Notices
Results 1 to 41 of 41
Like Tree13Likes
  • 2 Post By John Galt
  • 1 Post By kojax
  • 1 Post By John Galt
  • 1 Post By shlunka
  • 1 Post By sculptor
  • 4 Post By billvon
  • 1 Post By Harold14370
  • 1 Post By shlunka
  • 1 Post By kojax

Thread: Offensive fool

  1. #1 Offensive fool 
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    As my wife & I dined last night at one of the many sumptuous buffets here, I noticed an elderly gentleman, perhaps my age, seated with his wife adjacent to our booth. As have many of the old farts we see around here, he had a black cap on his head with bold gold letters proclaiming, "ISLAM IS THE PROBLEM".

    Now, I don't deny that I have no fore-knowledge of this man's background, he was likely a Veteran, most of whom proudly proclaim their ship or unit's name, but this was unusual.

    My wife agreed he had carried his personal feelings to far, in proclaiming them thusly.

    I thought he was a fool. A target painted on his forehead would have been more effective!

    What do you think of this? jocular


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    13,159
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    As my wife & I dined last night at one of the many sumptuous buffets here, I noticed an elderly gentleman, perhaps my age, seated with his wife adjacent to our booth. As have many of the old farts we see around here, he had a black cap on his head with bold gold letters proclaiming, "ISLAM IS THE PROBLEM".

    Now, I don't deny that I have no fore-knowledge of this man's background, he was likely a Veteran, most of whom proudly proclaim their ship or unit's name, but this was unusual.

    My wife agreed he had carried his personal feelings to far, in proclaiming them thusly.




    I thought he was a fool. A target painted on his forehead would have been more effective!

    What do you think of this? jocular
    He put all of the eggs in one basket

    It is inappropriate.

    We cannot judge all Islam anymore than we can judge any other belief.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    I should say he was rude, ignorant, offensive, ill-informed, deluded, complacent, self-obssessed and foolish. But I am sure he had some weaknesses also.
    tk421 and babe like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post

    I thought he was a fool. A target painted on his forehead would have been more effective!

    What do you think of this? jocular
    I think in a civilized world, offending people would not have any potential to result in violence. Civilized people understand that words and actions are not equivalent, and accordingly do not take violent action against mere words.

    Can we make the world civilized? Perhaps not. Can we make the USA civilized? Yes, if the people desire for it to be civilized. Will the freedom of speech survive if we don't make the USA civilized? No. It will absolutely certainly not survive in any form at all.

    So from my perspective, the man you described is a patriot in the truest sense.

    Patriots should go around provoking people with words, and if violence is the result then they should face that violence bravely. Asserting one's rights in the face of a physical threat is a time honored American tradition. Refusing or refraining from asserting one's rights out of fear that it might result in violence is the exact opposite of the attitude that lead to there being an American Revolutionary war.

    By the logic of the people I hear complaining about this guy the American colonists should have just stood by and taken whatever abuses the English government felt like dishing out, rather than risk having to kill anyone when they refused.
    seagypsy likes this.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    13,159
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post

    I thought he was a fool. A target painted on his forehead would have been more effective!

    What do you think of this? jocular
    I think in a civilized world, offending people would not have any potential to result in violence. Civilized people understand that words and actions are not equivalent, and accordingly do not take violent action against mere words.

    Can we make the world civilized? Perhaps not. Can we make the USA civilized? Yes, if the people desire for it to be civilized. Will the freedom of speech survive if we don't make the USA civilized? No. It will absolutely certainly not survive in any form at all.

    So from my perspective, the man you described is a patriot in the truest sense.

    Patriots should go around provoking people with words, and if violence is the result then they should face that violence bravely. Asserting one's rights in the face of a physical threat is a time honored American tradition. Refusing or refraining from asserting one's rights out of fear that it might result in violence is the exact opposite of the attitude that lead to there being an American Revolutionary war.

    By the logic of the people I hear complaining about this guy the American colonists should have just stood by and taken whatever abuses the English government felt like dishing out, rather than risk having to kill anyone when they refused.
    SO is your point that, we uphold freedom of speech, even when it is offensive?

