• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mass Shooting at Sikh Temple Outside Milwaukee [W:211]

How is it that you can be bigoted against a religious ideology but not a political one? That makes no sense.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
This is an argument to divorce ideology from action. It is totally false. The values you act upon can be legit, rational...or not. Those values can be judged. Your argument is to remove judgement of ideologies, an argument that ideas are all neutral, no matter how extreme that idea appears.

This is a totally false argument, it is BS.
Click to expand...

No, it's totally on target. You are attempting to paint things as variable as an ideology as a concrete concept. It's not. Everyone has their own personal interpretation of an ideology. It might vary only slightly, but it varies. And those interpretations mold that individuals behavior. That's why we don't see EVERYONE from a specific ideology shooting up churches/temples/mosques/etc...


Making false arguments is NOT clearing things up at all, other than making clear what kind of arguments a person makes.
Click to expand...

Since my argument was completely on target, it certainly cleared things up for those who aren't wedded to their falsely rigid perception of an ideological concept.

Edit:
It appears as though there are ideas you hold to, an I would assume that they are legitimate to you:



I would love to see how you would make an argument that the views of white supremacy/neo-NAZI-ism are not a problem.
Click to expand...

I personally do not like those views. Ultimately, I have no issue if someone has them, though... depending on how they act on them, of course.
 
Furiounova said:
There isnt much of a hassle with partisanship on discussing the epidemic of social terrorism because too many still think each attack is an isolated incident.
Click to expand...

The reason these incidents happen isn't so much about ideology, but it IS, partially, about partisanship in another way.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
But you just made the argument that the ideology is not the problem.

That is a total contradiction of arguments.
Click to expand...

Re-read my post. I am completely consistent and never claimed ideology was a problem.
 
Wiggen said:
So I'm worse than a neo-nazi who just murdered 6 people in the name of white supremacy? You really are on a different planet, aren't you? Perhaps in your world, white racists who murder are more acceptable than those that call them out.

I'd say you and he have far more in common.
Click to expand...
As you cant wait to drag dead bodies around to launch partisan attacks, Im sure you WOULD say that. Its kinda...well...sad actually
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
No, it's totally on target. You are attempting to paint things as variable as an ideology as a concrete concept. It's not. Everyone has their own personal interpretation of an ideology. It might vary only slightly, but it varies. And those interpretations mold that individuals behavior. That's why we don't see EVERYONE from a specific ideology shooting up churches/temples/mosques/etc...
Click to expand...
I wasn't making an absolutist argument about the results of an ideology on an individual, my argument AGAIN is that the ideology IS a problem when it leads a person to kill. This is not some vague, fuzzy possible scenario, this is real. A racist skin head used his ideology, an ideology espousing the elimination of any and all "sub-humans". Your argument sometimes is that this ideology should be condemned.....and then again "ideology is not a problem". You are attempting to divorce the individual from the values he used, his ideology.
It doesn't fly.




Since my argument was completely on target, it certainly cleared things up for those who aren't wedded to their falsely rigid perception of an ideological concept.
Click to expand...
No, your goalposts moved from one side of the street to the other.



I personally do not like those views. Ultimately, I have no issue if someone has them, though... depending on how they act on them, of course.
Click to expand...
You avoided my points, YOU have values you use, you act upon, that guide you. Yours are positive (assumption), you would say that they enhance your life and those around you. On the other hand, if your ideas are destructive, if your values cause harm, then the ideas are VERY bad. We condemn YOU and YOUR values, we don't separate and say..."Well, his ideas about killing people of other races is not the problem".

Of course they ARE.
 
Zyphlin said:
However a white-surpremisist neo-nazi's ideology and view point is comparable in reference to the mainstream conservative ideology of Republicanism in the same way NAMBLA's ideology is comparable in reference to the mainstream GLBT communities ideology
Click to expand...

Nope. Mainstream republicans and neo-nazis are pretty much the same when it comes to their bigotry. . .

Tennessee Mosque Protest: Lieutenant Governor Says Islam Not A Religion

Tennessee Mosque Protest: Lieutenant Governor Says Islam Not A Religion :: Responsible for Equality And Liberty (R.E.A.L.)
Click to expand...

whereas the number of GLBT supporters who defend pedophilia is too small even to be considered tiny.
 
