Org Mobile Site
Thread: Don Sterling...
Because we should really tolerate racism.
I thought corporations always got it right!
Originally Posted by Tiaexz:
Because we should really tolerate racism.
Yes - you must be tolerant of racism if you disagree with the NBA's handling and the media's coverage of this event Because we should really tolerate racism.
Originally Posted by Tiaexz:
Because we should really tolerate racism.
Yes, you really should.Because we should really tolerate racism.
Democracy, you know.
You might not support their view, but you should be willing to die for their right to state it. You propose a more updated version of democracy? If so, why?
A lot of appeals to democracy are inherently anti racist:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal"
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal"
The day when a man cannot say whatever the hell he wants in the privacy of his own goddamn bedroom is indeed a sad day. Not for him, he's loaded, he won't care either way. For the rest of us. The conformity nazis have struck again, yet the sheep are clamoring for more.
Gah.
Gah.
Originally Posted by :
The day when a man cannot say whatever the hell he wants in the privacy of his own goddamn bedroom is indeed a sad day. Not for him, he's loaded, he won't care either way. For the rest of us. The conformity nazis have struck again, yet the sheep are clamoring for more.
Yes the privacy of his goddamn bedroom, while on the phone to another person.The day when a man cannot say whatever the hell he wants in the privacy of his own goddamn bedroom is indeed a sad day. Not for him, he's loaded, he won't care either way. For the rest of us. The conformity nazis have struck again, yet the sheep are clamoring for more.
Personally I would be more concerned exactly how the audio was recorded. If it was the person on the other end who recorded it, for whatever end, then Sterling's an idiot witha bad sense of who to trust. If his phone line was being tapped by someone other than the two people, that's illegal and an invasion of privacy. Either way Sterling's still an idiot.
Equal rights =/= equal outcome
Racism is not a right, nor is it protected by democratic ideals. It is thoroughly disputed with the ideas that 1 person 1 vote, right to pursue happiness (not pleasure), that the rights are regardless of race or creed.
So an appeal to democracy to protect the rights of a bigot are not there. Freedom of speech is not freedom of responsibility.
Racism is not a right, nor is it protected by democratic ideals. It is thoroughly disputed with the ideas that 1 person 1 vote, right to pursue happiness (not pleasure), that the rights are regardless of race or creed.
So an appeal to democracy to protect the rights of a bigot are not there. Freedom of speech is not freedom of responsibility.
Originally Posted by Papewaio:
Equal rights =/= equal outcome
Racism is not a right, nor is it protected by democratic ideals. It is thoroughly disputed with the ideas that 1 person 1 vote, right to pursue happiness (not pleasure), that the rights are regardless of race or creed.
So an appeal to democracy to protect the rights of a bigot are not there. Freedom of speech is not freedom of responsibility.
So if science deem, say, whites to be sub-par compared to blacks when it comes to running... The whites should have an equal opportunity to get running medals?Equal rights =/= equal outcome
Racism is not a right, nor is it protected by democratic ideals. It is thoroughly disputed with the ideas that 1 person 1 vote, right to pursue happiness (not pleasure), that the rights are regardless of race or creed.
So an appeal to democracy to protect the rights of a bigot are not there. Freedom of speech is not freedom of responsibility.
As to the bolded part... Can one be racist if one can show that black people in fact seem to run faster compared to whites? I don't see the "responsibility" problem there?
Is it OK to be racist, as long as you point to scientific data?
For me, personally, it would be the utmost logical brain leap to think the human races have developed identically, given evolution and the different conditions we have had.
Just like we changed colour of skin, logic dictates that our brains might not exactly have gone in the identical same direction, no?
Originally Posted by rvg:
The day when a man cannot say whatever the hell he wants in the privacy of his own goddamn bedroom is indeed a sad day. Not for him, he's loaded, he won't care either way. For the rest of us. The conformity nazis have struck again, yet the sheep are clamoring for more.
Gah.
If I call my boss a whore, and someone from work hears me, I can expect to get fired no matter where it was said.The day when a man cannot say whatever the hell he wants in the privacy of his own goddamn bedroom is indeed a sad day. Not for him, he's loaded, he won't care either way. For the rest of us. The conformity nazis have struck again, yet the sheep are clamoring for more.
Gah.
I can't see how a racist tirade should be any different.
