• 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!

Is being racist a right?[W:343]

Is being racist a right


  • Total voters
    80
Yes. I think you have a right to be a racist. It depends how you mean punishment, do you believe someone has a right to be antiAmerican and not be punished?

Yes.......
 
Holding and/or expressing any opinion is a right. That means that other people have that same right to disagree with you and refuse to do business with you. It does not mean that you have a right to discriminate based on race, religion, ethnicity etc. in a business serving the public or as a governmental official.

I do not support laws against hate speech because I'm a strong supporter of maximum freedom of expression and sometimes legitimate criticism of a religion or other group could be considered hate speech, for example criticism of the Catholic Church's handling of child molestation allegations against priests.

I support the right of most* workers to be free from employment discrimination due to their off-work activities, including expression of opinions, and think that protection should be made the law.

*with limited exceptions for top executives, public relations staff, representatives of an ideology (i.e ministers) and other whose job requires representing an employers policies.
 
Last edited:
All this media blitz on Bundy and The basketball guy has me wondering if we now have thought police in this country. I'm not racist myself but I don't see what the big deal is if you are. We have laws to protect people from racism so your opinion should be a right and you should not be punished for what you believe. IMO firing someone for being a racist is anti American and flies in the face of free speech.

Bundy doesn't deserve to lose his claimed right to land based on his beliefs. The owner of the Clippers does. The difference is the NBA has a code of conduct. Just like the employer I have can tell me how to dreaa and behave while I am on the clock, the NBA can tell owners how to behave as part of their participation in the league. But, Bundy is being "convicted" for beliefs that had no bearing on land management jurisdiction.
 
But if she did this because she is a 'proud woman of color', she is as racist as he is.

WTF? How could you arrive at that ass-backwards conclusion?
Is everyone who outs a racist asshole for what they are a racist?
That is inside out crazy thinking.
What if he was a sexist woman hater and his girlfriend reported that to the press...Would that, somehow in your backwards thinking mind, make her a misogynist?
 
Bundy doesn't deserve to lose his claimed right to land based on his beliefs. The owner of the Clippers does. The difference is the NBA has a code of conduct. Just like the employer I have can tell me how to dreaa and behave while I am on the clock, the NBA can tell owners how to behave as part of their participation in the league. But, Bundy is being "convicted" for beliefs that had no bearing on land management jurisdiction.
Nobody convicted Bundy, the racist asshole, except Bundy himself. The federal courts found him guilty of grazing without paying ...but he wasn't convicted of anything.
His political supporters abandoned him because he decided to volunteer the fact that he was a racist asshole, to the world.
Nothing can make a political cause more toxic that a revelation that the main player in that cause is a racist asshole.
 
Last edited:
Nobody convicted Bundy, the racist asshole, except Bundy himself. The federal courts found him guilty of grazing without paying ...but he wasn't convicted of anything.
His political supporters abandoned him because he decided to volunteer the fact that he was a racist asshole, to the world.
Nothing can make a political cause more toxic that a revelation that the main player in that cause is a racist asshole.

Are you going for Guinness World Record for the most contradictions in a sentence fragment?
 
"Nobody convicted Bundy," contradicts "the racist asshole," as it is your own personal conviction.

"Nobody convicted Bundy," contradicts "The federal courts found him guilty of grazing without paying " contradicts "...but he wasn't convicted of anything."
 
WTF? How could you arrive at that ass-backwards conclusion?
Is everyone who outs a racist asshole for what they are a racist?
That is inside out crazy thinking.
What if he was a sexist woman hater and his girlfriend reported that to the press...Would that, somehow in your backwards thinking mind, make her a misogynist?

It depends what form the sexism took. If it was just his point of view and he did not inflict it on anybody, then she would be reprehensible to report that to the press. Don't forget, you were the one who pointed out the girlfriend being a person of color. What difference does that make? If she tried to destroy him because she is a woman of color, and for no other reason than she is a woman of color, that would make her a racist.

I am coming from the point of view that all of us are probably going to be 'unacceptable' to somebody. And I do not wish to live my life in fear that I could wind up on the front pages or lose my job or be made unwelcome anywhere just because I used the wrong word or phrase or expressed a politically incorrect point of view to a trusted friend. If you choose to live your life free of fear that the 'thought police' or 'PC police' could make your life a living hell, you too will agree that people should be allowed to be who and what they are in peace if they are not violating the rights of anybody else.
 
