Do you consider yourself racist?

[dank69]

Stop being stupid.

First of all, calling someone a redneck is itself a judgement of their character. Are you saying you think there isn't a single redneck that doesn't like to fish? Or drink beer? Or drive a large truck? Even if we had previously established that this person self-identifies as a redneck, I wouldn't assume any of those things. How about you stop being stupid.

 

[dank69]

You're so delusional it hurts. You are (yet again) implying they don't know what is reality because they have faith in what they believe in? You are contradicting exactly what you're trying to defend.

I didn't say they don't know what reality is. I said I question their ability to determine what reality is. If someone is willing to accept any concept on faith alone, then it is possible they will accept anything on faith alone.

 

[dank69]

1) I don't care what some internet forum posters think about me.
2) I don't consider being "racist" as such a dirty word as you believe it is. To you, that term invokes such venom, and is probably the worst thing someone can possibly be. To me, it's part of human nature. So if you want to call me "racist", all you are doing is saying "Life has taught you that different animals/groups of folks have different values, morals, and behaviors. Maybe its culture, evolution. Who knows, but in the end, we are different." in which I respond "Absolutely." So, if you (or anybody else here) want to label me a racist, go ahead. It doesn't hurt my feelings in any way.

Good. I'm not sure why you didn't pick the first option then.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

People that willingly believe in fairy tales? Yes, I judge people by their actions. Guilty as charged, lol. Of course I would never assume they are a bad person, but I will question their reasoning skill.

In the AF oath thread you clearly mention Christians as supporting the removal of the opt out. I replied that almost certainly some would, but there is no evidence that that's what the vast majority of them ask for. Now I'll change this around a bit. Blacks want to burn businesses. I can prove it because I can find some who did it.


Some X does or wants Y. I think some Christians might like to change the Oath. I don't know that, but I can at least qualify it. I know some blacks feel entitled to riot and loot and burn and I can pick Ferguson as an example.

That's neither bigoted nor racist as it is a statement of facts or reasonable supposition.

The transition to bigotry/racism is to take a subset of a group and expand it to fit the entire population. "Christians" "Blacks" "Gays" "Muslims" without express qualification.

Some Christians are as bad as you say.

Some blacks are violent criminals.

Some gays are pedophiles.

Some Muslims want to exterminate all who aren't practicing like them.

Some does not make the rule.

 

[blake0812]

I didn't say they don't know what reality is. I said I question their ability to determine what reality is.

Thanks for agreeing with me then.

If someone is willing to accept any concept on faith alone, then it is possible they will accept anything on faith alone.

Or you're just prejudice against religious people. Same superiority complex you're rubbing off.

I feel like i'm arguing with people on 4chan.

 

[brandonb]

First of all, calling someone a redneck is itself a judgement of their character. Are you saying you think there isn't a single redneck that doesn't like to fish? Or drink beer? Or drive a large truck? Even if we had previously established that this person self-identifies as a redneck, I wouldn't assume any of those things. How about you stop being stupid.

Well then we are different. Stereotypes exist for a reason, and again, are a pattern that you can form easily. Most blacks in the inner city with the pants hanging down and exposing their underpants 9 times out of 10 listen to rap music (I'd say its even higher than that). Most rednecks are going to drive around in their large truck. Again 9 out of 10 times they probably do.

Can you find me ones who don't? Sure!

But I'm going to assume, until I get to know the person, that these things are true. If I find out otherwise after talking to the person that it's not true, so be it, and great. Goes back to the "birds of a feather flock together" phrase. I also assume if there are 2 friends, that if one is a heavy drinker and is an alcoholic, I'm going to assume that the other friend is one as well, even though they might not be. Similar people flock together again with similar people. Nerds hang out with Nerds. Jocks hang out with Jocks. Is it possible Nerds and Jocks hang out sometimes? Absolutely.

There is nothing wrong anything above. I'm acknowledging that this happens. And it happens frequently whether or not you want to believe it yourself. To say it doesn't happen you are lying to yourself.

Does that mean I'm going to hold this stereo type against them? Absolutely not. I will give everybody the benefit of the doubt on an individual basis. But I will protect myself and my family and make assumptions that if I drive in the inner city, there is greater risk of being robbed or carjacked from certain minority groups. Does that mean everybody there is a criminal? No way... Does that mean everybody with sagging pants is going to carjack me? Nope. But I am going to make the assumption that there is a higher risk of it, and that will change my behavior. Sorry, but that's how life works.

