Whatever they were defending, they were defending it against the government, which was already pointed out, and which makes this whole line of argument pretty silly. The ACLU didn’t go to the Supreme Court and argue that nobody should be mean to Nazis.
You: “Tell me, are there any other issues that you feel you are justifying bullying someone to the point that they must knuckle under to your way of thinking?”
Me: “Sure, lots of them. I’m against racism and other forms of bigotry. I’m also against rape, child abuse, torture, murder, and cannibalism”
No, I have to say my answer was clear and direct. Any lack of comprehension was on your end.
They’re welcome to try. I don’t think they’ll succeed. I don’t think a racist trying to whip up support for his racism is going to get the kind of support you imagine. And if he tried to organize a boycott against me over my opposition to racism, I don’t imagine a lot of people would join in.
And if this did happen in some redneck community where there were a lot of other racists who’d back him up, it still wouldn’t change my mind. I’m not a knuckling under kind of guy.
The way you answered left the door open that you’d be against those things, but not necessarily to the point that you’d be willing to bully someone to the point of having them knuckle under. But, I see how you might have thought the answer was covered.
Regardless, I think we both know where each other stands. And I have no need to continue this to have you knuckle under.
The way I answered the question answered the question - “Are there any other issues?” “Sure, lots of them.”
As I’ve said all along in this thread, I have no reason to duck any questions here. My position is nothing to be ashamed of.
I just said that I don’t knuckle under. And I’ve had an easy time of it in this thread. I could keep posting here forever.
We know! We know!
I can’t tell you how impressed I am!
You were the one who posted “I think we both know where each other stands. And I have no need to continue this to have you knuckle under.” It looked to me like you were trying to declare victory as you ran away. So I wanted it to be clear that I was still here and I was still ready to defend my position.
It was a joke, son. I say, a JOKE! I was trying to end a useless discussion for both of us on a animus-free note. Hence, the that was included in the post. Sheeze. :rolleyes:
Heavens yes. There are some old, rare machines out there. Alouette (Big Al was huge), Chaparrel, Mercury, Ski-jet. The companies may be gone but some of the machines live on.
However, I still prefer the sleighs my uncle used to lovingly restore and test drive with his horses.
My brother used to make money doing this. He would do the restoring himself but he and his buddy used to go around and buy old junker snowmobiles. Then they’d disassemble them and sell off the usable parts.
Tell you what, villa, you’ll convince me that words are the equivalent of actions when you’d rather have someone beat the shit out of you for five minutes than call you nasty names for an hour.
No you don’t.
1.) I’m not making ad homs. I’m arguing with you, and calling you a fucking retard. I’m not saying you’re wrong because you’re a fucking retard. There’s a difference between an insult and an ad hominem attack.
2.) Haven’t you noticed yet that this has nothing to do with “those who disagree with me” and is limited to you in specific? The problem isn’t your position; it’s you, personally, being a fucking retard. Or a troll.
Remember what I said at the beginning of this post about you not understanding my argument? Case in point. In this (terrible) analogy, we, the voting public, are the ones who decide who our President should be and why. You’re not going to someone’s manager–you *are *their manager, and you can vote for someone or not vote for them for any reason you please.
I never said violence–or if I did, I misspoke. I talked about harm. And removing someone’s ability to earn a living harms them.
Thanks for pulling that back up–it’s even more ridiculous than I remembered.
Tell you what, when you convince me I have said they are the equivalent, I’ll try. But while you make the effort, I will still believe that the purpose of racist speech is to instill fear.
It took you a week to come up with this?
And you’re trying to insult my intelligence?
Too early to declare zombie racists?
Instead of going after this racist’s shit job, find out where he got the by bumper sticker. If it’s a brick and mortar store, boycott that place instead of the sandwich shop. If it’s a website, DDOS it. Let this one fuckhead show his ignorance, but don’t let it spread, and don’t let someone make $$$ off it. If the bumper sticker is homemade…
So, you’re going to try to coerce the restaurant owner into doing your thought control work for you?
You want to stalk a man for expressing his opinions, that are different than yours?
And I’ll bet you are one of the first to cry about constitutional rights when you see something that you don’t like, don’t you?
hh
Isn’t the party line all about “personal responsibility” and actions (sluts having sex) lead to consequences (punishment pregnancies)?
If I’m going into a restaurant that is showing Fox News I walk out without getting anything to eat. I don’t have a problem with opinions other than mine, but I’m sure not going to subsidize them.
-Joe
What? What party are you talking about? It’s Republicans who fire people for having the wrong bumper sticker on their car, or for running for office on the Socialist Workers’ Party line. If you’re approving of that kind of action, I have to assume you’re a Republican, too. So why would I be following your party line?
Apparently you’ve never noticed that I do 99.99% of my posting from the office. This means that I sometimes go days–or weeks, or months–between active posting sessions. In the case of a thread like this, where I have to deal with tedious backbirths like you, I won’t even open the update alert email until I’ve worked through everything else and know I’ll have the patience to deal with it.
I don’t know, can stating a bald fact be an insult?
Well, here’s exactly what you said:
I am reading this as saying that you consider it okay to cause concrete harm to someone–or make a threat of concrete harm–because of the language they’ve used that indicates a disgusting point of view rather than an *explicit *threat of harm.
How do you distinguish between someone who is looking to create fear, and someone who just has a genuine (retarded and disgusting) belief that anyone whose ancestors didn’t all come from Europe for the past few thousand years has inferior mental capabilities?
Let’s say someone is trying to get an octopus elected. Am I trying to instill fear if I argue that octopodes are genetically unfit to hold the office of President? Is there a difference between saying “Don’t elect the octopus” and “Don’t elect the [alternate reality octopus slur] eighty”? I.e., would you have a less vehement objection if the sticker hadn’t used such a loaded word?
He’s saying that calling somebody nigger is an explicit threat of harm. That’s why he called it responding in kind. I think it ought to be obvious by now that the word being loaded makes a huge difference, so I have a hard time believing that you don’t know how villa is going to respond to your alternate reality question. You might as well ask whether “Don’t vote for Dumbocrats” would be equally objectionable - obviously not, unless we were in an alternate reality where it was, in which case what’s the point of the alternate reality.
[QUOTE=handsomeharry]
So, you’re going to try to coerce the restaurant owner into doing your thought control work for you?
You want to stalk a man for expressing his opinions, that are different than yours?
And I’ll bet you are one of the first to cry about constitutional rights when you see something that you don’t like, don’t you?
[/QUOTE]
Constitutional rights don’t have anything to do with anything that anybody has talked about in this thread, except for the fact that I can’t report you to any authority and have your keyboard taken away for being like the ninth person to attempt to make this silly point. “Stalk him for his opinions that are different from yours.” Yeah, exactly that. Like a laser beam, right to the heart of the matter.
N/M