Racism on parade part 2- cops, thugs, looting, Obama,& more

[djAdvocate]

Aug 26, 2014 23:15:07 GMT -5 Green Eyed Lady said:

That was very nice of you.  Thank you.  I enjoy our debates.  You are a gentleman even when you don't agree.

yw.  you earned it.

[Deleted]

Aug 26, 2014 23:06:39 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Aug 26, 2014 18:37:38 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

That question probably should have it's own thread as generally as it's asked.

agreed.  so should your Venn Diagram. 

BUT.... as it relates to this specific topic of this specific thread... Some people believe that killing is wrong (immoral) for ANY reason... even self defense. The law states specifically that killing is legal in self defense or (in some states) as punishment for murder.

there is the rub.  SOME people.  so, clearly, SOME people think that killing is RIGHT under some circumstances, right?

so, that would mean that the law is a reflection of the moral positions of SOME people.  personally, i think that is interesting.  don't you?

Morality is semi-fluid... The law is fixed and specific.

[djAdvocate]

Aug 27, 2014 0:09:51 GMT -5 @richardintn said:

Aug 26, 2014 23:06:39 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

there is the rub.  SOME people.  so, clearly, SOME people think that killing is RIGHT under some circumstances, right?

so, that would mean that the law is a reflection of the moral positions of SOME people.  personally, i think that is interesting.  don't you?

Morality is semi-fluid... The law is fixed and specific.

i can see that perspective, but i think both are fairly "mushy".  the law is an attempt to codify morality.  it is best when it is only codifying public morality: that which has a real victim who has not consented to having his person or property harmed.  what we end up debating about quite a bit is private morality, which is largely between consenting adults.  people like me will argue that is nobodies business but ours.  but people like Pat Robertson fervently disagree, and want to make all sorts of things illegal that are none of his business (imo), and yet he seems to have little problem with crimes that have real victims (like discrimination).

i would hope that the law would change with changing social mores, but i fear that you are largely right- it only does so with a lot of kicking and screaming.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Aug 26, 2014 21:16:30 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Aug 26, 2014 16:11:46 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

I'm sick and tired of the "process".  Have you ever benefited from the "process" or do they just decide, for whatever reason, you're no longer needed and let you go?  It's time for AT WILL, NON-UNION public servants.  This person has expressed open, vicious contempt for his employer- THE PEOPLE.  Tell me where you can do that and stick around for some "process"?

Yep- the cops have a good union.  Funny a large lot of them are very right wing, but don't mess with their union.

If I said some shit like that on camera with a work uniform on or, really even if a higher up saw it, it would be termination on the spot.

But that last part was a firing level offense- wishing some terrorist would explode a bomb and kill people that are expressing their views, in their neighborhood, on their streets.  Nobody like that can remain in a public safety position.  The public is not 'the enemy', it is the boss. 

Agreed.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Aug 26, 2014 23:07:33 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Aug 26, 2014 21:41:04 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Who thinks killing is wrong in self-defense?

Jesus.  Gandhi.

next?

Neither expressed this view.  If they believed it, you must be a time-traveling mind reader.

In Gandhi's case, he brilliantly employed civil disobedience without the use of force as a coercive force-- a more effective tactic, that's all it was.  When he promoted non-violence as a means of getting what the Indian people wanted, he wasn't talking about an individual's right to defend themselves and other innocents against a violent attack.  


"I do believe that where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence I would advise violence," Gandhi in "Doctrine of the Sword".

"...When my eldest son asked me what he should have done, had he been present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908, whether he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he should have used his physical force which he could and wanted to use, and defended me, I told him that it was his duty to defend me even by using violence."

Gandhi advocated training in arms to defend liberty- "...Hence also do I advocate training in arms for those who believe in the method of violence. I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honor than that she should in a cowardly manner become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonor. - Doctrine of the Sword.

Gandhi also explains that someone who cannot use violence to defend themselves or their family is a helpless coward and a "worm."

In his own words from the text Between Cowardice And Violence

...He who cannot protect himself or his nearest and dearest or their honour by non-violently facing death may and ought to do so by violently dealing with the oppressor. He who can do neither of the two is a burden. He has no business to be the head of a family. He must either hide himself, or must rest content to live for ever in helplessness and be prepared to crawl like a worm at the bidding of a bully ...

