It isn't Racist to...

[MindTrap028]

@ cowboy, untill you show someone anyone relevant to the debate of proposing tax IDs. Your assertion that it is based I racism is simply not supported and sounds more like wako left wing propaganda.
I just want people to identify that they are indeed eligible to vote. The accusation that minorities are disnenfranchises seems ridiculous, as they are not currently tly disenfranchised from drinking which requires an ID. I am not for such an ID having a cost, it should be part of the already robust driving ID.

So the lonly "proof" so far is that dems and left wakos we want to name call and demonize their opponents.

[CowboyX]

@ cowboy, untill you show someone anyone relevant to the debate of proposing tax IDs. Your assertion that it is based I racism is simply not supported and sounds more like wako left wing propaganda.

I already did with my support in post 20...even with the goal posts moved.

---------- Post added at 01:15 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:13 AM ----------

So the lonly "proof" so far is that dems and left wakos we want to name call and demonize their opponents.

Yes, disgusting racists should be identified - whether through their words or actions - wherever they are.

---------- Post added at 01:19 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:15 AM ----------

I just want people to identify that they are indeed eligible to vote. The accusation that minorities are disnenfranchises seems ridiculous, as they are not currently tly disenfranchised from drinking which requires an ID. I am not for such an ID having a cost, it should be part of the already robust driving ID.

Apples and oranges, nobody above the legal age is disenfranchised from buying alcohol. You don't have to be a citizen or even show an ID to buy alcohol - they can ask for it but don't have to. Why would you bother to ID a senior citizen? Your analogy is ridiculous.

[Sigfried]

First, you conflate culture with individuals. They are not the same. One can respect the equality of every man, but recognize that the cultures they live in are unequal. Some cultures are clearly inferior to others.

When you say "We don't want to let those Muslims in here!" you are judging all Muslims that could be let in based on their membership of a culture. That is bigotry. You are not judging them as individuals but as members of an overarching group. So don't tell me I'm confused about individuals vs cultures. Bigotry is when you judge members of a group as inferior for belonging to that group.

Second, you're trying to argue that the labeling of any culture as inferior is unacceptable [I]by pointing to a historical culture you abhor! The culture Hitler created in the Third Reich, as you pointed out, is not equal to other cultures:

I am bigoted against Nazis, I'm happy to be so. The ideology is abhorant to me. Are you willing to admit you are biggoted agaisnt Muslims?

Third, you are engaging in a culture war right here, with your post, taking a position deep in the heart of PC modern culture against my position in support of a cultural view that you oppose.

I've always disliked racists, nationalists, elitists and other assholes who don't treat peaceful people as equal human beings. That's got nothing to do with PC culture, it's American culture.

And finally, as ODN winds down, after you've been debating here ten years, you have to resort to Reductio ad Hitlerim fallacy? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum

Sure, go with the classics I say. But it is not a fallacy. Biggotry is directly related to Hitler as he stands as the marked example of bigotry turned into government policy. American Slavery is another. So in a discussion of racism and bigotry, Hitler is a good anchor point of bad behavior. Hiters hatred of the Jews was justified by detailed arguments as to their inferiority. So if your argument is it is not bigotry if it is justified, you are making the same argument that Hitler did when he justified the Holocaust. You, of course are not arguing for a holocaust, but your argument is no defense that your take is moral.

[evensaul]

When you say "We don't want to let those Muslims in here!" you are judging all Muslims that could be let in based on their membership of a culture. That is bigotry.

Not if your definition of bigotry includes hatred or a belief in inferiority of certain people.

You are not judging them as individuals but as members of an overarching group.

I believe that each and every Muslim is worthy of respect just as any Christian, Hindu or atheist, because all men are created equal in the image of God the Father. It is not my place to judge them as people. That is the Lord's domain.

So don't tell me I'm confused about individuals vs cultures.

I think you are over-generalizing in your rush to condemn. Your mis-characterizations of my position may be from ignorance, or it may be willful. I don't know. But your knee-jerk reaction without seeking to first understand the reasons for my position demonstrates your own intolerance well enough.

Bigotry is when you judge members of a group as inferior for belonging to that group.

