Atheists, George Zimmerman and the burden of proof

[là bạn điên]

Fair enough on the point of ideology vs. position.

However, the fact that my positions coincide with a lot of ideologues doesn't mean that ideology is driving them. From my own perspective, I underwent a shift from (in American terms) conservative to liberal over a number of years. This went issue-by-issue. I personally consider the individual issues more important than any unifying trend that my position on those issues might signify. '

You seem quite rapidly leftist on economic matters. What issues do you not share the standard leftist position on?

With the irony being that most of the people who toss out the term are, in fact, doing precisely that. Usually in greater numbers and concentration and with more deliberation. In fact, for a lot of American conservatives, the accusation of 'race baiting' amounts to little more than an attempt to preserve the power and influence they have enjoyed for their entire lives thanks to their white skin.

Even if that is true it still doesn't negate the veracity of the term. The Jesse Jackson and Al Sharptons of this world need to be pulled up along with their followers who endorse their lies.

You assume a great deal about my motives. Are you telepathic?

I can only go by what you post/. You aren't a frothing loon like Minimalist but you appear to share his views.

There are no shortage of self-described "colorblind" people whose idea of colorblindness is insisting that racism doesn't exist anymore, and whenever evidence to the contrary is exhibited, those who display the evidence are considered 'race baiters'.

Complete strawman. race baiters IGNORE any evidence and take a side on ideological grounds. I am pretty certain that had the Zmmerman/Martin roles been reversed you would have switched sides with the same evidence.

Were there some people who did that on 'my side'? Sure. But, as I pointed out (and as you pointedly ignored), the situation for young black males in particular is that they are at an automatic disadvantage. There were many, far more, on 'the other side' who continue to insist that Trayvon Martin's combination of age, gender and skin color make it inherently more likely that he deserved what he got. Point this out is not 'race baiting'. It is pointing out reality. There are plenty of cases of it, well-documented.

I don't think that Martin deserved to be shot (unless he actually intended to Kill/Seriously Injure Zimmerman in which case he did) I think he decided to assualt Zimmerman and since I don;t think physical assualt should be tolerated I think he should have gone into detention for a number of weeks. Unfortunately the hobby of attacking people you think may be following you may very well lead to your demise.

Reality is ,of course, that except in the minds of the ideologically blinkered it is true that young black men are the most criminally minded combination of sex,skin colour and age in the USA (and indeed the UK). Stating that isn't racist either (much as people of YOUR ideology often insist it is). You leftists and the Conservatives are two sides of the same coin. You both judge on race rather than as individuals

Regarding groups vs. individuals: Everybody is both, to a large degree. Our socio-economic-political apparatus is far too large to address the needs of every individual on every single topic. This is unfortunate, but also a reality that some of us have decided to live with and utilize in a positive manner.

None of you use it in a positive manner. Except in the case of race or gender specific medical reasons ( such as breat cancer, Tay Sachs or sickle cell anaemia) discrimination is always a bad thing for society as a whole and only increases racial hatred.

I personally seek more freedom for individuals, especially on social issues. One of those freedoms is the freedom for young, black males to be given a fair shake.

You don;t want freedom. You want special treatment.

We're nowhere near that point yet. If the Martin case demonstrates anything clearly, it's that.

It doesn't demonstrate anything of the sort .All it demonstrates is that the media is vastly more concerned over the killing of a black person by a white person than of a white person by a black person (which generally goes unreported)

Was there some backlash against that? Was it unjustified? The answer to both is 'maybe', but what the hell do you expect after 400 years, and counting, of this kind of treatment?

Backlash? Are you referring to the unprovoked racist attacks on white and latino people committed by thugs that was condoned by the left and their racebaiting allies?