Calling All Liberal Race Baiters

[Immanuel Can]

What a fool believes, no wise man can reason away.

Well, I've found commonsense to be a generally reasonable person. If he/she is wrong on this, I don't hold it against him/her. In general, he/she is worth a conversation.

[Immanuel Can]

Well, now we at least have a written record showing us why the word "whitesplain" has to exist.

See, now, THERE is a perfect example of racism. Right there.

We remain unimpressed, of course.

[FlashDangerpants]

Whatever.

[SteveKlinko]

What a fool believes, no wise man can reason away.

Well, I've found commonsense to be a generally reasonable person. If he/she is wrong on this, I don't hold it against him/her. In general, he/she is worth a conversation.

A little bit harsh, but true about believers in general.

[Immanuel Can]

A little bit harsh, but true about believers in general.

They're not all equal here.

Commonsense is generally careful and thoughtful about responding. I don't think we should make complete agreement a basic requirement of our conversation here, even though, as you know, I disagree with commonsense about this.

[commonsense]

I agree now with Immanuel & thank him for his kind words.

Upon reflection, I must say that I believe I may have had a mini-stroke or an intractable case of brain farts when I provided my posts.

[gaffo]

True story.

One of my associates adopted a child, and had three of her own. The one she adopted is nearly the same age as her second, and they are thick as thieves together...real brothers.

They went to camp together. And somebody at the camp, doing registration, saw that the boys had the same last name, and were unusually close in age. Only the second son was on hand.

The registrar asked, "How will we tell which brother is which?" And the boy immediately answered, "It's easy; I have a green shirt, and my brother's is red."

The thing is, he's white, and his adopted brother's from Haiti.

The kid understood something I wish we all understood better. It's not the colour of your skin; it's the content of a person's character. Someone said that once, but lately, the race-talkers have all drowned him out with their selfish propaganda. But we should listen to that: MLK had a point.

Time we all stopped talking about "race." It was a dumb idea from the start.

Nice post and concur with it. MLK was a great man, but i like MalcomX more myself - esp after he left the racist black muslims (and was killed by them for it).

[gaffo]

Or if they want to allege racist attitudes on the part of another person, it will be useless unless their allegation addresses specific actions that are racist. Actions and policies can be remedied by law; but it's impossible to use policy to remedy a personal attitude.

If behaviour is remedied, attitude doesn't matter.

There wasn't a point in my parents' lives when they believed themselves to be "racists". They still don't.

But they no longer treat my wife like a 2nd class citizen. And that's a win.

from this post and an earlier one about you and your wife, can i assume you are South African, and in an interacial marraige?

i'm an American with a black GF, only thankful that so far - these last 3 yrs - we have had no trouble at all from anyone, though i do live in the Bible Belt.

[gaffo]

Reverse-racism is just as big a problem as original racism

its a problem but not as big of one.

here in America we have a newish Christian sect called the Hebrew Israelites (2 churches here in Oklahoma city even), its a Blakc church that denies the Jews as real Jews, thay call the classical Jews "the so called Jews" , and insist they are the True and original Jews - the Black Hebrews - and all pail people were infected by Satan and are evil by nature.

its a hate inspired Reverse Racist christianinty sect (Black Racism - i.e. reverse racism), that is growing rapidly in American since the 1980's.

but in the bigger picture, it is not the threat vs classical indemic racism - i,e KKK, etc White Supremecy mindset.

[gaffo]

I respect persons and their natural right cuz I'm a natural rights libertarian (a placeholder for a particular kind of moral realism)

OK.Is dignity a natural right?

no. Natural Law is extremely limited - right to kill others to defend your life, right to your life and your property.

nothing else.

higher cultures of course would affirm the right for all to live in dignity, but the latter is not a natural law right.

Is undignified treatment of humans immoral?

yes, but not illegal per Natural Law.

Slavery is illegal per Natural law because it limit "Life" via bondage, but undignified treatment would not be illegal under the same standard.

Suppose that your rights are natural. AM I obliged to recognize them?

no you are not, as a free person you are allowed to have any moral foundation you wish - as long as it is not a threat to others - so deny natural law, bey at the moon and drink blood while runing down the street weary the skin of your mom (assuming your mom allowed you to skin here in her will - so all legal and such (not you digging here up - that is illegal per grave robbery) - if that floats your boat - good on you.

If depriving you of your natural rights is not a breach of contract, what would you call it then?

that is a breach, when your denial of other assumed affirmation of natural law rights removes thier rights via your conduct of denying their right that you deny exist, then it is a breach.

otherwise you may deny their rights as long as your actions do not deny ther rights.

[gaffo]

I am speaking of "natural rights" and not of "social contracts" (but really, they are the same thing).

they are not the same thing, the former is the bare minimum for any society - the foundation.

the latter is an order higher and needed for a more just society.

example:

the us bill of rights, the right to claim and hang out with your friends (this is not a Natural Law Right) - its a Common Law right that date to pre-histroy.

the right to marry - same as above - not a Natural Law right.

the right to a jury trial of peers - ibid.

right to due process - 5th/6th amendment to BoR - again a Social contract, not a Natural Law (6th i think is "not lawful to torchure the accussed" - under Natural Law torchure is legal and fine until death, the it becomes illegal.

etc...........

[Skepdick]

no. Natural Law is extremely limited - right to kill others to defend your life, right to your life and your property.

nothing else.

higher cultures of course would affirm the right for all to live in dignity, but the latter is not a natural law right.

So, how far do you think I could stretch humiliation, torture and depravity without crossing into the realm of violating your natural rights?

[Immanuel Can]

Reverse-racism is just as big a problem as original racism

its a problem but not as big of one.

That's like saying, "It's a malignant, terminal cancerous node, but not as big a one."

That might be a kind of good news, but not much.

[gaffo]

no. Natural Law is extremely limited - right to kill others to defend your life, right to your life and your property.

nothing else.

higher cultures of course would affirm the right for all to live in dignity, but the latter is not a natural law right.

So, how far do you think I could stretch humiliation, torture and depravity without crossing into the realm of violating your natural rights?

to life, basically.

if you do the above, and the subject survives, then "no fowl", if the subjects dies then "fowl" the oppressed was deny his Natural Law Rights to life.

------------

of course i affirm NL, and just clairified its limits per history/philosophy/etc..............as limited. see above -


torchure is ok as long as the subject does not die. per NL, not my law, i have a higher standard............but per nl, the foundation.

NL is the base minimum, and welcome more than NL..............so better to not torture/etc................


BTW though a Liberal (I am also a Libertarian), I oppose the death penalty because it is The State acting as God and so deny the Right of the State to act as God to take the life of a killer.


if some schmuck, esp if the relation to the killed.....take justice in his hands.........ok and amen more power to him/her to kill the asshole - outside of "legal".

listening to "no snow on the mountain" - Nadasurf, drunk, sad about the message, love the music, 2 cents.

[gaffo]

Reverse-racism is just as big a problem as original racism

its a problem but not as big of one.

That's like saying, "It's a malignant, terminal cancerous node, but not as big a one."

That might be a kind of good news, but not much.

you talking to me?

did no note my post about Hebrew Israelites?

and i suspect you know my GF is black by now - not gone out of my way to proclaim my "wokeness" - since i am not woke - Hebrew Israelites are as racist as any KKK member - nor championed my Gf is black and i aint (as a virtue signal).

fuck Signals, i affirm Virtue, not it signal.

not saying i am virtious, but a worthy goal.

--------------------------------

and ya what does not kill you makes you stronger. its all about proportion.