I’m one of the chief proponents of strict legalism around here (ask me sometime what I think of “unenumerated rights”), but even I recognize that other systems may impose duties. Like, y’know, morals.
I’d give serious money to be able to use this as a verdict form IRL. 
This is true. We trot out the t-word far too often here. FTR, I do not consider you a troll. Nor do I consider Shodan a troll, although I think me might have engaged in trollish behavior once or twice.
The fact remains that RR was the only one who brought up race- and he did it by accusing others of harboring racist thoughts.
Moreover, the fact that the story included a picture of the woman is immaterial. Being black is, frankly, not an unusual condition. If the article was about a guy with no legs, or two heads, or something, including a picture might plausibly be taken as some sort of implicit comment and/or appeal to the reader’s sympathy buttons.
However, to suggest that because the article included a picture of a black person the reader is supposed to think, “oh, no, they’re evicting a black person! The humanity!” just makes you look silly, at best.
At worst, it makes you look like you’re suffering from some kind of paranoid delusion about creeping reverse racism.
Am I the only one who misses the ban we used to have on calling other posters trolls? With all the rumpus over rules changes lately, this is the one rule I’d really like to see reinstated.
Bricker, I’m sure you’ve been called a troll. I don’t mean that as an insult, I’m just saying, it is bound to happen sooner or later with this many people and this level of opinion.
But a conservative poster is not automatically judged a troll just because he’s posting minority opinions. That’s total bullshit. There are plenty of conservative posters here who get along just fine. You included.
Rand Rover seems to love pushing the envelope - he revels in it. He’s the one who shows up at a funeral and says, “The bitch shouldn’t have eaten so much fried food, then she’d still be alive.” And then he wanders around the reception wondering why everyone thinks he’s a dick.
I don’t know what you’re saying here. The analogy was only meant to illustrate that a person holding a view can express that to someone in both a douchebaggy and non-douchebaggy way, even though the opinion is the same in both cases. You frequently present your opinions on personal responsibility and Objectivism in a way far closer to my case 1 than my case 2, i.e. douchebaggishly.
Simply holding some opinions is viewed as jerkish by some, true. However, I think that alone motivates only a tiny fraction of people who think you’re a dick (although I think you use the idea as a shield to ignore your own culpability). Your choices of how and where to post your views that make you look far worse than the views themselves.
People keep saying things like this but no one can post an example of me doing it? Care to be the first?
This is the third time in this thread I have issued this challenge.
Jodi, I’m sure you are familiar with the concept of a right without a remedy–It’s not much of a right. Same thing with moral “duties.”
I owe you an apology.
Skimming your most recent posts (went back 5 pages), you actually answered quite a few GQ/IMHO questions helpfully and without saying anything douche-like.
I still think you’re kind of a dick, but I no longer think you’re a complete dick.
I encourage everyone else who’s been flinging poo at him to do the same (ie., check his recent posting history).
Post some examples of my douchebaggerry then.
You’ve simply shifted the topic from people’s opinions about my views to people’s opinions about how I express those views you still haven’t shown that this means that I am not “taking responsibility” for what I post. Your charge of hypocrisy therefore fails.
And had I suggested that, I would certainly feel as silly as you suggest.
But I didn’t.
The allegation was made that Rand Rover was the first to mention race in the related thread (which I haven’t even read beyond the OP). That allegation is untrue - the race of the person was established by the article posted in the OP. But simply pointing that out was enough to trigger accusations of racism from the esteemed Dr. Butts.
Sort of unfortunate, but not unprecedented - the subject of race triggers automatic reaction like almost no other.
No, you are certainly not the only one. People can’t seem to see any distinction between “I disagree” and “I will post this even though I don’t believe it just to piss everybody off”.
Regards,
Shodan
Apology accepted.
It’s been pointed out to you how much of a dick you were being in the initial thread but you just keep denying you were doing anything but … gosh … being all honest and stuff. And you know what … that’s not so egregious, but you just had to throw in your absolutely re-fucking-tarded crack about … “ooh she’s a black woman so that’s why all these liberals are upset.”
And then you have the sack to wonder why anybody could possibly see you as a dick.
The allegation is completely true, unless you’re suggesting that the author of the article linked in the OP is some sort of stealth poster here. Rand’s comments implied that everyone had looked at the article and picture and had phrased their comments differently because the woman was black.
As I noted a couple of pages ago, some of us never read the original article, and nobody else mentioned race. What you have done in this thread is post a knee-jerk defense of something RR did which isn’t defensible (unless you think we all really do secretly feel that it would be okay to do this to a white person), and then find some basis for that defense afterward.
No duty without outside enforcement? That’s nothing more that amoralism, of course, a POV I would not be surprised to find you hold – in fact assume you hold. But so what? Just because you say it doesn’t make it broadly so. You’re not the boss of me or my moral system, or any one else’s, and I sure as hell don’t grant to you the privilege of deciding what a duty is or when one exists.
IOW, to your assertion that “If a duty isn’t enforcable in court then it doesn’t exist,” I say: Sez you, Sparky.
Hrm, you guys have made a start. Some good old STFU and troll accusations and “hur hur yer the dumb one!”
But (at the risk of making this thread about calling someone everyone who disagrees with you a troll, stupid, immature, sociopathic, etc., not that you and your feel-good cronies would ever do anything like that, and because I seem to be the only one asking why you all feel the need to insult and dismiss people because they don’t play nicely with your tiny worldview), let’s take a look at your assertions!
Demographic: 18-22. Wrong (older)
Education: High school. **Wrong ** (lots more)
Intelligence: Slightly above average. ? I’m not even going here.
Underachiever Status: ? Kind of depends on the above items, but I’ve done reasonably well so far.
“Class Clown”-ness: Probably Wrong
No friends: Wrong
Live with/off parents: Wrong
Menial jobs in service industry: Wrong (Ok, I did work at a gas station during school)
Fired a lot: Wrong
Stoned: Wrong (Though I like to have a cocktail now and again)
Sizable Collection of Books: CORRECT!
Books intended for show: Wrong
Orientation: Hetero CORRECT!
Marital Status: Single Wrong
Drives a car: Wrong (I use public transportation because it is better for the environment and economically efficient)
Car purchased by sugar daddy: N/A (aka Wrong)
Now, I could go through and put my CV on here for your delectation. Or I could return the favor and lay out the description of some mid-level HR manager with 2.5 kids, a liberal bent, and a bad haircut or something, but why?
Like you do to Rand Rover and anyone else who disagrees with you, you are just trying to pigeonhole people so you can put them in little mental boxes and dismiss them with a clear conscience. Troll, threadshitter, sociopath, college freshman, conservative…
Let me ask you this, in all seriousness: If someone were to do the same thing, but with different groups, would you be offended? What if those groups were things like “jew” or “single mother” or “welfare recipient”?
“How dare you?!”, I can see you typing.
But here you are, with your buddies declaring 1-0 victory, with your namecalling and precious little else, participating in a thread whose OP stated he wanted to discuss actual points, and jumping on me for being a “troll”.
You respond to my so called trolls with yet more insults and STFUs. But you’re doing the same thing you are castigating Rand Rover for, and that’s why you’re pissed – because I am pointing out your hypocrisy. (Or because you’re too inept to get it at all.)
Oh, and bonus points for posting something along the lines of “Well, you TYPE like someone who lives with his mommy!”.
I meant to imply that attitude about the author of the article and not any poster in that thread.
Yes, if someone fails to do something that you believe they have a moral duty to do, then you may stamp your feet and insist that they are a poopyhead and be regarded as such by others if that makes you happy.
Still makes it bullshit that you’re slinging. And you got some on us.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10970200&postcount=16
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10638904&postcount=15
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10928575&postcount=5
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10893410&postcount=3
Then why did you wait so long to clear that up?
I will grant the post to the diabetic christian as an example of douchebaggery, but the others are nothing like calling the fat girl fat.