[When violence] is offered in self-defence or for the defence of the defenceless, it is an act of bravery far better than cowardly submission.

Next, indeed.  

[mmhmm]

Discussion of Ghandi is one thing as he is not a religious figure. Jesus Christ is a religious figure. Direct discussion of religion does not belong in the Current Events forum, so don't do it. I have moved a post to the Religious Discussions forum. More of the same thing will simply be deleted.

mmhmm, Administrator

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Aug 27, 2014 10:43:19 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Discussion of Ghandi is one thing as he is not a religious figure. Jesus Christ is a religious figure. Direct discussion of religion does not belong in the politics forum, so don't do it. I have moved a post to the Religious Discussions forum. More of the same thing will simply be deleted.

mmhmm, Politics Moderator

I presume DJ will delete Jesus from his post then, and/or you will move it?  If DJ can express a theological opinion, but it cannot be discussed- whether to agree, or rebut in any way, then it's got to go.  Fair is fair.

[djAdvocate]

Aug 27, 2014 10:54:57 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Aug 27, 2014 10:43:19 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Discussion of Ghandi is one thing as he is not a religious figure. Jesus Christ is a religious figure. Direct discussion of religion does not belong in the politics forum, so don't do it. I have moved a post to the Religious Discussions forum. More of the same thing will simply be deleted.

mmhmm, Politics Moderator

I presume DJ will delete Jesus from his post then, and/or you will move it?  If DJ can express a theological opinion, but it cannot be discussed- whether to agree, or rebut in any way, then it's got to go.  Fair is fair.

i wasn't expressing theology.  i was expressing important historical figures who eschewed violence as a tactic.

edit: but whatever.  i have no problem with self defense.  i just think that "defense" is a poor excuse for what happens 99% of the time.

[mmhmm]

Aug 27, 2014 11:37:36 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Aug 27, 2014 10:54:57 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

I presume DJ will delete Jesus from his post then, and/or you will move it?  If DJ can express a theological opinion, but it cannot be discussed- whether to agree, or rebut in any way, then it's got to go.  Fair is fair.

i wasn't expressing theology.  i was expressing important historical figures who eschewed violence as a tactic.

edit: but whatever.  i have no problem with self defense.  i just think that "defense" is a poor excuse for what happens 99% of the time.

Neither did your post preach or quote scripture, dj.  That isn't allowed in other than Religious Discussions. Paul knows this very well as we've had this conversation many times before.

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Aug 27, 2014 11:41:37 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Aug 27, 2014 11:37:36 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i wasn't expressing theology.  i was expressing important historical figures who eschewed violence as a tactic.

edit: but whatever.  i have no problem with self defense.  i just think that "defense" is a poor excuse for what happens 99% of the time.

Neither did your post preach or quote scripture, dj.  That isn't allowed in other than Religious Discussions. Paul knows this very well as we've had this conversation many times before.

The theological opinion was that Jesus Christ advocated pacifism.  Do you deny that was the opinion you expressed in response to EVT1's question?

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Just remember this:

[mmhmm]

Aug 27, 2014 11:47:25 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Aug 27, 2014 11:41:37 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Neither did your post preach or quote scripture, dj.  That isn't allowed in other than Religious Discussions. Paul knows this very well as we've had this conversation many times before.

The theological opinion was that Jesus Christ advocated pacifism.  Do you deny that was the opinion you expressed in response to EVT1's question?

It's irrelevant, paul. DJ did not quote scripture and dj did not proselytize. Your post did. - mmhmm, Administrator

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

A photo montage of the "gentle giant" for your files:

[Sam_2.0]

Paul - that top photo isn't Michael Brown. It went all around FB last week and was quickly pointed out it was some other kid. Also the same photo that some MO cop shared & earned him some leave time from work.

[Tennesseer]

AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP:  Just curious-what is your take on the following quote:  

"Whites commit crimes but blacks are criminals.”

