end.

What the hell power do we have over others? You saying you don't believe in free will? Slavery's still in tack?

Let me ask you something,
if two guys go for a job, one white, and the other black, and they're both qualified the same, why is it that every time the black guy gets it? why can we be racist, but if someone says anything about blocking what whites say its not bad? where is the fairness?

(now, personally, i would hire the one that was nicest.)

fj1200

01-30-2012, 09:16 PM

Do what?

First of all, I would argue that we owe blacks NOTHING for what their parents , or in some cases grandparents suffered in terms of real discrimination. I didn't discriminate and they didn't suffer. Maybe my great grandfather discriminated and MAYBE their great grandfather suffered. But that is them and then not us and now.

In the second place, ANY organization that promotes giving extra benefits to one race or the other is racist. Now I happen to believe we have the right to be racist, and see nothing wrong with the NAACP in most cases, but at the same time your own definition of racism would suggest that the very existence of such a group while at the same time saying whites can't have such a group is racism in and of itself without the NAACP doing ANYTHING.

Where is the White Caucus at?

The White Caucus? It's called the rest of Congress. ;)

First of all, I think racism is largely non-existent today and any problems that continue are the result of poverty and liberalism. Second, you're also going to have to brush up on the premise of the debate:

Racism is defensible and justifiable.

You're going to have to give back at least one of those degrees if you are going to contend that because slavery was abolished in 1863 that blacks had equality in 1963 or even that the CRA lifted them up to automatic equality. The ideology of the NAACP in the 60's can be completely different from their current ideology or at least their tactics in achieving stated goals. Do you really think their 1911 charter equates to racism?

To promote equality of rights and to eradicate caste or race prejudice among the citizens of the United States; to advance the interest of colored citizens; to secure for them impartial suffrage; and to increase their opportunities for securing justice in the courts, education for the children, employment according to their ability and complete equality before law.

I also note above that you've presented yet another definition for racism so can we please settled on a definition and then the debate? BTW, I didn't define racism, only gave an example.

ConHog

01-31-2012, 10:06 AM

The White Caucus? It's called the rest of Congress. ;)

First of all, I think racism is largely non-existent today and any problems that continue are the result of poverty and liberalism. Second, you're also going to have to brush up on the premise of the debate:

You're going to have to give back at least one of those degrees if you are going to contend that because slavery was abolished in 1863 that blacks had equality in 1963 or even that the CRA lifted them up to automatic equality. The ideology of the NAACP in the 60's can be completely different from their current ideology or at least their tactics in achieving stated goals. Do you really think their 1911 charter equates to racism?

I also note above that you've presented yet another definition for racism so can we please settled on a definition and then the debate? BTW, I didn't define racism, only gave an example.

I of course agree that abolishing slavery didn't suddenly do away with racism towards blacks, in fact in MANY ways their situation became worse ( I mean as a people, of course many individuals were far better off not being slaves)

And yes I think that ANY organization which is intended for ONE race only is racist. I simply say that isn't a bad thing. I think we have the right to congregate and exclude if we wish. That doesn't mean we have the right to inflict violence on others. That is an entirely different thing. But we DO have the right to say "I'm not hanging out with or doing business with anyone who isn't white" just as blacks can say that about blacks. Mexicans can say it about Mexicans, etc etc.

And I think it's a whole nother ball game when you're comparing the government to private enterprise. For instance, the black coaches association. Totally okay in my book, private group they can do what they want. The black caucus on the other hand is patently discriminatory and SHOULD be disbanded for being in violation of the civil rights act, but oh it's blacks so it's okay I suppose. And don't give me "the rest of Congresss" because the "rest of Congress" doesn't exclude black people, blacks can be a member of both, whites can not, THAT is discrimination, which when it comes to the government is ILLEGAL and should be so.

fj1200

01-31-2012, 11:47 AM

I of course agree that abolishing slavery didn't suddenly do away with racism towards blacks, in fact in MANY ways their situation became worse ( I mean as a people, of course many individuals were far better off not being slaves)

And yes I think that ANY organization which is intended for ONE race only is racist. I simply say that isn't a bad thing. I think we have the right to congregate and exclude if we wish. That doesn't mean we have the right to inflict violence on others. That is an entirely different thing. But we DO have the right to say "I'm not hanging out with or doing business with anyone who isn't white" just as blacks can say that about blacks. Mexicans can say it about Mexicans, etc etc.

And I think it's a whole nother ball game when you're comparing the government to private enterprise. For instance, the black coaches association. Totally okay in my book, private group they can do what they want. The black caucus on the other hand is patently discriminatory and SHOULD be disbanded for being in violation of the civil rights act, but oh it's blacks so it's okay I suppose. And don't give me "the rest of Congresss" because the "rest of Congress" doesn't exclude black people, blacks can be a member of both, whites can not, THAT is discrimination, which when it comes to the government is ILLEGAL and should be so.