 

[Rakehellion]

Fantastic. Now tell us what we can assume about a black person just from his/her skin color.

Excessive eating and living a sedentary lifestyle makes you fat just like stealing TVs and selling crack makes your skin turn black. Duh.

 

[brandonb]

Good. I'm not sure why you didn't pick the first option then.

Because I don't think I'm more racist than other people. I believe everybody is racist in the exact same manner. It's just that some are more honest than others about it.

 

[dank69]

In the AF oath thread you clearly mention Christians as supporting the removal of the opt out. I replied that almost certainly some would, but there is no evidence that that's what the vast majority of them ask for. Now I'll change this around a bit. Blacks want to burn businesses. I can prove it because I can find some who did it.


Some X does or wants Y. I think some Christians might like to change the Oath. I don't know that, but I can at least qualify it. I know some blacks feel entitled to riot and loot and burn and I can pick Ferguson as an example.

That's neither bigoted nor racist as it is a statement of facts or reasonable supposition.

The transition to bigotry/racism is to take a subset of a group and expand it to fit the entire population. "Christians" "Blacks" "Gays" "Muslims" without express qualification.

Some Christians are as bad as you say.

Some blacks are violent criminals.

Some gays are pedophiles.

Some Muslims want to exterminate all who aren't practicing like them.

Some does not make the rule.

AF oath thread? What is that?

Regardless, adding the word want changes things more than you realize. There is a large difference IMO between "blacks burn businesses" and "blacks want to burn businesses." The first is a statement of easily verifiable fact. The second is conjecture, unless a specific group of black people are on the record stating exactly that, in which case the second statement become more clear that "blacks" refers to that specific group and not "all blacks."

 

[dank69]

Thanks for agreeing with me then.


Or you're just prejudice against religious people. Same superiority complex you're rubbing off.

I feel like i'm arguing with people on 4chan.

Declaring to the world that you believe something is true even though you have no evidence to support it is not an admirable trait IMO. Regardless, judging people based on their actions and beliefs is not only justifiable, it is the only true way to judge someone's character. Unless you think it is bigoted of me to think condoning rape, for example, is a character flaw?

 

[Rakehellion]

I drive in the inner city, there is greater risk of being robbed or carjacked from certain minority groups.

What are those minority groups?

 

[dank69]

Because I don't think I'm more racist than other people. I believe everybody is racist in the exact same manner. It's just that some are more honest than others about it.

Right, you justify your ugly perspective by projecting it onto everyone else.

 

[HumblePie]

I thought the definition of racist was believing that one race, ethnicity, or culture group was superior to any other.

It is that superior qualifier that defines racists and racism. Nothing more and nothing less. Believing your "tribe" is better than the rest regardless of knowing contrary evidence is what makes you racist.

Realizing that every races, ethnicity, and culture has different strengths and weaknesses that are generalized to those groups while realizing that individuals of any group can be outliers on that Bell Curve trend for any particular statistic is not being racist at all. So I fail to see the point in this thread or poll unless it's meant for trolling purposes.

 

[Rakehellion]

Or you're just prejudice against religious people. Same superiority complex you're rubbing off.

There are Christians who run soup kitchens and there are Christians who bomb abortion clinics and protest at funerals. I don't make any assumptions about a person's behavior by the religion they claim.

But one's skin color isn't a decision, isn't a variable they can change throughout their lives.

 

[blake0812]

Declaring to the world that you believe something is true even though you have no evidence to support it is not an admirable trait IMO.

Why would one require evidence when they believe in something? As long as their beliefs never harm others, what makes them inferior to you? All because they believe in a higher being, you think that they don't have the ability to tell reality from non-reality. So by using your logic, the Romans were a very inferior civilization because they had their beliefs in multiple deities.

Regardless, judging people based on their actions and beliefs is not only justifiable, it is the only true way to judge someone's character.

No one ever said it wasn't.

Unless you think it is bigoted of me to think condoning rape, for example, is a character flaw?

Quit grasping at straws.

 

[brandonb]

What are those minority groups?

Well if I drive into the Minneapolis/St.Paul area, there are the typical ghetto black gang bangers, the Somali gangs, and over in St. Paul there is a lot of Hmong gangs.