"Nobody convicted Bundy," contradicts "the racist asshole," as it is your own personal conviction.

"Nobody convicted Bundy," contradicts "The federal courts found him guilty of grazing without paying " contradicts "...but he wasn't convicted of anything."

I apologise for my faux pas...
Bundy is a racist asshole...That is my own personal conviction, shared with millions of other Americans.
The federal courts have not sentenced Bundy but have found him responsible for the debt he owes the government and ordered him to pay up. Bundy has not been convicted of being a racist asshole in the courts, however most sensible Americans have determined that he is a racist asshole.
Better?
Word usage is important...I fell down on the job, sorry...
 
It is your right to be a racist, sub human, idiotic, asshole, dickheaded, stupid, moron, retarded, jerk ...if you so choose to be.
But know this ... All those adjectives go inseparably together with that right.
View attachment 67165817
...AND, this who you are identifying with.

There's nothing wrong with prejudice, it only becomes wrong when it results in discrimination in my opinion. I would go so far as to say everyone is prejudiced in some way or another (doesn't even have to be against a particular race, it can be against a social class, religion, etc.). I have huge doubts that there is a single person on this Earth who has absolutely NO prejudice whatsoever. I simply believe as a human community we need to reflect on ourselves and keep our fellow humans in check so that this prejudice is monitored and doesn't result in anything dangerous.
 
If she tried to destroy him because she is a woman of color, and for no other reason than she is a woman of color, that would make her a racist.
i pointed out that she is a woman of color because she would be even more likely to be offended by a racist asshole, perhaps,than one who was not.
Does that make her a racist? No.
I would say that Sterling destroyed himself, when he expressed to anyone words that he should have known would destroy him.
BTW Sterling has not been "destroyed" ...He is still a billionaire... net worth 1.9 billion USD.
 
Last edited:
There's nothing wrong with prejudice, it only becomes wrong when it results in discrimination in my opinion. I would go so far as to say everyone is prejudiced in some way or another (doesn't even have to be against a particular race, it can be against a social class, religion, etc.). I have huge doubts that there is a single person on this Earth who has absolutely NO prejudice whatsoever. I simply believe as a human community we need to reflect on ourselves and keep our fellow humans in check so that this prejudice is monitored and doesn't result in anything dangerous.
Sorry no, racial prejudice is in a class of it's own. Racial prejudice held by an owner of a team in the NBA is probably unique.
The argument that everyone is a little bit evil so therefore evil is OK does not hold much water.
 
Sorry no, racial prejudice is in a class of it's own. Racial prejudice held by an owner of a team in the NBA is probably unique.
The argument that everyone is a little bit evil so therefore evil is OK does not hold much water.

No, my argument was that everyone is evil and it is ok AS LONG AS SUCH EVIL IS NOT ACTED UPON (this can even be in the form of simply saying something prejudiced although that's a little light in my eyes compared to actively physically harming someone out of prejudice).

What you posted was only a fragment of my argument.
 
No, my argument was that everyone is evil and it is ok AS LONG AS SUCH EVIL IS NOT ACTED UPON (this can even be in the form of simply saying something prejudiced although that's a little light in my eyes compared to actively physically harming someone out of prejudice).

What you posted was only a fragment of my argument.
IMHO talking racism is racism in action.
Those who act as a racist in more overt ways started out talking racism .
 
IMHO talking racism is racism in action.
Those who act as a racist in more overt ways started out talking racism .

Yes, I did acknowledge that speaking racism is an issue that may be (and in most cases is) considered discrimination. I'm simply saying that people do have a right to be prejudiced in any way shape or form, they simply do not have the right to act upon that prejudice (which is when prejudice becomes discrimination).
 
Yes, I did acknowledge that speaking racism is an issue that may be (and in most cases is) considered discrimination. I'm simply saying that people do have a right to be prejudiced in any way shape or form, they simply do not have the right to act upon that prejudice (which is when prejudice becomes discrimination).
Of course we can not act on what a person thinks.
But when they start talking racism they have crossed a bold line.
 
Of course we can not act on what a person thinks.
But when they start talking racism they have crossed a bold line.

Agreed, all I wished to say was that being racist (which implies only having racist thoughts without any further words to specify otherwise) is not an issue.

Racism as defined by Oxford English Dictionary (A golden standard of dictionaries) = The belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.

Racism is a belief. Now, racist as per the oxford dictionary = A person who believes that a particular race is superior to another.

Still, being racist simply implies that someone has a BELIEF of people being inferior.

Therefor I declare personally that every human being in the world has the right to be racist as per my values on the subject of the freedom of opinion.
 
i pointed out that she is a woman of color because she would be even more likely to be offended by a racist asshole, perhaps,than one who was not.
Does that make her a racist? No.
I would say that Sterling destroyed himself, when he expressed to anyone words that he should have known would destroy him.
BTW Sterling has not been "destroyed" ...He is still a billionaire... net worth 1.9 billion USD.

No matter whether or not she was offended, if her being black is the reason she ratted him out, that makes her a racist. That would assume her seeing herself as being black gives her some kind of license that a non-black person would not have. And whether or not she was able to 'destroy him', she had to be willing to hurt him as much as she possibly could to do what she did. There are a lot of things somebody could do to me that would be more devastating than taking away all my money.
 
You are too funny. But not in a laugh with YOU funny kinda way. Nope . . . it's a LAUGH AT YOU kind of funny. I asked you 4-questions . . . answer one. Never mind, it would defeat the whole purpose of your thread. You are by far the least original . .. non-thinking/non-reading member of the forum. So, how did that work out for you Sparky?

I truly gasp at the message you and your ilk try to pass along. You give me COPD . . . I hope OBAMACARE takes care of me. It's surely taking care of you unless you are a liar.

You libs are nothing if not predictable. When you lose honest debate, which you always do, you start the personal insults. YAAAAWN

EDIT: You know I was thinking, there should be a special forum for special people that can't hold a respectful intelligent conversation and have no arrows in their quiver except talking trash. I wonder what they could call that place.:lol:
 
Last edited:
Bundy doesn't deserve to lose his claimed right to land based on his beliefs. The owner of the Clippers does. The difference is the NBA has a code of conduct. Just like the employer I have can tell me how to dreaa and behave while I am on the clock, the NBA can tell owners how to behave as part of their participation in the league. But, Bundy is being "convicted" for beliefs that had no bearing on land management jurisdiction.

If there is something in Sterling's contract he violated by having a personal conversation I would be surprised. Remember this taped conversation that was released was a private conversation.
 
No matter whether or not she was offended, if her being black is the reason she ratted him out, that makes her a racist. That would assume her seeing herself as being black gives her some kind of license that a non-black person would not have. And whether or not she was able to 'destroy him', she had to be willing to hurt him as much as she possibly could to do what she did. There are a lot of things somebody could do to me that would be more devastating than taking away all my money.

BS. She is no more a racist than she would be a rapist if she reported that he raped her.
Your convoluted, inside out, blame the victim thinking, tells us a lot about you and your warped values.
Thanks for that reveal...
.
 
You libs are nothing if not predictable. When you lose honest debate, which you always do, you start the personal insults. YAAAAWN

EDIT: You know I was thinking, there should be a special forum for special people that can't hold a respectful intelligent conversation and have no arrows in their quiver except talking trash. I wonder what they could call that place.:lol:

The only thing you got right in this reply was that I personally insulted you. Do you still believe that the NBA owners are fascist morons for protecting their brand by demanding punishment?
 
The only thing you got right in this reply was that I personally insulted you. Do you still believe that the NBA owners are fascist morons for protecting their brand by demanding punishment?
He calls anyone who doesn't agree with him a "fascist moron" and then scolds us for "not holding a respectful intelligent conversation".:lamo
 
The only thing you got right in this reply was that I personally insulted you. Do you still believe that the NBA owners are fascist morons for protecting their brand by demanding punishment?

So after I scold you like a little boy you crawl back saying "please mister, I'll be good, I really can debate and discuss like an adult'. I'll think it over but for now run along boy, ya bother me.
 
Back
Top Bottom