Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: June 15, 2025, 3:12 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Atheists, George Zimmerman and the burden of proof
#30
RE: Atheists, George Zimmerman and the burden of proof
(February 6, 2014 at 2:06 am)là bạn điên Wrote: These aren't ideologies -they are positions. An ideology is where you have an overiding viewpoint which informs the vast majority of your positions. With Minimalist you know all his positions in advance because they are consistent with his Ideology. More or less that is you all round. The nearest thing I have to Ideology is 'Whig'

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.

Quote:It carries the direct accusation that people use race as a means to gain power and influence unjustly.

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.

Quote:Being liberal (in the real meaning not the modern US definition) I look on each case by its individual merits I don't chose one saide based on ideology which the conservatives and you leftists do. I don't think any of you could care less about the merits you just saw a black vs white conflict and took the black side on principal. The conservatives have rightly identified
that such people are race baiters and need to be labelled and confronted.

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

Quote:If you are ,like me, a classic liberal, you will constantly be called racist (and sexist) by people who want to treat people as part of a collective and not as individuals. These are people of the left and who are not liberals. US conservatives might call you and Minimalist liberals I think you are no such thing- you are leftists, collectivists who want to give bonuses and penalties to entire groups. Indeed leftists call me whole colourblind position 'racist' just as they subscribe to the nonsense that black people can't be racist (which to me Eric Holder amply demonstrates the opposite).I am certainly not going to change my language so as not to incur the wrath of people whose far leftist ideology with its opposition to individualism is so pronounced.

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'. 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.

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.

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



Messages In This Thread
RE: Atheists, George Zimmerman and the burden of proof - by Ryantology - February 6, 2014 at 2:53 am

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  George Conway Minimalist 0 380 November 22, 2018 at 3:28 pm
Last Post: Minimalist
  George Carlin - The Only Prophet Who Made Accurate Predictions Minimalist 14 2808 December 24, 2017 at 1:10 pm
Last Post: Thumpalumpacus
  George Bush and Ronald Regan debate immigration 1980 CapnAwesome 0 835 January 7, 2016 at 1:44 am
Last Post: CapnAwesome
  Zimmerman's Girlfriend Asks Judge To Drop Charges A Theist 6 2587 December 10, 2013 at 5:47 pm
Last Post: The Valkyrie
  George Zimmerman continues to flaunt the fact that he got away with murder Ryantology 28 6470 November 20, 2013 at 11:43 am
Last Post: Doubting Thomas
  Zimmerman verdict: Not Guilty. TaraJo 431 172060 September 22, 2013 at 1:22 pm
Last Post: Captain Colostomy
  George Zimmerman: Weak Prosecution wolf39us 15 4854 July 8, 2013 at 5:39 pm
Last Post: Whateverist
  Martin and Zimmerman - A reasoned logical discussion Puddleglum 27 12821 September 12, 2012 at 9:34 pm
Last Post: Puddleglum
  George Washington named Britan's Greatest Ever Foe Handprint 24 10649 April 20, 2012 at 2:26 pm
Last Post: downbeatplumb
  Perhaps Zimmerman Wasn't So Bad Minimalist 18 7082 April 4, 2012 at 8:17 pm
Last Post: mediamogul



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)