If you notice, I said gang for every single one.

 

[blake0812]

There are Christians who run soup kitchens and there are Christians who bomb abortion clinics and protest at funerals. I don't make any assumptions about a person's behavior by the religion they claim.

But one's skin color isn't a decision, isn't a variable they can change throughout their lives.

I wasn't implying anything different. Of course no one chooses to be born a certain way, but they can definitely choose to act a certain way.

 

[Rakehellion]

I thought the definition of racist was believing that one race, ethnicity, or culture group was superior to any other.

It is that superior qualifier that defines racists and racism. Nothing more and nothing less. Believing your "tribe" is better than the rest regardless of knowing contrary evidence is what makes you racist.

Realizing that every races, ethnicity, and culture has different strengths and weaknesses that are generalized to those groups while realizing that individuals of any group can be outliers on that Bell Curve trend for any particular statistic is not being racist at all. So I fail to see the point in this thread or poll unless it's meant for trolling purposes.

That's an overly technical definition that doesn't fit everyone's opinion. Regardless, it doesn't nullify the poll.

 

[brandonb]

Right, you justify your ugly perspective by projecting it onto everyone else.

I don't need to justify anything. What do you not understand? I look at my "ugly perspective" differently than you. I accept me for who I am. I'm ok with that "ugly perspective."

 

[blake0812]

That's an overly technical definition that doesn't fit everyone's opinion. Regardless, it doesn't nullify the poll.

It's been twisted around nowadays to fit anyone's personal definition of what racism is. Just look at Tumblr.

The other day someone told me that because I am white, I am a racist. She was white herself yet believed that all white people are racist but blacks can't be because "racism is a result of color + privilege".

 

[dank69]

Why would one require evidence when they believe in something?

Why would anyone believe in something without evidence?

As long as their beliefs never harm others, what makes them inferior to you?

It doesn't and again, I never claimed it did. It means one specific part of them is inferior. They may still be 10x the person I am in other ways.

All because they believe in a higher being, you think that they don't have the ability to tell reality from non-reality. So by using your logic, the Romans were a very inferior civilization because they had their beliefs in multiple deities.

Your entire line of reasoning depends on me thinking religious people are inferior. Since this is not the case, your entire line of reasoning is invalid. For example, I don't think the Romans were inferior, I simply think they were unable to determine that Neptune did not control the seas.

No one ever said it wasn't.

Actually, when you said I was prejudice against religion you were claiming that my opinion of them is not based on reason.

Quit grasping at straws.

It might seem like I am grasping at straws to you I suppose, but I am just laying out the logic for you.

 

[ThatsABigOne]

I know that I am racist but I put my initial feelings aside and let the individual judgement control my decisions. I have met great people from other races that do not have a big favor for me and when I communicate with those individuals, the race is the last thing on my mind.

 

[HumblePie]

That's an overly technical definition that doesn't fit everyone's opinion. Regardless, it doesn't nullify the poll.

Overly technical definition? Welcome to using the English language. Without overly technical definitions for words we might as well resort to using grunting sounds with pantomime to get what we want across.

Racism is the belief that one race is superior to all others and a racist is a person that behaves with that belief in their actions.

Pretty simple and straight forward.

 

[nehalem256]

Overly technical definition? Welcome to using the English language. Without overly technical definitions for words we might as well resort to using grunting sounds with pantomime to get what we want across.

Racism is the belief that one race is superior to all others and a racist is a person that behaves with that belief in their actions.

Pretty simple and straight forward.

Someone forgot their Liberal->English dictionary ^_^

Liberal dictionary
--------------------
Racism: Being a poo poo head in a way that can be connected to race is even the most roundabout manner.

 

[dank69]

Overly technical definition? Welcome to using the English language. Without overly technical definitions for words we might as well resort to using grunting sounds with pantomime to get what we want across.

Racism is the belief that one race is superior to all others and a racist is a person that behaves with that belief in their actions.

Pretty simple and straight forward.

Someone forgot their Liberal->English dictionary ^_^

Liberal dictionary
--------------------
Racism: Being a poo poo head in a way that can be connected to race is even the most roundabout manner.

That isn't the complete definition of racism:

rac·ism
ˈrāˌsizəm/Submit
noun
the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.

The word "especially" means that isn't always the case.