I do not think Muslims are inferior as individuals, but rather they have been sadly misled into a religion that denies Jesus Christ as Savior. And much more important to the issue of immigration, as members of Islam, Muslims are members of a political movement, not just a religion. When practiced according to the teachings of the Koran, Islam seeks to take control of government and forcibly convert or execute non-muslims. Those facts make Islam incompatible with a democratic republic such as we have in the United States. Because Islam is a dangerous political ideology wrapped in a religion, our government should deny immigration to Muslims in the same way it denies entry to Communists.

I've always disliked racists, nationalists, elitists and other assholes who don't treat peaceful people as equal human beings. That's got nothing to do with PC culture, it's American culture.

Islam is inherently dangerous to citizens of the United States. Our government has a responsibility and a long history of implementing effective immigration policies to protect the American people. As examples, those who are sick with communicable diseases are denied entry, as are previously mentioned Communists. We have long primarily accepted refugees and other immigrants from Western Europe who would readily assimilate into the "melting pot", and who were not dangerous to our own citizens and the Republic. THAT is American culture and history, Sig, and it has proven very effective over the past two hundred years in protecting the American people. It is unfortunate that you and those on your side of the issue do not appreciate the realities of safe immigration policy.

Read this article published today about how some Muslim fathers teach their young children to be jihadists, and tell me the culture and religion they are members of is morally acceptable to you.
https://www.france24.com/en/20181117...training-jihad
And then explain to me why we should risk letting people from that culture and religion into our country.

[evensaul]

It isn't racist to invite people who hate America to leave the country.

Telling people to "Love it or leave it" goes way back, including use toward protesters during the Vietnam War.

Telling an immigrant who is overly critical of our country to "go back where you came from" is not racism. It is patriotism.

[Freund]

It isn't racist to invite people who hate America to leave the country.

What do you mean by 'America' in this sentence?

Telling people to "Love it or leave it" goes way back, including use toward protesters during the Vietnam War.

So what?

Telling an immigrant who is overly critical of our country to "go back where you came from" is not racism. It is patriotism.

I disagree. Because you haven't made an argument here but merely stated opinion, my statement has equal weight.

[CowboyX]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/18/polit...rnd/index.html

"A federal agency charged with enforcing laws prohibiting workplace discrimination cites "go back to where you came from" as a remark that may constitute unlawful harassment based on national origin."

"Ethnic slurs and other verbal or physical conduct because of nationality are illegal if they are severe or pervasive and create an intimidating, hostile or offensive working environment, interfere with work performance, or negatively affect job opportunities," the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission states in a passage on its website."

[evensaul]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/18/polit...rnd/index.html

"A federal agency charged with enforcing laws prohibiting workplace discrimination cites "go back to where you came from" as a remark that may constitute unlawful harassment based on national origin."

"Ethnic slurs and other verbal or physical conduct because of nationality are illegal if they are severe or pervasive and create an intimidating, hostile or offensive working environment, interfere with work performance, or negatively affect job opportunities," the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission states in a passage on its website."

You are conflating national origin with race. They are not the same thing.

[mican333]

You are conflating national origin with race. They are not the same thing.

If it's being said to a person of color, it's a racial issue.

"Go back to Africa" or "Go back to Mexico" are both considered racist.

If you want to argue that being bigoted against Mexicans isn't racist, you are just splitting hairs. It is unacceptable to be bigoted against blacks or Mexicans and telling either of them to "go back where they came from" is racist and unacceptable.

And "go to where you came from" is not the same as "love it or leave it". "Go back where you came from" indicates that the person is less American than us white people because of their origin in Africa/Middle East/Mexico/Latin America/etc.

I'm a white guy who is the descendants of Norwegian immigrants and while someone might say to me "Love it or leave it" if I'm critical of the government, people aren't going to say "Go back to Norway" to me as a response. But if I were black or Mexican, then "go back to..." is something that might be spoken to me just like it was written in regards to the four congresswomen of color in the tweet. "Go back to..." is a response reserved for people of color just like racial slurs are reserved for those specific races that they apply to for derogatory purposes.

[evensaul]

If it's being said to a person of color, it's a racial issue.

So it is not racist if said to a white person? Why not?

"Go back to Africa" or "Go back to Mexico" are both considered racist.

By who? Do you have a universally recognized authority on this?

If you want to argue that being bigoted against Mexicans isn't racist, you are just splitting hairs. It is unacceptable to be bigoted against blacks or Mexicans and telling either of them to "go back where they came from" is racist and unacceptable.

If Europeans regard tourists from the United States as "Ugly Americans", is that racist? No, it isn't, because it is generally about people from a place, not a reference to their race.

You say it is "unacceptable". I know it is a favorite tactic of the Left to describe nearly anything that is unacceptable as racism. Your statement is just more evidence of that.

And "go to where you came from" is not the same as "love it or leave it". "Go back where you came from" indicates that the person is less American than us white people because of their origin in Africa/Middle East/Mexico/Latin America/etc.

No, it says they should go back to where they came from if they don't love this country. It really is that simple, Mican.

I'm a white guy who is the descendants of Norwegian immigrants and while someone might say to me "Love it or leave it" if I'm critical of the government, people aren't going to say "Go back to Norway" to me as a response. But if I were black or Mexican, then "go back to..." is something that might be spoken to me just like it was written in regards to the four congresswomen of color in the tweet. "Go back to..." is a response reserved for people of color just like racial slurs are reserved for those specific races that they apply to for derogatory purposes.

I'll say it. MICAN, GO BACK TO WHERE YOU CAME FROM! GO BACK TO WHERE YOUR ANCESTORS CAME FROM! That just means I'd be really happy if you said buh bye and got on a boat or plane. Don't leave mad, just leave. You gonna cry racism, or admit that it isn't a racist statement?

It seems your position is only supported with Special Pleading and Ad Populum fallacies. Is that all you've got?

[mican333]

So it is not racist if said to a white person? Why not?

Because it's not a commonly-used method used to attack white people based on their ethnicity. Similar to how it's racist to call a black person a n-word but not racist to call a white person that.

By who? Do you have a universally recognized authority on this?

No, but I can observe that this line is used primary, if not exclusively, to attack people of color and not used to attack white people.

If Europeans regard tourists from the United States as "Ugly Americans", is that racist? No, it isn't, because it is generally about people from a place, not a reference to their race.

Which makes it quite different than "go back to Africa" and "go back to Mexico" because those are about race.

Just because one can be insulted on their nationality does not mean that racial attacks aren't racial.

You say it is "unacceptable". I know it is a favorite tactic of the Left to describe nearly anything that is unacceptable as racism. Your statement is just more evidence of that.

Wow, yeah. You really nailed "the left" with that totally acc8rate assessment that is in no way rooted in political bias and completely unsupportable. It's just so spot on that I have no choice but to ignore it.

No, it says they should go back to where they came from if they don't love this country. It really is that simple, Mican.

Evan, not only is it not that simple, it's not even remotely accurate. Here is the tweet:.

So interesting to see “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough.

Do you see ANY mention of them not loving our country???? Nope! So what DID they do to warrant being asked to leave the country?

They told the people "how our government is to be run". And giving input on how the government should be wrong is pretty much the primary aspect of their job description!

And more to the point, ALL of them are American citizens and three of them were born in the US so THIS is their country. And the classic "go back to Africa/Mexico" line implies that THIS is not their country - that they don't belong in America but somewhere else. And Trump is pretty much saying the same thing when he says that they belong in their country of origin instead of the US,

"Love it or leave" just says that one should leave the country if they don't love it and does not say that they belong somewhere else specifically. Trump's tweet did not mention lack of love and it did request that they belong specifically somewhere else.

I'll say it. MICAN, GO BACK TO WHERE YOU CAME FROM! GO BACK TO WHERE YOUR ANCESTORS CAME FROM! That just means I'd be really happy if you said buh bye and got on a boat or plane. Don't leave mad, just leave. You gonna cry racism, or admit that it isn't a racist statement?

If I thought you were sincerely asking me to leave the US due to my European heritage, I would consider your comment to be a racist attack. But since you are saying that without sincerity in order to make a debate point, I do not consider it an honest statement of what I should do due to my ethnicity and therefore do not feel that you are trying to denigrate me because I'm white.

It seems your position is only supported with Special Pleading and Ad Populum fallacies. Is that all you've got?

And it seems that your personal assessments of my debating is as big a waste of time as it always has been.

Skip the editorializing and attack my arguments as I present them.

[evensaul]

If I thought you were sincerely asking me to leave the US due to my European heritage, I would consider your comment to be a racist attack. But since you are saying that without sincerity in order to make a debate point, I do not consider it an honest statement of what I should do due to my ethnicity and therefore do not feel that you are trying to denigrate me because I'm white.

I need to focus here until you get this through your head. I WANT YOU TO GO BACK WHERE YOU CAME FROM. OR WHERE YOUR DNA CAME FROM. BECAUSE WHOEVER CAME HERE AS YOUR ANCESTOR EVENTUALLY SPAWNED A PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRAT THAT IS A THREAT TO MY COUNTRY. GO BACK TO YOUR OWN COUNTRY, MICAN. GO BACK, SO YOU WON'T CONTINUE TO DESTROY THIS GREAT NATION. I'M TOTALLY SINCERE. GO BACK TO NORWAY! You got it? I'm totally effing serious. Do you believe me now?

[mican333]

I need to focus here until you get this through your head. I WANT YOU TO GO BACK WHERE YOU CAME FROM. OR WHERE YOUR DNA CAME FROM. BECAUSE WHOEVER CAME HERE AS YOUR ANCESTOR EVENTUALLY SPAWNED A PROGRESSIVE THAT IS A THREAT TO MY COUNTRY. GO BACK TO YOUR OWN COUNTRY, MICAN. GO BACK, SO YOU WON'T CONTINUE TO DESTROY THIS GREAT NATION. I'M TOTALLY SINCERE. GO BACK TO NORWAY! You got it? I'm totally effing serious. Do you believe me now?

Note.

I still think you are saying that to win the debate instead of stating a sincere belief that people like me should go back to Norway.

BTW, if I did actually believe that you were sincere, then I would consider it a racial attack. So I guess I will retract an earlier statement of mine. "Go back to..." can likewise be racists if said to a white person. And for that matter, I imagine that Native Americans might occasionally say that in regards to European Americans and that would be racist. So I'll change my statement that it's racist when used against a person of color to that it's racist in general.

[evensaul]

Note.

I still think you are saying that to win the debate instead of stating a sincere belief that people like me should go back to Norway.

BTW, if I did actually believe that you were sincere, then I would consider it a racial attack. So I guess I will retract an earlier statement of mine. "Go back to..." can likewise be racists if said to a white person. And for that matter, I imagine that Native Americans might occasionally say that in regards to European Americans and that would be racist. So I'll change my statement that it's racist when used against a person of color to that it's racist in general.

Then you STILL don't get it. It isn't about your race. It isn't about your national origin. It is about WHAT YOUR DOING TO THIS COUNTRY! You, and every single liberal who wants to tear this country down. I don't care if you're white, black, hispanic or asian. I care about what you're doing to my country. And the same goes for anyone crossing the border illegally, or anyone encouraging or even condoning illegal crossings. And it goes for someone who comes here and is way overly critical of our country, or who grows up here and is way over critical, it is completely legitimate to say GO! We don't want you here. Love it or leave it. Go back where you came from! And that doesn't become racist just because the target's skin happens to be a few shades darker. Do you really not understand that, or do you just refuse to?

[mican333]

Then you STILL don't get it. It isn't about your race. It isn't about your national origin. It is about WHAT YOUR DOING TO THIS COUNTRY! You, and every single liberal who wants to tear this country down. I don't care if you're white, black, hispanic or asian. I care about what you're doing to my country. And the same goes for anyone crossing the border illegally, or anyone encouraging or even condoning illegal crossings. And it goes for someone who comes here and is way overly critical of our country, or who grows up here and is way over critical, it is completely legitimate to say GO! We don't want you here. Love it or leave it. Go back where you came from! And that doesn't become racist just because the target's skin happens to be a few shades darker. Do you really not understand that, or do you just refuse to?

I agree that saying "love it or leave it" is not inherently racist and never said otherwise. But as I said it a couple of posts ago and you completely ignored, Trump's tweet was not saying "love it or leave it". Here is my argument again.

Here is the tweet:.

So interesting to see “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough.

Do you see ANY mention of them not loving our country???? Nope! So what DID they do to warrant being asked to leave the country?

First off, they apparently came from "countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe" and they told "the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run." NEITHER of those qualify as not loving our country.

And more to the point, ALL of them are American citizens and three of them were born in the US so THIS is their country. And the classic "go back to Africa/Mexico" line implies that THIS is not their country - that they don't belong in America but somewhere else. And Trump is pretty much saying the same thing when he says that they belong in their country of origin instead of the US,

"Love it or leave" just says that one should leave the country if they don't love it and does not say that they belong somewhere else specifically. Trump's tweet did not mention lack of love and it did request that they belong specifically somewhere else.


So again, while I don't disagree with you that "love it or leave it" is not racist, that's not what the tweet says. It says "Go back to your own country" to a group of minority women.

[evensaul]

I agree that saying "love it or leave it" is not inherently racist and never said otherwise.

Okay, good.

But as I said it a couple of posts ago and you completely ignored, Trump's tweet was not saying "love it or leave it". Here is my argument again.

Here is the tweet:.

So interesting to see “Progressive” Democrat Congresswomen, who originally came from countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe, the worst, most corrupt and inept anywhere in the world (if they even have a functioning government at all), now loudly and viciously telling the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run. Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came. Then come back and show us how it is done. These places need your help badly, you can’t leave fast enough.

Do you see ANY mention of them not loving our country???? Nope! So what DID they do to warrant being asked to leave the country?

First off, they apparently came from "countries whose governments are a complete and total catastrophe" and they told "the people of the United States, the greatest and most powerful Nation on earth, how our government is to be run." NEITHER of those qualify as not loving our country.

And more to the point, ALL of them are American citizens and three of them were born in the US so THIS is their country. And the classic "go back to Africa/Mexico" line implies that THIS is not their country - that they don't belong in America but somewhere else. And Trump is pretty much saying the same thing when he says that they belong in their country of origin instead of the US,

"Love it or leave" just says that one should leave the country if they don't love it and does not say that they belong somewhere else specifically. Trump's tweet did not mention lack of love and it did request that they belong specifically somewhere else.


So again, while I don't disagree with you that "love it or leave it" is not racist, that's not what the tweet says. It says "Go back to your own country" to a group of minority women.

So if the tweet doesn't make logical sense to you, why is it racist? And why don't you consider all of things he said after that initial tweet?

[mican333]

So if the tweet doesn't make logical sense to you, why is it racist?

I didn't say the tweet didn't make logical sense.

But even if I did say that, a tweet that doesn't make sense can still be racist.

And why don't you consider all of things he said after that initial tweet?

Who says I didn't consider those things?

[CowboyX]

Then you STILL don't get it. It isn't about your race. It isn't about your national origin. It is about WHAT YOUR DOING TO THIS COUNTRY! You, and every single liberal who wants to tear this country down. I don't care if you're white, black, hispanic or asian. I care about what you're doing to my country. And the same goes for anyone crossing the border illegally, or anyone encouraging or even condoning illegal crossings. And it goes for someone who comes here and is way overly critical of our country, or who grows up here and is way over critical, it is completely legitimate to say GO! We don't want you here. Love it or leave it. Go back where you came from! And that doesn't become racist just because the target's skin happens to be a few shades darker. Do you really not understand that, or do you just refuse to?

What are they being "overly critical" about? Concentration camps?

Give examples, please, of statements that go beyond your ability to take criticism. {challenge thingy}

[Sigfried]

Well Evensaul....

I think you should leave the country first. You aren't really a true (rainbow unicorn). You are a (fluffy kitten) and a (hand-crafted pot holder). America was founded by immigrants, settled by immigrants and populated largely by the descendants of immigrants. It is a liberal country that believes in freedom and giving everyone a fair chance. I believe in both individualism and community. It's about making a good life for yourself and a good life for others. It's about giving everyone a chance and not using violence or threats to settle our differences.

I love America very much. Liberal America is the future of America. This travesty of a president will not last and with every generation, this Nation gets better and overcomes a little more of its long and unfortunate history of racism and bigotry. Your political allies won't be the last and are a slowly dying breed. So please kindly find a different country to darken with bigoted views. You seem to truly what this country truly stands for and you betray its values.

Miccan and I are here to stay.

[evensaul]

It isn't racist to describe the city of Baltimore as a “disgusting, rat and rodent infested mess”.
https://apnews.com/3d49bd171f9b4245b3d24e62a77ad35f

Everyone knows Baltimore is a disaster and that liberals are responsible for the mess, as was debated on this website a few years ago:
http://www.onlinedebate.net/forums/s...ore?highlight=