    Then, I'd have to agree, because that is what America IS about.

    We don't have to like or agree, but we are allowed, that freedom.

    So, looking at it that way I stand corrected, even if I feel it is in poor taste.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    I think in a civilized world, offending people would not have any potential to result in violence. Civilized people understand that words and actions are not equivalent, and accordingly do not take violent action against mere words.
    Had some violent action been taken against the 'mere words' of Mein Kampf a great deal of heartache might have been avoided.

    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    So from my perspective, the man you described is a patriot in the truest sense.
    Interesting. In my mind he appears to be an ignorant asshole. Don't get me wrong - I am all in favour of him having the freedom to express himself. That helps the rest of us identify bigots.

    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Patriots should go around provoking people with words,
    You don't think it might be the the tiniest bit important to check the accuracy of your provocative words before uttering them? Do you think it is patriotic to cast a negative light on ones country by espousing blatant nonsense?

    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Refusing or refraining from asserting one's rights out of fear that it might result in violence is the exact opposite of the attitude that lead to there being an American Revolutionary war.
    Using this logic it is acceptable to call out Fire in a crowded theatre even when there is no fire.

    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    By the logic of the people I hear complaining about this guy the American colonists should have just stood by and taken whatever abuses the English government felt like dishing out, rather than risk having to kill anyone when they refused.
    The American colonists had a justifiable grievance against the English Crown. I find very little in the writings and rhetoric of the time, from the main protagonists on the colonists' side, that could be judged invalid. Such is not the case with the 'gentleman' described in the opening post.
    PhDemon likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Had some violent action been taken against the 'mere words' of Mein Kampf a great deal of heartache might have been avoided.
    I find this comparison rather obnoxious, JG. If I were to compare anybody to Hitler it would be the fanatical Muslims who threaten people for what they say or print.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Malignant Pimple shlunka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dogbox in front of Dywyddyr's house.
    Posts
    1,785
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Had some violent action been taken against the 'mere words' of Mein Kampf a great deal of heartache might have been avoided.
    I find this comparison rather obnoxious, JG. If I were to compare anybody to Hitler it would be the fanatical Muslims who threaten people for what they say or print.
    Yes... because the Islam as implied by the hat is applicable only to fanatical muslims...
    "MODERATOR NOTE : We don't entertain trolls here, not even in the trash can. Banned." -Markus Hanke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Had some violent action been taken against the 'mere words' of Mein Kampf a great deal of heartache might have been avoided.
    I find this comparison rather obnoxious, JG. If I were to compare anybody to Hitler it would be the fanatical Muslims who threaten people for what they say or print.
    Yes... because the Islam as implied by the hat is applicable only to fanatical muslims...
    It looks to me like JG was endorsing the fanatical Muslims, by impying that the hat guy should have some violent action taken against him.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Malignant Pimple shlunka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dogbox in front of Dywyddyr's house.
    Posts
    1,785
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Had some violent action been taken against the 'mere words' of Mein Kampf a great deal of heartache might have been avoided.
    I find this comparison rather obnoxious, JG. If I were to compare anybody to Hitler it would be the fanatical Muslims who threaten people for what they say or print.
    Yes... because the Islam as implied by the hat is applicable only to fanatical muslims...
    It looks to me like JG was endorsing the fanatical Muslims, by impying that the hat guy should have some violent action taken against him.
    Or suggesting that harsh generalizations that are deluded should be looked down upon.
    John Galt likes this.
    "MODERATOR NOTE : We don't entertain trolls here, not even in the trash can. Banned." -Markus Hanke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Had some violent action been taken against the 'mere words' of Mein Kampf a great deal of heartache might have been avoided.
    I find this comparison rather obnoxious, JG. If I were to compare anybody to Hitler it would be the fanatical Muslims who threaten people for what they say or print.
    Yes... because the Islam as implied by the hat is applicable only to fanatical muslims...
    It looks to me like JG was endorsing the fanatical Muslims, by impying that the hat guy should have some violent action taken against him.
    Or suggesting that harsh generalizations that are deluded should be looked down upon.
    Suppose the guy had a hat that said "Religion is the problem." Would that person be engaging in harsh generalizations and would he be deluded? You will find that sentiment freely expressed here in the Scientific Study of Religion forum. Only difference is, nobody puts it on their hat.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Had some violent action been taken against the 'mere words' of Mein Kampf a great deal of heartache might have been avoided.
    I find this comparison rather obnoxious, JG. If I were to compare anybody to Hitler it would be the fanatical Muslims who threaten people for what they say or print.
    Kojax was arguing that 'mere words' did not justify a violent action. I provided an example that demonstrated his belief was faulty.

    Shlunka has perfectly captured my intent: "Or suggesting that harsh generalizations that are deluded should be looked down upon. "

    Suppose the guy had a hat that said "Religion is the problem." Would that person be engaging in harsh generalizations and would he be deluded? You will find that sentiment freely expressed here in the Scientific Study of Religion forum. Only difference is, nobody puts it on their hat.
    I have repeatedly noted that otherwise repsected members who wish to blame religion for this that and the other have their heads buried up their asses.

    Perhaps, Harold, if you could escape the bias that has you almost believing the guy's hat spoke the truth, you would have taken the time to understand what I was saying and not misunderstood a comparison that wasn't even there.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    I only wear a hat when it's raining------an old broad brimmed stetson, or when it's freezing, a wool beret.

    A message on a hat like "ISLAM IS THE PROBLEM" seems to be inviting conversation or confrontation.
    Though I've never had a problem with followers of islam, I really do not like the TSA.
    If I were to wear such a hat, it would read "the TSA IS THE PROBLEM".
    jocular likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Malignant Pimple shlunka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dogbox in front of Dywyddyr's house.
    Posts
    1,785
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Had some violent action been taken against the 'mere words' of Mein Kampf a great deal of heartache might have been avoided.
    I find this comparison rather obnoxious, JG. If I were to compare anybody to Hitler it would be the fanatical Muslims who threaten people for what they say or print.
    Yes... because the Islam as implied by the hat is applicable only to fanatical muslims...
    It looks to me like JG was endorsing the fanatical Muslims, by impying that the hat guy should have some violent action taken against him.
    Or suggesting that harsh generalizations that are deluded should be looked down upon.
    Suppose the guy had a hat that said "Religion is the problem." Would that person be engaging in harsh generalizations and would he be deluded? You will find that sentiment freely expressed here in the Scientific Study of Religion forum. Only difference is, nobody puts it on their hat.
    The generalization wouldn't be deluded... now would it? Nor would it excite racism, nor is it as offensive as a more direct insult "I.E, islam specifically". Both are superfluous articles of clothing that do nothing to benefit anyone amongst the human population.
    "MODERATOR NOTE : We don't entertain trolls here, not even in the trash can. Banned." -Markus Hanke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    The generalization wouldn't be deluded... now would it? Nor would it excite racism, nor is it as offensive as a more direct insult "I.E, islam specifically". Both are superfluous articles of clothing that do nothing to benefit anyone amongst the human population.
    Is Islam a race now? Why is it okay to insult all religions, but not any specific ones? Do you think all religions are the same, or might some be more of a problem than others?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Malignant Pimple shlunka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dogbox in front of Dywyddyr's house.
    Posts
    1,785
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    The generalization wouldn't be deluded... now would it? Nor would it excite racism, nor is it as offensive as a more direct insult "I.E, islam specifically". Both are superfluous articles of clothing that do nothing to benefit anyone amongst the human population.
    Is Islam a race now? Why is it okay to insult all religions, but not any specific ones? Do you think all religions are the same, or might some be more of a problem than others?
    By focusing the insult on a specific religion, you make the insult more personal. What's more offensive, a hat that says "Humans are stupid" or a hat that says "Mexicans are stupid"? Islam is not a race, however, do not specific races "based on skin color and geographical location" come to mind when the word "muslim" is thrown around? Of course all religions aren't the same, that is an absurd question that doesn't even deserve an answer.
    "MODERATOR NOTE : We don't entertain trolls here, not even in the trash can. Banned." -Markus Hanke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    The generalization wouldn't be deluded... now would it? Nor would it excite racism, nor is it as offensive as a more direct insult "I.E, islam specifically". Both are superfluous articles of clothing that do nothing to benefit anyone amongst the human population.
    Is Islam a race now? Why is it okay to insult all religions, but not any specific ones? Do you think all religions are the same, or might some be more of a problem than others?
    By focusing the insult on a specific religion, you make the insult more personal. What's more offensive, a hat that says "Humans are stupid" or a hat that says "Mexicans are stupid"?
    I don't see any difference in the offensiveness.
    Islam is not a race, however, do not specific races "based on skin color and geographical location" come to mind when the word "muslim" is thrown around?
    No.
    Of course all religions aren't the same, that is an absurd question that doesn't even deserve an answer.
    Why do you think it's all right to condemn all religions then? At least identify specific teachings that you think are problematic.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,416
    Unfortunately, many do make those associations between religion and the rather arbitrary category of "race." It's out of ignorance as bad as the hat wearing man from the OP.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Malignant Pimple shlunka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dogbox in front of Dywyddyr's house.
    Posts
    1,785
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Unfortunately, many do make those associations between religion and the rather arbitrary category of "race." It's out of ignorance as bad as the hat wearing man from the OP.
    Is there not a correlation between geographic location and religion?
    "MODERATOR NOTE : We don't entertain trolls here, not even in the trash can. Banned." -Markus Hanke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    I think in a civilized world, offending people would not have any potential to result in violence. Civilized people understand that words and actions are not equivalent, and accordingly do not take violent action against mere words.
    Had some violent action been taken against the 'mere words' of Mein Kampf a great deal of heartache might have been avoided.
    Murdering Hitler before he could run for office would also have prevented a massacre. Shall we also start murdering people who we think might later go on to become criminals?

    Just like children, ideas are potential actions. But they are only potential actions. But the truth is that you don't know what action will follow from any particular expressed idea. It's possible a person is just blowing off steam and letting them say what they're feeling will help them to avoid acting it out. The writing of Mein Kampf while in prison certainly provided young Hitler with an outlet. Nobody could possibly know for sure what he was going to do afterward.

    However Hitler did everyone a big favor by writing it, and announcing openly what he was. If the people of that time had been wiser, they would never have voted for him. Later on Nazi party leaders would go on to lament the fact he had written that book. In many ways it was among the biggest stumbling blocks of his career.






    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    So from my perspective, the man you described is a patriot in the truest sense.
    Interesting. In my mind he appears to be an ignorant asshole. Don't get me wrong - I am all in favour of him having the freedom to express himself. That helps the rest of us identify bigots.
    Yep. The devil we know is better than the devil we don't know.

    Or do you operate under the illusion that devils would cease to exist if they couldn't speak?


    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Patriots should go around provoking people with words,
    You don't think it might be the the tiniest bit important to check the accuracy of your provocative words before uttering them? Do you think it is patriotic to cast a negative light on ones country by espousing blatant nonsense?
    Slander and libel laws are legitimate limitations on the freedom of speech. Acts of deception concerning matters of a factual nature amount to a form of coercion. We don't want people defrauding old grannies out of their retirement funds and then hiding behind freedom of speech.

    However spouting nonsense is up there on my list of crimes right next to picking one's nose in public, or fat people sun bathing on the beach. Crimes to be sure, but hardly a problem for the authorities to be called in over.

    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    Refusing or refraining from asserting one's rights out of fear that it might result in violence is the exact opposite of the attitude that lead to there being an American Revolutionary war.
    Using this logic it is acceptable to call out Fire in a crowded theatre even when there is no fire.
    That would be a deliberate act of deception concerning a matter of a factual nature.


    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    By the logic of the people I hear complaining about this guy the American colonists should have just stood by and taken whatever abuses the English government felt like dishing out, rather than risk having to kill anyone when they refused.
    The American colonists had a justifiable grievance against the English Crown. I find very little in the writings and rhetoric of the time, from the main protagonists on the colonists' side, that could be judged invalid. Such is not the case with the 'gentleman' described in the opening post.
    The gentleman was asserting he had the right to say something angry and hurtful. Perhaps he was angry or had been hurt. Maybe a close relative had died in Afghanistan recently. Who knows?

    People will always express their frustrations on some level. The trick is choosing that level. We don't want people physically assaulting each other, so it's best we get them to do something lighter than that. What would you propose that we allow this man to do that would be less damaging than wearing a silly hat in public?
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Unfortunately, many do make those associations between religion and the rather arbitrary category of "race." It's out of ignorance as bad as the hat wearing man from the OP.
    Is there not a correlation between geographic location and religion?
    You are making the correlation, not the hat guy, so don't accuse him of racism without any evidence when you are the one making a racial connection. The Boston bombers were white guys.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Malignant Pimple shlunka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dogbox in front of Dywyddyr's house.
    Posts
    1,785
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Unfortunately, many do make those associations between religion and the rather arbitrary category of "race." It's out of ignorance as bad as the hat wearing man from the OP.
    Is there not a correlation between geographic location and religion?
    You are making the correlation, not the hat guy, so don't accuse him of racism without any evidence when you are the one making a racial connection. The Boston bombers were white guys.
    Correct, the Boston bombers were white guys. Are the majority of Muslims white? Is there not an olive skinned middle eastern stereotype to Muslims? While "race" is an outdated term, there is a geographic and even skin tone predominance in Islam. Do you believe that an individual wearing such an absurdly superfluous and blatantly prejudiced hat in public would think "Islam is distributed throughout the world, and as such, individuals of all skin colors and geographical areas could be Muslims." Or is it more likely that he has a sort of "Olive skinned towel head Afghani terrorists are all muslims." view?
    "MODERATOR NOTE : We don't entertain trolls here, not even in the trash can. Banned." -Markus Hanke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Unfortunately, many do make those associations between religion and the rather arbitrary category of "race." It's out of ignorance as bad as the hat wearing man from the OP.
    Is there not a correlation between geographic location and religion?
    You are making the correlation, not the hat guy, so don't accuse him of racism without any evidence when you are the one making a racial connection. The Boston bombers were white guys.
    Correct, the Boston bombers were white guys. Are the majority of Muslims white? Is there not an olive skinned middle eastern stereotype to Muslims? While "race" is an outdated term, there is a geographic and even skin tone predominance in Islam. Do you believe that an individual wearing such an absurdly superfluous and blatantly prejudiced hat in public would think "Islam is distributed throughout the world, and as such, individuals of all skin colors and geographical areas could be Muslims." Or is it more likely that he has a sort of "Olive skinned towel head Afghani terrorists are all muslims." view?
    This is about like saying that Nazis were primarily white guys from Germany, therefore if you don't like Nazis, you have some prejudice against those who come from that part of the world.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Malignant Pimple shlunka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dogbox in front of Dywyddyr's house.
    Posts
    1,785
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Unfortunately, many do make those associations between religion and the rather arbitrary category of "race." It's out of ignorance as bad as the hat wearing man from the OP.
    Is there not a correlation between geographic location and religion?
    You are making the correlation, not the hat guy, so don't accuse him of racism without any evidence when you are the one making a racial connection. The Boston bombers were white guys.
    Correct, the Boston bombers were white guys. Are the majority of Muslims white? Is there not an olive skinned middle eastern stereotype to Muslims? While "race" is an outdated term, there is a geographic and even skin tone predominance in Islam. Do you believe that an individual wearing such an absurdly superfluous and blatantly prejudiced hat in public would think "Islam is distributed throughout the world, and as such, individuals of all skin colors and geographical areas could be Muslims." Or is it more likely that he has a sort of "Olive skinned towel head Afghani terrorists are all muslims." view?
    This is about like saying that Nazis were primarily white guys from Germany, therefore if you don't like Nazis, you have some prejudice against those who come from that part of the world.
    Ah yes, because the stigma of living in Germany is identical to the stigma of being an Afghani with a long beard, dark skin, and wearing a turban.
    "MODERATOR NOTE : We don't entertain trolls here, not even in the trash can. Banned." -Markus Hanke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    2,227
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    So from my perspective, the man you described is a patriot in the truest sense.
    As I am sure you are aware, veterans (especially those with PTSD) often become violent, and sometimes go on rampages, killing people before they are brought down.

