But using that word does address the beliefs he thinks you hold.
Klingon.
Or you could explain why your views are not racist and, if the person calls you a racist again, simply shrug it off and discontinue arguing that issue with that person.
Taking the high road is simple, too.
If I think your views on this subject are ignorant, can I constantly refer to you as an ignormaus when discussing the topic without it being considered insulting?
Can an ignoramus like you even understand why a ‘factual’ descriptor that implies characterisitcs with normative implications can be considered insulting in the general sense?
If I think your posts are foolish, can I call you a fool? If I think your posts are jerkish, can I call you a jerk?
And if I think your posts are racist, I’m going to call you a race.
Are you trying to say that all descriptive terms can be considered as insults? Or are you trying to say that only some descriptive terms are considered as insults, and that IYHO “racist” is a descriptive term that should be considered as an insult at the board?
ETA: reading the thread, it’s clear that you mean the later, that “racist” is an insulting term that should be forbidden outside the Pit. Those terms like racist or sexist or homophobic are borderline, I could see a decision going either way.
Now, now. I don’t need more people running me.
nm. Arnold’s edit cleared it up.
Stop pandering!
Just another racist, dismissing my comments because I’m a Panda.
Hmm. Is “pimp” an insult?
So, if I think—if I seriously believe—that what he opines is sheer idiocy, I can call him an idiot? Well, that works perfectly doesn’t it?
No, no it doesn’t. Because then he has the right to defend himself. Except that turns into a discussion that is not ATMB material. Evidently, the very type of thing TubaDiva cautioned me on in this very thread.
It makes sense that such name calling is disallowed outside the Pit because it simply leads to hijacks of “Am not”, “Are too.”, “Am not.”, “Are too.” That’s not helpful to the forum. So the poster is asked to address what the poster actually says, rather than comment on the poster himself.
Additionally, allowing such nonsense outside the pit just encourages the use of the ad hominem fallacy. It does not help one’s argument one iota. It simply seeks to inflame and quash a viewpoint. You would think a debate board like the Straight Dope would be aware of this.
Oh, wait—they are! They even have rules stating it. They even have an Administrator/Mod named C K Dexter Haven who takes the time to remind people of this by offering in a post:
Maybe for your benefit he should add an addendum:
This really isn’t the type of stuff a mere poster should be explaining to a Mod. But I’m happy to be of service.
And if I think you have stupid viewpoints…
Regards,
Shodan
“that ilk” is Scots for “the same.” Names of clans or sub-clans commonly include the name of a place (e.g. MacLachlan of Strathlachlan); where the place name is the same as the clan name, instead of duplicating (e.g. Moncreiffe of Moncreiffe), they would say Moncreiffe of that Ilk (i.e. “Moncreiffe of the same”). By extension, “that ilk” came to mean “that family” or “that group of people.”
Now see, you’ll learn something new around here every day if you’re not careful. 
Thanks, Matt. I really didn’t know and now I do.
Yeah, that’s one of the best pieces of trivia I’ve seen in a while.
Moose or an ilk.