What does the right consider as "racist"?

Dec 2018
3,222
960
New England
#62
Over and over and over again, one frequently recurring practice amongst right-wingers is that they have a much "higher" threshhold for considering something as racist. At this stage, I think it would require a filmed lynching (with interviews afterwards to document the motivations) for some to consider something as racist.

So the question for the right, please describe your standards (or give examples) of:
# speech you consider as racist,
# actions you consider as racist.
If you've been following the recent civil case, Harvard University's admissions policy (compounded by their defense of it) is clearly racially biased against Asian and Asian American applicants.
 
Nov 2005
8,807
3,298
California
#63
If it is my own business then I have a basic human right to decide for myself who I wish to associate with or not.
That is your opinion.
It is not one shared by law.


Will YOU pick up the tab for my losses after someone that YOU force me to associate with fails to pay...?
This is a lame question.
If you want to refuse service to a black person because he is black, that may likely be illegal.
If you want to refuse service to a person because they are a credit risk (and the person happens to be black), that is legal.


Which form of government and model of society is known for violating this basic human right..?
Which form of government dictates to it's citizens who they SHALL associate with or else face punishment...?
Please educate yourself: Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Wikipedia
 
Likes: se7en
Apr 2019
1,487
184
America
#64
If you've been following the recent civil case, Harvard University's admissions policy (compounded by their defense of it) is clearly racially biased against Asian and Asian American applicants.
Do not expect the accusers of walking the walk. They are special.
 
Aug 2019
200
35
De Congo
#66
That is your opinion.
It is not one shared by law.



This is a lame question.
If you want to refuse service to a black person because he is black, that may likely be illegal.
If you want to refuse service to a person because they are a credit risk (and the person happens to be black), that is legal.



Please educate yourself: Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Wikipedia
Citing laws that violate my basic human right to choose who I wish to associate with does not make your belief that I should not have that right any stronger.
Your refusal to "put your money where your mouth is" with regards to covering my losses for being forced to associate with people against my will who end up harming me says it all.
My basic human rights come first before any imaginary responsibilities you think that I have to associate with you.
Your misguided belief that you or anyone else has a basic human right to force me to associate with you is simply wrong.
 
Nov 2005
8,807
3,298
California
#67
Do not expect the accusers of walking the walk. They are special.
:rolleyes:
As usual, you take only part of the relevant information and you run with it...
It is illegal for the government to discriminate based on race without a legitimate state interest.
Affirmative action (in education) has a legitimate state interests of:
  • promoting educational diversity
  • remedying the present effects of past discrimination
 
Nov 2005
8,807
3,298
California
#69
Citing laws that violate my basic human right to choose who I wish to associate with does not make your belief that I should not have that right any stronger.
Your English is poor.
The laws I cite do indeed make my belief stronger.

And it's not that "you should not have that right". A right to free speech does not cover yelling "fire" in a crowded theater nor does it cover slander / libel.
Likewise, right to association does not cover public business transactions.


Your refusal to "put your money where your mouth is" with regards to covering my losses for being forced to associate with people against my will who end up harming me says it all.
Either you are not able to understand or you do not care about honesty.
Again, I am not forcing you to do business with people who are a financial risk to you. Your failure to comprehend that is not my problem.


My basic human rights come first before any imaginary responsibilities you think that I have to associate with you.
Your actual rights do.
What you describe is not included and is not acknowledged as such by the government.


Your misguided belief that you or anyone else has a basic human right to force me to associate with you is simply wrong.
That is your opinion, not shared by the government.
It is also not shared by a majority of U.S. citizens.
 
Likes: leekohler2
Nov 2005
8,807
3,298
California
#70
It is marvelous you understand how to use our laws against us. Self defeating and destructive to the point of subversion.
Your statements are hyperbolic to the point of meaninglessness.
The purpose of the law has always had an importance when it comes to the issues of rights.
 

Similar Discussions