Freedom of speech is meaningless if our words don't have consequences. That someone wants to be able to say whatever they want without any consequences is just proof of them being crybabies.
LOL @ the appeal to "democracy" - the Greek version with the slaves? Or one of the other iterations where there's lip service given to it but the true power always rests with a select few?
USA is not a Democracy,it's a Republic.
As for this old white fool - he by owning a team has agreed to abide by and be held to the code of conduct the NBA have in place,as do most all sporting codes and other associations.
So his "rights" he allowed to be denigrated when he wanted to make the $$ and be in the NBA as an owner.
USA is not a Democracy,it's a Republic.
As for this old white fool - he by owning a team has agreed to abide by and be held to the code of conduct the NBA have in place,as do most all sporting codes and other associations.
So his "rights" he allowed to be denigrated when he wanted to make the $$ and be in the NBA as an owner.
Originally Posted by Papewaio:
A lot of appeals to democracy are inherently anti racist:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal"
All men created equal: Sure. A lot of appeals to democracy are inherently anti racist:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal"
All men have the same intellectual capacity: A big no-no.
All men have the same physical capacity: A big no-no.
I think they meant it in a methodological way - no? I for one am not on par with, say, Zlatan, nor Messi or Ronaldo - when it comes to soccer.
What I mean with that is that physically handicapped children obviously have the same rights to reach their physical limits when, say, going to school and having PE class...
Retarded children don't have the same rights to go for A-grades (in fact it would be horrible to expect it of them, or judge them by it!!). They DO however still have the right to reach THEIR full capacity, just like any other child.
It is not saying that anyone is as good as any other. They just have the right to reach THEIR limit, they are not however in their right to get an Olympic medal. Nor the Nobel Prize.
As to how the dice are rolled in what sub groups of humanitys DNA code... It's either the will of some God, if you are into that.
Alternatively a matter of science.
Democracy should not shut science up - for the well being of you know... Society?
*not to mention science at large*
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV:
you should be willing to die for their right to state it
What if I'm not?you should be willing to die for their right to state it
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV:
Yes, you really should.
Democracy, you know.
You might not support their view, but you should be willing to die for their right to state it. You propose a more updated version of democracy? If so, why?
He doesn't state something, he's imposing it on others. It's a classic "freedom to oppress", to claim freedom of speech. Excluding the racism, he's basically doing the abusive husband thing ("I don't want you to see those friends anymore"). That's usually private, but it's not taken kindly normally. Yes, you really should.
Democracy, you know.
You might not support their view, but you should be willing to die for their right to state it. You propose a more updated version of democracy? If so, why?
Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube:
Funny, but not as funny as Cliven Bundy's racist tirade. Old white racists are really living it up this month.
In his case, I think he even sees himself as a good guy. Funny, but not as funny as Cliven Bundy's racist tirade. Old white racists are really living it up this month.
It doesn't require that much. First, your position in life is always depending on yourself and your attitude. So blacks having it hard is because of a an evil loser attitude that's been spread around. Second, slavery is like forced working for housing and food and people do that all the time and the work is about the same as farmers has been doing so it's not extremely hard. Give them something to do and that loser attitude will disappear and things will be better.
Eat those lies and it's basically a form of welfare.
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV:
Yes, you really should.
Democracy, you know.
You might not support their view, but you should be willing to die for their right to state it. You propose a more updated version of democracy? If so, why?
I don't think you really get the concept of freedom of speech. It doesn't mean you can say whatever, wherever, whenever and to whomever you want without consequence. The government is not locking him up and no criminal charges have been even considered. There you go. No violation of his rights.Yes, you really should.
Democracy, you know.
You might not support their view, but you should be willing to die for their right to state it. You propose a more updated version of democracy? If so, why?
Originally Posted by Goofball:
I don't think you really get the concept of freedom of speech. It doesn't mean you can say whatever, wherever, whenever and to whomever you want without consequence. The government is not locking him up and no criminal charges have been even considered. There you go. No violation of his rights.
Freedom of speech is not freedom from the consequences thereof -- it only means that the government cannot restrict your right to cram your own foot in your mouth up to the ankle.I don't think you really get the concept of freedom of speech. It doesn't mean you can say whatever, wherever, whenever and to whomever you want without consequence. The government is not locking him up and no criminal charges have been even considered. There you go. No violation of his rights.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO