An example of "tolerance"

[lordbt]

You previously asserted that the fear we are currently talking about is rational. Now you are saying 'It doesn't matter! Who cares whether it's rational or visceral.' I can thank-you for this much at least: conceding the point.

Saying a particular point is moot or of no importance is not the same thing as conceding it.

 

[brindisi]

You previously asserted that the fear we are currently talking about is rational. Now you are saying 'It doesn't matter! Who cares whether it's rational or visceral.' I can thank-you for this much at least: conceding the point.

The fear is rational, but if it was not and was primal instead, that would have abolutely no practical effect on whether folks still feel it or not, nor on how they react to it. None.

If that is your point, then I concede it, but it hasn't seemed to be.

 

[Nathan Poe]

We would do that sort of thing here, but we cant. That would be racist, dont you know. And we cant have racial profiling, that would be wrong, somehow. Anyway, we are both saying there is something to fear: I am narrowing it down to the obvious threat--radical muslims. You want to pretend it is someone/anyone else.

But it is someone else -- people who look like "radical Muslims."

So all that means is that the terrorists start dressing up in nice suits before they board the planes -- and slip past you completely undetected.

 

[DaisyDay]

Sure, someone who runs a restaurant will certainly have a great deal more to fear from roaches than you or I.

Not necessarily. A person living in Manhattan has more cause to fear roaches (which may contribute to asthma), than a restaurateur in Fairbanks.

I single out muslims as something to be feared in a particular situations. I dont fear muslims in all situations. I dont fear white males boarding my plane, because white males arent blowing them up. I did, however, fear white (all) males when I would take my young children to public places. But that fear would vanish if I was by myself since no one was looking to kidnap me.

Muslims come in white, you should know.

 

[BoltNut]

You just blew my mind, man.

Just thought I needed to throw something in to lighten it up a bit.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

The fear is rational, but if it was not and was primal instead, that would have abolutely no practical effect on whether folks still feel it or not, nor on how they react to it. None.

If that is your point, then I concede it, but it hasn't seemed to be.

Then you have conceded it. I never denied that folks still feel it, regardless of whether it is rational or not. I denied that it is itself rational.

 

[brindisi]

Then you have conceded it. I never denied that folks still feel it, regardless of whether it is rational or not. I denied that it is itself rational.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

We would do that sort of thing here, but we cant. That would be racist, dont you know. And we cant have racial profiling, that would be wrong, somehow. Anyway, we are both saying there is something to fear: I am narrowing it down to the obvious threat--radical muslims. You want to pretend it is someone/anyone else.

Another strawman, lordbt? You must deluding yourself if you think that your visceral fears are that accurate and precise that with them you are capable of narrowing down exactly who is and who isn't a tangible threat on an aeroplane solely on the basis of something as malleable and superficial as their outward appearance. Are terrorists always going to wear 'Muslim garb' so that your inerrant visceral reactions will be able to identify the man next to you as a potential threat? Did the 9/11 hijackers wear Muslim garb? What about the recent underwear bomber? Are you going to be suspicious of Muslims who wear underwear now? Of course the underwear bomber was black. Are you now going to fear black people at airports and claim that it is more than visceral to do so? Profiling people on the basis of them wearing 'Muslim garb', or on the basis of race, is about the dumbest security measure I have ever heard of. It's like weaving a net out of 3-inch mesh and hoping that the fish you want to catch are no smaller than 3 inches.

 

[lordbt]

No straw man at all. I say when it comes to air travel, fear of muslims is warranted and rational. You say its not.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

No straw man at all.

"You want to pretend it is someone/anyone else." = strawman.

I say when it comes to air travel, fear of muslims is warranted and rational. You say its not.

We aren't merely talking of a fear of Muslims here. We are talking about Juan's fear of people dressed in Muslim garb. A very specific fear reaction to someone's outward appearance. You say that it is more than a visceral fear reaction, but can't seem to justify why it would be anything more than just that.

 

[lordbt]

"You want to pretend it is someone/anyone else." = strawman.

Then you see muslims as a threat then.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Then you see muslims as a threat then.

I see terrorists as a threat, be they Muslim or otherwise.

 

[lordbt]

I see terrorists as a threat, be they Muslim or otherwise.

And since the only terrorists trying to blow planes out of the sky are muslims, muslims are the threat and it is rational to fear them.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

And since the only terrorists trying to blow planes out of the sky are muslims, muslims are the threat and it is rational to fear them.

1. This is irrelevant to the topic at hand: Juan's fear reaction to people dressed in Muslim garb. You're trying to shift the goal-posts.
2. 'Muslims are the threat, and it is rational to fear them' is about as simple-minded as it gets. Muslims are also the victims of terrorism. Are you going to regard victims simultaneously as threats?
3. No, Muslims are not the threat. Once again, you reveal your fondness for statements with undertones of bigotry. The threat is terrorism. If the threat were Islam itself then airline security would be making sure no Muslims ever manage to fly on an aircraft. They're the threat, and threats aren't allowed to fly afterall. We stop them. Because the threat is terrorism, not Islam, we make sure no terrorists manage to get on a plane.
4. If we regarded Muslims as 'the' threat, then we'd be doing the dumb thing and making a net with a three inch mesh, hoping that none of the fish we want to catch are smaller than three inches.

 

[lordbt]

1. This is irrelevant to the topic at hand: Juan's fear reaction to people dressed in Muslim garb. You're trying to shift the goal-posts.

Muslims are the threat no matter how hard you try to pretend they are not. Muslim garb is simply one means of identifying those who might be part of that threat.

2. 'Muslims are the threat, and it is rational to fear them' is about as simple-minded as it gets. Muslims are also the victims of terrorism. Are you going to regard victims simultaneously as threats?

Completely irrelevant.

3. No, Muslims are not the threat. Once again, you reveal your fondness for statements with undertones of bigotry. The threat is terrorism. If the threat were Islam itself then airline security would be making sure no Muslims ever manage to fly on an aircraft. They're the threat, and threats aren't allowed to fly afterall. We stop them. Because the threat is terrorism, not Islam, we make sure no terrorists manage to get on a plane.

But we arent allowed to do that, and you know it.

4. If we regarded Muslims as 'the' threat, then we'd be doing the dumb thing and making a net with a three inch mesh, hoping that none of the fish we want to catch are smaller than three inches.

I will worry about that when muslims stop trying to blow up aircraft.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Muslims are the threat no matter how hard you try to pretend they are not. Muslim garb is simply one means of identifying those who might be part of that threat.

Bare insistence won't help prove that 'Muslims are the threat'. Unfortunately for you bare insistence is all that you have left. If Muslim garb is one means of identifying those who might be part of that threat, what is another? Their skin colour? Their eye colour?

Completely irrelevant.

To someone who doesn't want to see the bigger picture, yes, I'm sure they'd dismiss it as irrelevant. How else could they justify such narrow-mindedness?

But we arent allowed to do that, and you know it.

Of course we don't, because it would be irrational and dumb for security procedures to be run in this manner.

I will worry about that when muslims stop trying to blow up aircraft.

Ah, so you'll worry about that after your net fails due to a lack of foresight.

 

[Nathan Poe]

And since the only terrorists trying to blow planes out of the sky are muslims, muslims are the threat and it is rational to fear them.

All Muslims or just the ones trying to blow planes out of the sky?

Or do you not make that distinction?

 

[lordbt]

Bare insistence won't help prove that 'Muslims are the threat'. Unfortunately for you bare insistence is all that you have left. If Muslim garb is one means of identifying those who might be part of that threat, what is another? Their skin colour? Their eye colour?

Muslims are the ones threatening aircraft. That may be 'bare insistence' but it also happens to be fact as well.

To someone who doesn't want to see the bigger picture, yes, I'm sure they'd dismiss it as irrelevant. How else could they justify such narrow-mindedness?

Sorry to disappoint you, but just because you make an assertion does not make that assertion relevant. And your previous assertion was, and is, irrelevant.

Of course we don't, because it would be irrational and dumb for security procedures to be run in this manner.

You are the one who put that into evidence here, not me.

Ah, so you'll worry about that after your net fails due to a lack of foresight.

I'll stop worrying about muslims blowing up my plane when muslims stop trying to blow up planes.

 

[lordbt]

All Muslims or just the ones trying to blow planes out of the sky?

Or do you not make that distinction?

Would you have known what this guy was up to?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Would you have known what this guy was up to?

So -- All Muslims or just the ones trying to blow planes out of the sky?

Or do you not make that distinction?