Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is where you are wrong. If some white supremacist blows up a black bunch of kids all white supremacists are bad. Can you not be white supremacist and not want to use violence? Are all white supremacists evil? What about white separatists who just want to be left alone. They don't want to live next to other races but do not want to use violence either. If one blows up some Muslims are all evil? The left would and does think so.
That is because white supremacists are an extremist group. If a white supremacist blows up a black church, no one goes around blaming all Christians for it, just like no one should blame all Muslims when an extremist does something bad.
There is where you are wrong. If some white supremacist blows up a black bunch of kids all white supremacists are bad. Can you not be white supremacist and not want to use violence? Are all white supremacists evil? What about white separatists who just want to be left alone. They don't want to live next to other races but do not want to use violence either. If one blows up some Muslims are all evil? The left would and does think so.
That is one hell of a false equivalency.
White supremacists join groups that advocate violence and murder against those who are born looking differently. People seek out and join these groups to promote hate.
Are you actually championing white supremacy as good? Is this something from Stormfront?
Liberals do not "circle the wagons" around motive. That's the conservative reflex. Liberals understand the world to be more complex than a single motive, cause, influence or reason.
If that was true, the gay marriage issue wouldn't instantly brand someone as a homophobe if they didn't completely support gay marriage. The slightest hesitance or opposition to it is treated as blind hatred of homosexuals by Liberals who don't look at the nuance behind a Conservative opinion, and only see in black/white.
If that was true, the gay marriage issue wouldn't instantly brand someone as a homophobe if they didn't completely support gay marriage. The slightest hesitance or opposition to it is treated as blind hatred of homosexuals by Liberals who don't look at the nuance behind a Conservative opinion, and only see in black/white.
I don't care if you support gay marriage or not, but it should be legal. You are attacked because you go out of your way to make sure it stays illegal.
Who or what are ignoring Extream Muslim groups? Who is not saying that Al Qaeda and the Taliban are some bad actors? There is a difference in Extrimists and everyday...run of the mill...Muslims.
In the same way I dont blame all white folk for the mass shooting of late, why would I blame any group for the actions of some of that group.
Sounds to me like you are accustomed to blaming the group...
You've inadvertently hit on why the brothers are a problem for the Islamic jihad-excusers. They appeared to be 'everyday... run of the mill... Muslims.' No obvious ties to terror groups, not particularly fundamentalist, in the country for years, school, married, weed. Then what, in a year, 6-months, overnight ?, Extremists.
Of course anyone who blames ALL white folk, Muslims, Wiccans, short people, women, tea party members, etc. for the actions of some in the group lack both common sense and logic.
If that was true, the gay marriage issue wouldn't instantly brand someone as a homophobe if they didn't completely support gay marriage.
It depends on what you understand "homophobia" to mean. If you understand (as most liberals do) "homophobia" to be a general label that includes a bunch of different specific reasons (dogmatic religious belief, sexual squeamishness, repressed self loathing, etc.) then branding someone a "homophobe" is simply a convenient way to get past the red-herring of personal motive and talk instead about the real issue as we see it.
So here is another example of the conservative reflex to be simplistic and reductionist. We honestly do not care what your personal motives are, we care only about your arguments. And we do not frame our arguments against you as simple dismissals of your "homophobia." Anyone who doubts this should start his or her self-education by reading the transcripts from Perry v. Schwarzenegger, the big California case challenging the constitutionality of Proposition 8. The "nuanced" arguments defending the law made every effort to ignore personal motives... and they still lost badly.
And not one of our arguments was that you are "homophobes."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vejadu
The slightest hesitance or opposition to it is treated as blind hatred of homosexuals by Liberals who don't look at the nuance behind a Conservative opinion, and only see in black/white.
Ignoring that a "phobia" is not a hatred, it is a fear, the nuance behind your opinion is meaningless unless it can be framed as a legitimate argument.
If that was true, the gay marriage issue wouldn't instantly brand someone as a homophobe if they didn't completely support gay marriage. The slightest hesitance or opposition to it is treated as blind hatred of homosexuals by Liberals who don't look at the nuance behind a Conservative opinion, and only see in black/white.
HD cares little for the point and more wants to see if he can belittle it and make it go away. If he really cared he would argue it not try to use some tired liberal false arguments against it.
I watch every day as the left wing press goes to every length to say its not Islam, its not even radical Islam, motive has nothing to do with this. A very different thing would be happening right now if it were a white bomber who blew up an NAACP rally and killed some black kids. I know as well as the sun will rise in the East tomorrow that they would be yelling it from the roof tops. I have seen people like HD before who think that if they can use a convoluted argument they can win the debate. You just have to dismiss unreasoned thinking like his.
HD cares little for the point and more wants to see if he can belittle it and make it go away. If he really cared he would argue it not try to use some tired liberal false arguments against it.
I watch every day as the left wing press goes to every length to say its not Islam, its not even radical Islam, motive has nothing to do with this. A very different thing would be happening right now if it were a white bomber who blew up an NAACP rally and killed some black kids. I know as well as the sun will rise in the East tomorrow that they would be yelling it from the roof tops. I have seen people like HD before who think that if they can use a convoluted argument they can win the debate. You just have to dismiss unreasoned thinking like his.
So.....you know HistorianDude? from this forum, from the past? What was your user name before you got booted? Booklover, oldarmysoldier, mr.xxx, rebelyell, or other?
So.....you know HistorianDude? from this forum, from the past? What was your user name before you got booted? Booklover, oldarmysoldier, mr.xxx, rebelyell, or other?
I think his latest was sharkhunter.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