Wiggen said:
Actually, the right reacts with frenzied defense and accusations of playing the racism card every time it's mentioned. The fact is, this clown may belong to a minority but there are a hell of a lot of people on the Right who wouldn't do this but 'understand' why somebody would.

And please don't play the 'poor white southerner' card. They gave up any right for sympathy around 1964.
Click to expand...

Here ya go. This might come in handy, since you use yours with such regularity.

View attachment 67132202
 
Crosscheck said:
One thing we learned from the theater shooting in Colorado that it will be a couple days for we have enough information to make any opinion.
Click to expand...


The liberals already think they know it all.
 
johnny_rebson said:
The liberals already think they know it all.
Click to expand...

FYI, the news is all out there. A brain-dead white supremacist who led some stupid band took out his hatred in a gurdwara.
 
Sure looks like it, it has gotten REALLY quite in here.
 
teamosil said:
View attachment 67132204

Well I guess that ends that debate, huh?
Click to expand...

Yep. The fact there was still debate was a bit ridiculous. I have the same statement at the start of these things as I have had in every one...from Republicans yelling "MUSLIM" during the Fort Hood shooting up to the cries of "Tea Partier" with the Colorado shooting...we should let some actual facts come out rather than attempting to ignorantly jump to whatever conclusion fits our little preconceived politically expedient heads. While sometimes the outcome does match whatever one ignorant group tried to declare from the start, often times it's not the case. However, once the facts began to actually roll out here it was pretty obvious the guy was a White Supremacist and likely a neo-nazi.
 
Zyphlin said:
Yep. The fact there was still debate was a bit ridiculous. I have the same statement at the start of these things as I have had in every one...from Republicans yelling "MUSLIM" during the Fort Hood shooting up to the cries of "Tea Partier" with the Colorado shooting...we should let some actual facts come out rather than attempting to ignorantly jump to whatever conclusion fits our little preconceived politically expedient heads. While sometimes the outcome does match whatever one ignorant group tried to declare from the start, often times it's not the case. However, once the facts began to actually roll out here it was pretty obvious the guy was a White Supremacist and likely a neo-nazi.
Click to expand...

Yes. But you're still in denial when you claim that the GOP shouldn't be lumped in with white supremacists like the shooter.

The truth is that people like Palin, Bachmann, etc. help create an environment that fuels the kind of hatred that leads to shootings like this by spreading a Cinderella-like story to their followers that paints the world as being divided into easily identifiable good and bad sides. In this (childish) world view, the good people are White Christians, and the bad people are Muslims, Asians, immigrants etc. who are morally inferior to the White Christians and who are attempting to destroy/invade America, a country that (they claim) belongs to the White Christians.

These pols do this because they know their followers are idiots who already hold similar prejudices, and know that they can easily exploit their ethnocentrism to win elections. Why talk about issues when you can play the race/culture card? That's the GOP tactic, and it always works to win elections. . .

. . .at the expense of

6.jpg
 
You're never going to see Palin, Bachmann, Santorum, etc. to say anything condemning the perp of these events. It would jeopardize their political ambitions.
 
solletica said:
Yes. But you're still in denial when you claim that the GOP shouldn't be lumped in with white supremacists like the shooter.

The truth is that people like Palin, Bachmann, etc. help create an environment that fuels the kind of hatred that leads to shootings like this by spreading a Cinderella-like story to their followers that paints the world as being divided into easily identifiable good and bad sides. In this (childish) world view, the good people are White Christians, and the bad people are Muslims, Asians, immigrants etc. who are morally inferior to the White Christians and who are attempting to destroy/invade America, a country that (they claim) belongs to the White Christians.

These pols do this because they know their followers are idiots who already hold similar prejudices, and know that they can easily exploit their ethnocentrism to win elections. Why talk about issues when you can play the race/culture card? That's the GOP tactic, and it always works to win elections. . .

. . .at the expense of

6.jpg
Click to expand...

Oh so you think we should just sit back and be overrun by anti-white anti-christians; sure I don't mind...breaking up the United States into multiple republics and warring with each other for the next 1,000 years.
 
Wiggen said:
The notion that the Far Right on this forum condemns and denounces racism and racially based posts is ludicrous. It's for those of us on the left to denounce it, and then for those of you on the right to denounce us. That's the pattern, and it continues in this thread.
Click to expand...

Denounce what? I'm just here to say, "I told you so." I love saying that, my 4 favorite words.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom