Nah it's cool, you're just makin' a point. You have a good point but the thing is, murder is a crime. Prejudice is not. I can't exactly think of any area of the world where murder isn't a crime, so the justice brought upon a murderer is oftentimes done by a system of government...well, at least that's how it's supposed to work. It doesn't happen like that everywhere. Or all the time. Even here in the US. Thing is, you're supposed to turn to an impartial source of justice if you have information to show that someone is a murderer, right? That's how you retaliate against a murderer.
Someone who is prejudiced however, there is no such law that exists to punish them for it. Prejudice is just allowed to happen. We may not like it as a society but there's no real way to enforce it. And why is that? Well, because prejudice takes many forms, many shapes, and tends to be very subjective. We all seem to agree on this point: Prejudice is bad. Thing is, prejudice is bad, when there's no reason for it, but prejudice when it has a reason is oftentimes very deserving. Prejudice against gays, minorities, women, stuff like that, is unfounded. It comes from bigotry and willful ignorance. So, to be prejudiced against someone who is exhibiting prejudice out of ignorance is reasonable; it's a negative reaction to ignorance and bigotry. Saying "I am prejudiced against racists" does not hold the same negative connotations as "I am prejudiced against niggers" does.
The world does not exist in black and white. Generally assume that if I make a generalized statement, I'm only using a generalized statement because it's the easiest way of saying something. If I say "Texas is stupid," don't take that to meaning that TexaNS are stupid; take it to meaning that the body that REPRESENTS Texas, their politicians, are stupid in the context I am referring to them in. Say for example, this thread. The legislative body responsible for this law is clearly stupid, ignorant, and bigoted. Do you not agree?
Trust me, I am an intelligent enough individual that, most of the time, I know when to specify something. If it had been said "ALL Texans are idiots," then yes. You then become justified in saying I am being unfairly prejudiced. But if I am saying "Texas is stupid" and there is a clear lack of a definitive, all-encompassing statement, then you need to look at the context. And the context here was legislators passing a really idiotic law. And Min was saying it in this exact same way. So I must therefore ask...why do you take it out of context? Why do you cry persecution towards the entirety...when no such persecution of any kind was being made? You are trying to argue against something that isn't there.
I must say, I am disappointed in the reactions to this thread. These are knee-jerk emotional reactions, people being offended by something they shouldn't be...butthurt over nothing, essentially.
Someone who is prejudiced however, there is no such law that exists to punish them for it. Prejudice is just allowed to happen. We may not like it as a society but there's no real way to enforce it. And why is that? Well, because prejudice takes many forms, many shapes, and tends to be very subjective. We all seem to agree on this point: Prejudice is bad. Thing is, prejudice is bad, when there's no reason for it, but prejudice when it has a reason is oftentimes very deserving. Prejudice against gays, minorities, women, stuff like that, is unfounded. It comes from bigotry and willful ignorance. So, to be prejudiced against someone who is exhibiting prejudice out of ignorance is reasonable; it's a negative reaction to ignorance and bigotry. Saying "I am prejudiced against racists" does not hold the same negative connotations as "I am prejudiced against niggers" does.
The world does not exist in black and white. Generally assume that if I make a generalized statement, I'm only using a generalized statement because it's the easiest way of saying something. If I say "Texas is stupid," don't take that to meaning that TexaNS are stupid; take it to meaning that the body that REPRESENTS Texas, their politicians, are stupid in the context I am referring to them in. Say for example, this thread. The legislative body responsible for this law is clearly stupid, ignorant, and bigoted. Do you not agree?
Trust me, I am an intelligent enough individual that, most of the time, I know when to specify something. If it had been said "ALL Texans are idiots," then yes. You then become justified in saying I am being unfairly prejudiced. But if I am saying "Texas is stupid" and there is a clear lack of a definitive, all-encompassing statement, then you need to look at the context. And the context here was legislators passing a really idiotic law. And Min was saying it in this exact same way. So I must therefore ask...why do you take it out of context? Why do you cry persecution towards the entirety...when no such persecution of any kind was being made? You are trying to argue against something that isn't there.
I must say, I am disappointed in the reactions to this thread. These are knee-jerk emotional reactions, people being offended by something they shouldn't be...butthurt over nothing, essentially.
