Look at what this sheriff had to say...

[Snark]

Oh, so people care more about real black people being killed by cops then they do hypothetical examples?

I can see that. If I'm honest, I'm not that outraged about hypothetical people being shot either.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

Oh, so people care more about real black people being killed by cops then they do hypothetical examples?

I can see that. If I'm honest, I'm not that outraged about hypothetical people being shot either.

So's law FTW.

No one said anything about hypothetical. I do mean actual white men getting killed by police, but I wasn't pointing to one specific case. "in general" ≠ "hypothetical".

 

[Snark]

Maybe this is a cultural difference (UK vs US). Because I certainly remember a lot of fuss when Harry Stanley and Jean Charles de Menesez were killed over here. Neither of them were black.

If it helps, I condemn the police shooting people in cold blood in all circumstances, regardless of the victim's race.

Perhaps the Sheriff in the OP should spend a bit more time persuading his co-workers not to act as judge, jury and executioner. Motes and beams.

 

[TheDag]

Her logic is crap. Watch and learn.

She notes that black women have abortions. She also notes that black people protest black deaths by cops. She says this is hypocritical, because the people protesting killings by cops don't also protest black abortions.

However, this would only be an example of hypocrisy if those black protestors also were not in favor of abortion! And we, nor she, have no way of knowing if that's the case!

She wades in, assuming that everyone thinks like her - ie, abortion is bad - and so their failure to protest abortion makes them hypocrites. But, if they don't, in fact, oppose abortion, there is no hypocrisy on their part - simply a disagreement in values.

And we, nor she, have no way of knowing what their position on abortions is.

Now, she chooses to make this solely about one racial group. My reminder to her about white servicemen deaths and white abortions highlights this - her comments are racially motivated.

Your lesson is over.

my lesson based on lack of understanding by you. Only a clown would call this racially motivated especially after it has been explained why it has the focus.

Of course her view is based on her view that abortion is wrong and the sherriffs view that abortion is wrong. Thats understandable. That is the flaw in her view. To jump to false conclusions like you have is your flaw.

Of course that still does not change the fact you made up your own version of her logic rather than the logic she actually used.

Yes I am aware of what a dag is. It has nothing to do with why I was given that nickname.

 

[TheDag]

I'm sorry but I'm never sarcastic, I intended to use the scratching head emoticon, I'm sincerely at a loss, you however, are sarcastic.



Since you are educated and can understand why, would you be kind enough to answer my question, instead of just responding with sarcasm.


One has to ask, why are you choosing to deliberately ignore my question.

So it has been explained several times why it has the focus it does and you are still at a loss as to why? Perhaps you should try reading all the posts in the thread rather than skipping over large chunks. I assume that is what you have done since you don't know the reason why. The only other option is you are choosing to be dishonest and pretending it has not been answered. I choose to believe the best about people so I assume you just didn't read large chunks of this thread.

Perhaps you could point out the post number of the question you want answered. The only one I can remember is Why are blacks the subject of this thread? That has been answered several times and if one can not be bothered reading the answer it certainly does not justify endlessly repeating it. Note two people who disagree with preachers wifes views have answered it. Preachers wife has answered it as well as saying yes that is exactly it when another person answered the question.

 

[TheDag]

To use a non-facetious example, what you're doing is like claiming that anyone who is against abortion has to be an absolute pacifist for their position to be respectable. So those who protest abortion clinics but not military recruitment offices are hypocrites. Are you willing to go down that hardline road on this?

No that is not the same. In abortion the unborn does not have a choice. People have a choice as to if they go into a recruitment office and sign up.

*please note I am not making any comment on if abortion is right or wrong in this post.

Oh, so people care more about real black people being killed by cops then they do hypothetical examples?

I can see that. If I'm honest, I'm not that outraged about hypothetical people being shot either.

further dishonesty just because you disagree with the OP! If you ook you can see plenty of examples of white men being killed by cops and they do not get the same condemnation and same protests or riots. With all the talk about Brown being shot it seems people missed that a black cop shot a white guy and there was one comment on CF about the white guy being shot with no condemnation for racist behaviour while people were calling Wilson racist for shooting Brown. As preachers wife said she was not speaking about a specific case but that does not mean it is a hypothetical situation. Once again we see a failure of logic.

