Do you know why the Civil Rights Act was concerned with actual impact on minorities for 'pre-clearance' instead of stated intent?
You're going to have to clarify what you mean by that for me to respond. My point is that any policy, no matter how ostensibly benign and regardless of its purpose, might happen to disproportionately impact minorities, and the fact that it ends up doing so does not suggest that it should be automatically tied to racism, which is, in short, a hatred of certain people on the basis of their ethnicity.
Suppose, for example, the the US federal government instituted a 10% sales tax on all goods and services sold in the USA in big cities (ignoring whether they could actually do so constitutionally). They do so because they've decided this is going to raise a whole bunch of revenue and will allow income taxes and business taxes to be lowered, or some such policy basis that the powers that be have determined, rightly or wrongly, will benefit the overall economy, and de-centralize the population, which for some reason they also think is a good plan. This new tax applies to everyone, but could well disproportionately effect black people. That does not make the policy itself racist. To say that it does broadens the definition of racism so far as to render it meaningless.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
Innocent people have been executed before, not just criminals. Beyond that you have anti-abortion activists who have in the past and will undoubtedly in the future murder abortion doctors. Anti-abortion is the more accurate term whether you like it or not. They clearly are willing to have life taken away if they deem the life unworthy, for whatever reason they'd like.
Anti-abortion activists have killed something like 11 people in the US. It's not even a worthy counterpoint. All of the murderers were taken into custody, and prosecuted.
Innocent people have been executed before, not just criminals. Beyond that you have anti-abortion activists who have in the past and will undoubtedly in the future murder abortion doctors (and "pro lifers" who condone those things). Anti-abortion is the more accurate term whether you like it or not. They clearly are willing to have life taken away if they deem the life unworthy, for whatever reason they'd like.
Yeah, thanks, I'm aware innocent people have been executed and that's a large part of why I'm against the death penalty (also, the cost associated with it).
Yeah, thanks, I'm aware that certain crazy #######s kill abortion doctors. This does not in any way affect the merits of the pro-life argument - which, again, I disagree with on the whole.
You're determined to attribute the absolute worst people you can find to a particular ideological perspective in an effort to discredit it rather than actually engaging with it. Which isn't surprising because it's what you've done throughout this thread - tried to smear people as falling into certain categories that you think justifies ignoring them. I swear just today I saw you jump into a conversation to tell someone to ignore Peter12 because "he's a troll".
So, no, pro-life is not a debunked term "whether I like it or not", only in your myopic, insular little world where the other side's evil and can't possibly have anything resembling a reasonable world view on any topic whatsoever.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
Pro life is certainly the term they'd prefer. Since corsi has shown he's so concerned about accurate language being used he should agree I think that they be described as pro-birth, that is far more accurate.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ResAlien For This Useful Post:
You're going to have to clarify what you mean by that for me to respond.
I don't want to bog the thread down with an argument about the Civil Rights Act, but on the topic of 'what constitutes racism' I encourage eveveryone to listen to a favourite podcast of mine, More Perfect, and their exploration of Batson challenges. 48mins
Pro life is certainly the term they'd prefer. Since corsi has shown he's so concerned about accurate language being used he should agree I think that they be described as pro-birth, that is far more accurate.
Well, no, because conceptually it is about the value of a life regardless of context or utility or whatever. It's not about life processes, it's about moral obligation beyond self-interest.
Location: In a land without pants, or war, or want. But mostly we care about the pants.
Exp:
As usual, CHL, you're missing the forest for the pedantic trees. The policies around voter registration have an ostensible purpose, to combat voter fraud, however, since this isn't a real problem, it's obvious it's actually more about limiting minorities right to vote. You can Buster it up however you like, it is still obvious to anyone with even the least grasp of subtlety over the literal interpretation of events.
__________________
Better educated sadness than oblivious joy.
The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to jammies For This Useful Post:
You're going to have to clarify what you mean by that for me to respond. My point is that any policy, no matter how ostensibly benign and regardless of its purpose, might happen to disproportionately impact minorities, and the fact that it ends up doing so does not suggest that it should be automatically tied to racism, which is, in short, a hatred of certain people on the basis of their ethnicity.
Suppose, for example, the the US federal government instituted a 10% sales tax on all goods and services sold in the USA in big cities (ignoring whether they could actually do so constitutionally). They do so because they've decided this is going to raise a whole bunch of revenue and will allow income taxes and business taxes to be lowered, or some such policy basis that the powers that be have determined, rightly or wrongly, will benefit the overall economy, and de-centralize the population, which for some reason they also think is a good plan. This new tax applies to everyone, but could well disproportionately effect black people. That does not make the policy itself racist. To say that it does broadens the definition of racism so far as to render it meaningless.
That's some kinda hypothetical.
Why not talk about real world examples where racists used racism to disenfranchise other races?
You're determined to attribute the absolute worst people you can find to a particular ideological perspective in an effort to discredit it rather than actually engaging with it. Which isn't surprising because it's what you've done throughout this thread - tried to smear people as falling into certain categories that you think justifies ignoring them. I swear just today I saw you jump into a conversation to tell someone to ignore Peter12 because "he's a troll".
So, no, pro-life is not a debunked term "whether I like it or not", only in your myopic, insular little world where the other side's evil and can't possibly have anything resembling a reasonable world view on any topic whatsoever.
Hahaha what? No, I'm determined we use appropriate terms. The term pro-life is dumb. Ask pro-lifers if they're cool with mothers of unwanted babies collecting welfare. I betcha they aren't. So they don't actually care about the life of the child, just that it gets born. So ResAlien actually probably ends the debate with "pro-birth". That is likely the most accurate term. So let's go with that then?
As far as calling peter a troll, you'll notice as soon as I do it he usually disappears from the thread. It's his MO here, he was much better at trolling a few years ago but has badly slipped. He even acknowledged as much when Buster was taking over the King Troll crown in the other thread.
As to the last part, feel free to spell out the "reasonable world view" on being pro life. Looking forward to reading it.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
This does not in any way affect the merits of the pro-life argument - which, again, I disagree with on the whole.
The point I was trying to make is that ardent pro-lifers, generally, don't have a sophisticated understanding of the issue. Same goes for anti-vax and anti-gomo positions, but those aren't the dominant positions on the Congressional Science Committe.
__________________
There's always two sides to an argument, and it's always a tie.
Location: In a land without pants, or war, or want. But mostly we care about the pants.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken
That's some kinda hypothetical.
Why not talk about real world examples where racists used racism to disenfranchise other races?
Just look up "redlining" in your favorite search engine and read. It's been a long-time tactic of racists in the USA to keep minorities in their "place" - that place being, of course, not as nice as the white neighbourhoods.
__________________
Better educated sadness than oblivious joy.
The Following User Says Thank You to jammies For This Useful Post:
So getting back to the election....this obviously increases the chances of a down ticket bloodbath.
Quote:
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has effectively shut down his high-dollar fundraising operation for the rest of the campaign, a highly unusual move that deals another serious blow to the GOP's effort to finance its get-out-the-vote operation before Election Day.
Steven Mnuchin, Trump's national finance chairman, said in an interview with The Washington Post on Tuesday that Trump Victory, a joint fundraising committee between the party and the campaign, held its last formal fundraiser on Oct. 19. The luncheon was in Las Vegas on the day of the final presidential debate.
“We’ve kind of wound down,” Mnuchin said. “But the online fundraising continues to be strong.”
Quote:
But Trump's decision effectively turns off one of the main spigots to the Republican National Committee, which collected $40 million through Trump Victory as of Sept. 30. The party has devoted a large share of the funds to pay for its national voter mobilization program to benefit the entire Republican ticket.
RNC officials said that party leaders, including Chairman Reince Priebus, are continuing to bring in resources for the party. “The RNC continues to fundraise for the entire GOP ticket,” said spokeswoman Lindsay Walters.
Mnuchin said Trump does not need high-dollar fundraisers, because his campaign is being buoyed by online donations, which he said are on track to hit a new record in October.
“We couldn’t be more pleased with how the fundraising has gone,” he said, adding: “We have big media buys, we have a terrific ground game.
But the RNC gets only 20 percent of the money that Trump raises online in conjunction with the party, while the vast majority of the big checks contributed to Trump Victory are routed to the party.
Quote:
Trump has also boosted his bid with his own resources. But while the businessman has repeatedly vowed to put $100 million into the effort, campaign finance reports show that he has given just $56 million so far.
Mnuchin declined to comment on when — or if — Trump intends to put in the remaining $44 million. “He has been very supportive of the campaign with his contributions,” Mnuchin said.
Just look up "redlining" in your favorite search engine and read. It's been a long-time tactic of racists in the USA to keep minorities in their "place" - that place being, of course, not as nice as the white neighbourhoods.
Oh sht, they drive above their manufacturer recommended RPM?
Does the moral decay know no end? Sign of the times.
The Following User Says Thank You to Gozer For This Useful Post:
What's that, just to the right of the 'RUMP' sign, what's that little black triangle? Is that a... stethoscope?
Yes, yes it is. Why would you wear your stethoscope to a political rally? (Other than, of course, the obvious explanation: professional doctor impersonator... dude's got his bedside expressions down, looking concerned but approachable.)