[djAdvocate]

Aug 27, 2014 11:47:25 GMT -5 AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP said:

Aug 27, 2014 11:41:37 GMT -5 mmhmm said:

Neither did your post preach or quote scripture, dj.  That isn't allowed in other than Religious Discussions. Paul knows this very well as we've had this conversation many times before.

The theological opinion was that Jesus Christ advocated pacifism.  Do you deny that was the opinion you expressed in response to EVT1's question?

i think he kinda did, but i realize that i can't really support that without violating TAC.

[djAdvocate]

oh, and flipping the bird means nothing.  you could easily make a montage of ME that was equally damning.  maybe worse.

[zibazinski]

I wanna talk about Siri and the mob!!

[Tennesseer]

Aug 27, 2014 16:26:50 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

oh, and flipping the bird means nothing.  you could easily make a montage of ME that was equally damning.  maybe worse.

I am SHOCKED. SHOCKED I say. Seeing some pictures of someone giving the finger.

[djAdvocate]

Aug 27, 2014 16:48:09 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Aug 27, 2014 16:26:50 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

oh, and flipping the bird means nothing.  you could easily make a montage of ME that was equally damning.  maybe worse.

I am SHOCKED. SHOCKED I say. Seeing some pictures of someone giving the finger.

seriously.  i like how that gang symbol looks like some cross between "OK" and jerking.  do they realize how stupid they look?

[EVT1]

Aug 27, 2014 15:02:41 GMT -5 Sam_2.0 said:

Paul - that top photo isn't Michael Brown. It went all around FB last week and was quickly pointed out it was some other kid. Also the same photo that some MO cop shared & earned him some leave time from work.

Yep- it was a photo of a murder suspect and the cop might not have a job anymore.  On that note any photo PBP posted is suspect as it probable came from 'one of those' websites. 

[EVT1]

Damn- I think that is 4 different people- all look the same to PBP I guess

[Value Buy]

I see the Brown family has been out moneyed in donations by the policeman, two to one so far.

Some here will claim it shows how racist the country is.

Some here will claim it shows how America can sort the truth out of the fifty shades of gray.

[EVT1]

Aug 27, 2014 22:24:34 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

I see the Brown family has been out moneyed in donations by the policeman, two to one so far.

Some here will claim it shows how racist the country is.

Some here will claim it shows how America can sort the truth out of the fifty shades of gray.

I claim it shows how racist the country is. Have to be a fucking moron to think otherwise.

[Value Buy]

Aug 27, 2014 22:38:27 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Aug 27, 2014 22:24:34 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

I see the Brown family has been out moneyed in donations by the policeman, two to one so far.

Some here will claim it shows how racist the country is.

Some here will claim it shows how America can sort the truth out of the fifty shades of gray.

I claim it shows how racist the country is. Have to be a fucking moron to think otherwise.

Not necessarily true.

Black people are less likely able to donate money due to financial situations, plus it only takes ten or twenty thousand to do a really fancy funeral.

White liberals do not do it, because they expect someone else to supply the funds.

The white cop, now he is in a pickle.

The white community knows his lawyers are going to cost him a million dollars minimum.

And that is probably on the first court case.

After that court case, regardless of the outcome, comes the personal case by the parents against him.

He needs 3 million minimum for attorney fees.

[mmhmm]

I agree with most of what you say, Value Buy. Your third statement, however, isn't true. I know liberals who donate freely, just as I know conservatives who don't - and vice versa. If folks could just refrain from pointing the finger at what they consider the "other side" and speak to issues based on fact, not bias, seems to me we'd all be better off.

[Deleted]

Facts? What are these "facts" you speak of? Very few people want facts. Speculation is much more satisfying to most people.

[Value Buy]

Aug 27, 2014 22:38:27 GMT -5 EVT1 said:

Aug 27, 2014 22:24:34 GMT -5 Value Buy said:

I see the Brown family has been out moneyed in donations by the policeman, two to one so far.

Some here will claim it shows how racist the country is.

Some here will claim it shows how America can sort the truth out of the fifty shades of gray.

I claim it shows how racist the country is. Have to be a fucking moron to think otherwise.

Evidently I am a fucking moron

according to EVT1

[Tennesseer]

To add to paul's collection of gangsta' sign pictures:

[ArchietheDragon]