 

[TheDag]

A comment about the [lack of] logic in the OP is more than on point for a comment discussing the logic laid out in the OP. If you don't want to talk about the failings of the argument in the OP, that's fine, but it is hardly off topic.

Except you were not responding to the flaws in logic in the OP so you are being dishonest. One poster pointed out why this thread was about black people which is very clear and easy to understand why. You took issue with that post with the response I quoted. I did explain this but of course you chose to leave that explanation out of the quote of my post.

 

[Loudmouth]

No that is not the same. In abortion the unborn does not have a choice. People have a choice as to if they go into a recruitment office and sign up.

*please note I am not making any comment on if abortion is right or wrong in this post.


further dishonesty just because you disagree with the OP! If you ook you can see plenty of examples of white men being killed by cops and they do not get the same condemnation and same protests or riots. With all the talk about Brown being shot it seems people missed that a black cop shot a white guy and there was one comment on CF about the white guy being shot with no condemnation for racist behaviour while people were calling Wilson racist for shooting Brown. As preachers wife said she was not speaking about a specific case but that does not mean it is a hypothetical situation. Once again we see a failure of logic.

There are people alive today who can remember a police force that enforced segregation, who looked the other way when lynch mobs killed black activists. You are forgetting the historical context of police and minorities.

 

[humbleServant77]

There are people alive today who can remember a police force that enforced segregation, who looked the other way when lynch mobs killed black activists. You are forgetting the historical context of police and minorities.

A context which is still alive and well. Toned down a bit, not as over the top, but finally having the light of day expose its ugliness for what it is.

 

[Euler]

my lesson based on lack of understanding by you. Only a clown would call this racially motivated especially after it has been explained why it has the focus.

Of course her view is based on her view that abortion is wrong and the sherriffs view that abortion is wrong. Thats understandable. That is the flaw in her view. To jump to false conclusions like you have is your flaw.

Of course that still does not change the fact you made up your own version of her logic rather than the logic she actually used.

Yes I am aware of what a dag is. It has nothing to do with why I was given that nickname.

Errr, no. I pointed out the flaw in her logic from the outset. In her zeal to stereotype black people as hypocrites, she made a faulty assumption, which you appear to recognize.

And, you decided to name yourself after 'a small ball of faeces and hair'??

Okaaaaaay................

 

[Loudmouth]

A context which is still alive and well. Toned down a bit, not as over the top, but finally having the light of day expose its ugliness for what it is.

At the same time, there are white police officers who are strongly in favor of protecting minorities from discrimination. What our history has done is make people more sensitive to the interplay of policing and racial discrimination.

 

[Euler]

Oh please. No one is anti-black here.

I'm just anti-hypocrital protestors. It's not my fault the majority of them happen to be black.

But the point that seems not to be able to get into your head is this -

You have no way of being able to assess them as "hypocritical"!

Someone is guilty of hypocrisy if they act in opposition to their stated position. If, for example, I was a politician who stood on a platform of conservative family values and then was later found to be involved in a series of adulterous affairs, I could quite accurately be described as a hypocrite. Because what I say I stand for wasn't matched by my actions. (Yeah, I know, that never happens!)

So, those people protesting black deaths by cops could only be described as "hypocritical" in your instance, if it could be shown that they also feel that abortion is wrong!

You have no way of knowing what their attitudes about abortion are! So how can you describe them as hypocrites?

 

[PreachersWife2004]

Errr, no. I pointed out the flaw in her logic from the outset. In her zeal to stereotype black people as hypocrites, she made a faulty assumption, which you appear to recognize. And, you decided to name yourself after 'a small ball of faeces and hair'?? Okaaaaaay................

That's uncalled for. Address the topic, not the poster.

 

[Euler]

That's uncalled for. Address the topic, not the poster.

I did. The "dag" thing was just an aside, which he was happy to address as well.

So, how about you address MY post then.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

I did. The "dag" thing was just an aside, which he was happy to address as well.

I can't speak that he was "happy" about it, but the whole "Balls" portion is uncalled for. It's rude. It's vulgar. If I were you, I'd edit it out and forget about it.

So, how about you address MY post then.

