So… it’s OK to hate people for what they are, but not for who they are? And it’s OK to hate kids because adults give them special treatment? Why not go directly to the source and hate the adults, and not worry about the kids?
Is this making sense to anybody other than yourself?
I am proud to say that I have never, ever, not once, watched a single episode of Star Treck. Trek. Whatever.
Now we’re expected to believe that somebody who calls himself “Starwarsfreek” has never seen an episode of Star Trek, and is so unaware of it that you’re unsure of the spelling? :dubious:
You, lady, are so full of shit you must squeak when you walk.
I didn’t say it was ok, I said it made me not a bigot, by that definition.
There is nothing in my username that implies any connection with Star Trek, and you have no reason to assume that I am a liar.
And for the fourth time, I am a girl.
I’m sure that goes a long way toward the annual George Lucas Ass Sucker of the Year award, but my point still stands.
:yawn:
I found a different definition:
“n. One who is strongly partial to one’s own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.”
Gotcha ya!
Corrected.
And I have every reason to believe you’re a liar. You claim you’re not a bigot… which is a lie. Why not assume you’re lying about the Star Trek thing as well?
Well, look, arguing with stupid bigots is something that I can do all day… but I’ve wasted enough time as it is. Go back to your little cocoon of tortured reason: other than pointing out the flaws in your thinking, there’s little else one can do here.
Ok, but where have I indicated that I’m strongly partial to my own group, religion, race, or politics? I admit, I’m intolerant of people who like pork rinds or Sara Palin, but that’s about it. I’m a liberal agnostic single female in Alabama. If I was strongly partial to my own group I’d be pretty damn lonely.
Dude, even by your own definition I’m not a bigot.
You said your bias was irrelevant. I say that mine is. See how that works?
I will, after you prove that yours is.
I think I’ve amply proven that I don’t think children are always angels. Now it’s your turn to prove that you don’t think children are always devils.
Oh, you’re telling me.
Very nice. And you wonder why I say you’re acting like an asshole in this thread. A child having a bad episode is not a heathen. The parents aren’t necessarily heathens either. It’s your rush to apply denigrating and insulting labels people that’s wrong here. You lack the basic compassion to understand that people can behave poorly because of any number of stressors and not deserved to be called hellspawn that were pooped out by heathens. It’s assholish to describe them so. You simply do not have enough information to say that about strangers.
I really don’t care who says it. Unless you’re being hyperbolic and deliberately obnoxious, it’s rude and belitting.
I’m not having an emotional issue. I’m simply disagreeing with you. You’re the one filled with an emotion-- hate. I feel no emotion towards you or your argument whatsoever, since amusement tinged with disgust is not an emotion.
I will, but you’re not going to like it, since it’s not hateful: an upset, crying child. You don’t know her, you don’t know why she’s crying, and calling her pooped out hellspawn just makes your spitefully little heart feel all happy, but it’s not actually very descriptive. It’s just your judgment, not an accurate description of a stranger, whose motivations you are unaware of. See, it’s not as much fun to think of people who displease you as human beings, with feelings just the same as yours. It’s so much easier just to vilify and belittle them. But that just says far more about you than it does about your target.
Go ahead, insult my job and how I do it. That’s your gig, right? Making hateful, belittling judgments about people you don’t know because they disagree with or discomfit you. Well, at least I am a productive member of society, I contribute and don’t just take and bitch.
A distinction without a difference from someone who can’t even own up to her own words, and is both a moral coward and a generic brand one. I’m so glad you never reproduced.
Certainly there is. Science fiction movies.
By that logic, if I like blueberries I should also like strawberries because they are both berries. The fact that they share a genre doesn’t mean I have to be associated with both.
Yawn. Since we’re both pulling definitions out of the collective ass known as the Internet, how about this one from Wiki:
You, an adult, admittedly hate people with the identity of “children”. You are a bigot. Plain, pure, and simple.
No, but I’d expect that you’d have some knowledge of what you don’t like, and why. Unless you truly are such a Star Wars phile that that is the only science fiction you’ve ever watched. Or heard about. Or read about. Or talked about.
Are you the one that causes five full shelfs of Borders science fiction section to be taken up with Star Wars novelizations?
Well, fair enough, although since Wiki is edited by the general public, I’m going to lean toward the definition from Merriam-Webster. Specifically, the problem I have with the one from Wiki is that I don’t take offence to the opinions or lifestyles of children because I don’t go near them. Also, I’m not “devoted” to my prejudice. It’s not something that comes up every day or even every week. Also, in general, people who are referred to as bigots are prejudiced against more than one group.
Assuming no allergies, one would expect a poster named “blueberryfreek” to have tasted a strawberry at least once in their life, at the very least in finding out that they don’t like them.
But, shit, we’re talking to somebody who thinks that hating a group of people isn’t bigotry. Why are we wasting our time, Frank?
Since we don’t have a Borders here, I wouldn’t know. I know there is a TV show called Star Trek, and there are some movies. I know there is a character called Spock and one called Pickard (sp?) and one called Data (sp?) because I’ve heard people argue about the show. I’ve seen some commercials. That’s about it. I was biased against it as a kid because so many people I know don’t know the difference between Star Wars and Star Trek. (And *that’s *because I’m surrounded by hicks.) I have seen other SciFi movies and read other books, but I do prefer the fantasy genre.
ETA: That was to say, I’m not so biased against it as an adult, but I haven’t been terribly interested in what people have told me about it and since I have no cable I’m not going to waste my money on renting it.
I find it hard to believe that you are a great babyistter if you cannot like someone under the age of 17. I mean really, if you hate the children but love the money the best thing you offer is safety. From your handle I think that you are young. Give it a few years.
The point is–when do you think a child is allowed to be part of a group that you do not hate? Is a well read, well spoken 10 year old worth your time, or does he have to reach the age of majority? Is a coddled 18 year old OK, even as he shuns you for you lack of a BMW and platinum card?