Gotcha, no joking in racism threads. :poke:

OK, I'll define it. Racism (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism)

1: a belief that race (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/race[3]) is the primary determinant (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/determinant) of human traits and capacities and that racial (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racial) differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
Racism is different than bigotry, prejudice, discrimination...

I doubt that the members of the CBC believe in their inherent superiority. Although they are in Congress... Also as part of racism I include the power to effect rules that are beneficial to its members or to discriminate against others. People of course have the right to congregate and exclude in private but they should not have that "right" and use government power to exercise it. That's why racism is bad, because of the possibility of using police action to enforce that "right." The CBC doesn't really have any power either. The discrimination that they show is unfortunate especially when they exclude white members who represent majority black districts.

ConHog

01-31-2012, 12:36 PM

Gotcha, no joking in racism threads. :poke:

OK, I'll define it. Racism (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism)

Racism is different than bigotry, prejudice, discrimination...

I doubt that the members of the CBC believe in their inherent superiority. Although they are in Congress... Also as part of racism I include the power to effect rules that are beneficial to its members or to discriminate against others. People of course have the right to congregate and exclude in private but they should not have that "right" and use government power to exercise it. That's why racism is bad, because of the possibility of using police action to enforce that "right." The CBC doesn't really have any power either. The discrimination that they show is unfortunate especially when they exclude white members who represent majority black districts.

Okay, we'll use YOUR definition. Are you telling me that a belief should be outlawed? What belief is next?

fj1200

01-31-2012, 01:18 PM

Okay, we'll use YOUR definition. Are you telling me that a belief should be outlawed? What belief is next?

You may take up your issue with Messr.s Merriam and Webster regarding the definition. :poke:

You can't outlaw a belief. You may attempt to outlaw a behavior, i.e. discrimination. Do you still believe that racism is defensible and justifiable? Would you contend that discrimination is defensible and justifiable?

jimnyc

01-31-2012, 01:42 PM

ConHog

01-31-2012, 02:37 PM

You may take up your issue with Messr.s Merriam and Webster regarding the definition. :poke:

You can't outlaw a belief. You may attempt to outlaw a behavior, i.e. discrimination. Do you still believe that racism is defensible and justifiable? Would you contend that discrimination is defensible and justifiable?

yes and yes. I went to the liquor store this morning and bought a case of beer, I chose Heineken, I discriminantly chose Heineken. Now I didn't punch a hole in the case of Coors Light sitting there, and I didn't push over the display of Bud Light, I simply prefer Heineken.

Same with people, I can discriminate who I hang out with, do business with, associate with, without harming those people. How is that wrong?

fj1200

02-01-2012, 09:41 AM

Are you guys debating on the merits and definition of the potential debate? LOL

I'm asking because I see lots of decent material in here that could be used in a one on one! Someone speak up, or shoot me a PM if an agreement is reached and you guys want to have a flame free and factual debate.

You mean we're not? :420: Well, as soon as CH accepts the definition of racism that I posted then I suppose we can have a go.

yes and yes. I went to the liquor store this morning and bought a case of beer, I chose Heineken, I discriminantly chose Heineken. Now I didn't punch a hole in the case of Coors Light sitting there, and I didn't push over the display of Bud Light, I simply prefer Heineken.

Same with people, I can discriminate who I hang out with, do business with, associate with, without harming those people. How is that wrong?

Are you really equating racism with beer? And racism is a societal issue, not personal.

logroller

02-01-2012, 01:42 PM

Are you really equating racism with beer?

Kettle logic would say a) you don't like Heineken, b) you discriminate against red herrings, and c) you have racist views towards red people. :laugh:

cadet

02-01-2012, 04:21 PM

Racism is there if you believe it is, and act as though it is. if i start to worry about if this is racist, then people will start to be offended, there was once this black lady hanging out at a company, and didn't like how she was being treated, "overly nice" is how she put it, like people were so worried about offending her that she got offended.

now of course, it was just great costumer service, but you get the point.

no matter what, people will take offense to anything and everything you do if they think you worry about racism, or are racist.

my friend Mishu (saudi) told me he loved it how i treated him, not better then anyone, not out of my way, but was there when he needed me. like he was a true american.

in a nut shell, your racist if someone thinks you are. even if that wasn't your intentions.

by my own opinion, racism is almost completely wiped. my family is every color of the rainbow, and we're always making racist jokes to each other. and the only time i see racism, is when someone claims that somebodies racist. even if you deny it, your racist. every time.

every time someone say's i'm racist and am working too hard to please them cause they're different, i go out of my way to cuss them out and tell them there's no way in hell i'm racist. Met some of my close friends that way.