I've said all I wish to say to you. You're combative, which doesn't make for good debate. There's at least three other people in this thread who disagree with me but who managed to be respectful about it, and didn't put words in my mouth. THOSE are the people I'll stick to responding to in this thread.

 

[Euler]

I can't speak that he was "happy" about it, but the whole "Balls" portion is uncalled for. It's rude. It's vulgar. If I were you, I'd edit it out and forget about it.

Ummm......please go to your preferred dictionary. You will find that a "dag" is pretty much defined as I posted. I simply wanted to know why he would describe himself as such.

I've said all I wish to say to you. You're combative, which doesn't make for good debate. There's at least three other people in this thread who disagree with me but who managed to be respectful about it, and didn't put words in my mouth. THOSE are the people I'll stick to responding to in this thread.

Translation: You have accurately pointed out the flaw in my argument and my racial stereotyping has been well exposed, so I have nowhere else to go.

 

[Euler]

By the way, I'd like you to point out what the "combative" quality was in that last post? I made a series of logical statements, followed by a conclusion. Yes, it disagrees with your own. How is that "combative"? And what words have I put into your mouth?

 

[PreachersWife2004]

By the way, I'd like you to point out what the "combative" quality was in that last post? I made a series of logical statements, followed by a conclusion. Yes, it disagrees with your own. How is that "combative"? And what words have I put into your mouth?

You've continually put words in my mouth and called me racist. You kept inserting logic that you claimed I was using when I wasn't.

Ultimately, your argument (aside from the insults) boils down to "abortion isn't wrong so they aren't hypocrites and you're racist".

I still disagree with your premise, but I don't like to make a habit of banging my head on brick walls.

So have a nice day.

 

[Euler]

You've continually put words in my mouth

Yet you can't name one.

and called me racist.

Show me where I've called you racist. I've said that your are racially stereotyping, but please show me where I've called you a racist. You wouldn't be putting words in my mouth, would you?

You kept inserting logic that you claimed I was using when I wasn't.

You've said those black people are hypocrites because they are not protesting black abortions.

1. Unless you follow each of them in their daily lives, you have no way of knowing if they protest abortions or not.

2. You have no way of knowing what their individual attitudes about abortions are. So you have no basis for determining them as "hypocrites".

Ultimately, your argument (aside from the insults) boils down to "abortion isn't wrong so they aren't hypocrites and you're racist".

No, my argument is that, unless you know what the attitudes of those people are towards abortion, you can't label them, as a group or as individuals, as hypocrites.

But thanks once again for putting those words in my mouth.

Do you know what 'projection' is?

I still disagree with your premise, but I don't like to make a habit of banging my head on brick walls.

You don't appear to know what my premise is. The only voice you are hearing appears to be your own.

So have a nice day.

Always do.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

These posts pretty well sum up what I was saying about your argument.

So. Now that I've answered that, let's move on.

Oh, I know the point of the thread!

It was to loosely stitch together a hateful, racist, mean, bigoted, prejudiced stereotype of a group of people, while at the same time pushing your minority view barrow concerning the appropriateness of abortion - and all of it completely logic-free!

Yes, they need to learn their "place", right?

Uh, yeah.

Sure.

Her logic is crap. Watch and learn.

She notes that black women have abortions. She also notes that black people protest black deaths by cops. She says this is hypocritical, because the people protesting killings by cops don't also protest black abortions.

However, this would only be an example of hypocrisy if those black protestors also were not in favor of abortion! And we, nor she, have no way of knowing if that's the case!

She wades in, assuming that everyone thinks like her - ie, abortion is bad - and so their failure to protest abortion makes them hypocrites. But, if they don't, in fact, oppose abortion, there is no hypocrisy on their part - simply a disagreement in values.

And we, nor she, have no way of knowing what their position on abortions is.

Now, she chooses to make this solely about one racial group. My reminder to her about white servicemen deaths and white abortions highlights this - her comments are racially motivated.

Your lesson is over.

Errr, no. I pointed out the flaw in her logic from the outset. In her zeal to stereotype black people as hypocrites, she made a faulty assumption, which you appear to recognize.

And, you decided to name yourself after 'a small ball of faeces and hair'??

Okaaaaaay................