    Imagine someone sat down next to you with a hat saying "stop veterans before they stop you." Would you consider him a patriot in the truest sense?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Ah yes, because the stigma of living in Germany is identical to the stigma of being an Afghani with a long beard, dark skin, and wearing a turban.
    Why are you so obsessed with race? It's got nothing to do with it. Many Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Coptic Christians, etc. have long beards, dark skin, and wear turbans. Nobody is wearing hats that say they are the problem.

    You can only play the race card so often, then the impact wears off and you have to come up with some logical arguments.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Malignant Pimple shlunka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dogbox in front of Dywyddyr's house.
    Posts
    1,785
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Ah yes, because the stigma of living in Germany is identical to the stigma of being an Afghani with a long beard, dark skin, and wearing a turban.
    Why are you so obsessed with race? It's got nothing to do with it. Many Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Coptic Christians, etc. have long beards, dark skin, and wear turbans. Nobody is wearing hats that say they are the problem.

    You can only play the race card so often, then the impact wears off and you have to come up with some logical arguments.
    Afghani is not a race... it's a name derived from location. Also, the logical arguments have been stated earlier, you have yet to address why you disagree that reductionism makes things possibly more offensive. Nor address that there IS a stigma surrounding Muslims of specific physical characteristics. Nor addressed my point suggesting that you made a false equivalence in that stereotypical Islamic = 1940s Nazi party member. Then completely ignored anything that I've stated asides from my initial usage of the archaic word "race" as used colloquially by the majority of Americans.
    "MODERATOR NOTE : We don't entertain trolls here, not even in the trash can. Banned." -Markus Hanke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Afghani is not a race... it's a name derived from location. Also, the logical arguments have been stated earlier, you have yet to address why you disagree that reductionism makes things possibly more offensive.
    Your analogy of "humans" versus "Mexicans" to "all religions" versus "Islam" was flawed. All humans includes everybody, but all religions does not. Therefore by insulting all religions, you are still dividing people into two camps, theists and atheist.
    Nor address that there IS a stigma surrounding Muslims of specific physical characteristics.
    There may be a stigma, but that is not relevant to the present discussion. Wearing a hat critical of Islam does not display any stigma about physical characteristics. You are jumping to a conclusion and making an unwarranted stereotype about the person wearing the hat.
    Nor addressed my point suggesting that you made a false equivalence in that stereotypical Islamic = 1940s Nazi party member. Then completely ignored anything that I've stated asides from my initial usage of the archaic word "race" as used colloquially by the majority of Americans.
    You missed the point. During the WWII era, there was a prejudice against Germans, enough so that some people in the US of German heritage Anglicized their names. This prejudice was wrong, because not all ethnic Germans were Nazis. Many even fought with the Allies. This doesn't mean there is anything wrong with being anti-Nazi. Nazism is a political philosophy, like Islam.
    shlunka likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Malignant Pimple shlunka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dogbox in front of Dywyddyr's house.
    Posts
    1,785
    I hate it when I'm wrong....
    babe likes this.
    "MODERATOR NOTE : We don't entertain trolls here, not even in the trash can. Banned." -Markus Hanke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    So from my perspective, the man you described is a patriot in the truest sense.
    As I am sure you are aware, veterans (especially those with PTSD) often become violent, and sometimes go on rampages, killing people before they are brought down.

    Imagine someone sat down next to you with a hat saying "stop veterans before they stop you." Would you consider him a patriot in the truest sense?
    Yes, actually.

    It's ok to speak hatefully about one's own country. (Though I'm sure many conservatives disagree and would like for it to be banned.) I had many times over more respect for the flag back when it was legal to burn flags. It was a true icon of its own values, willing to allow disrespectful behavior even if it was itself the object of that disrespect.

    I like those soldiers who say that they may disagree with what you are saying, but they'll fight to the death to uphold your right to say it. Those guys understand what freedom is. It's giving people a choice, and then not telling them which option they're supposed to choose. (As opposed to giving them a choice and then forcing them to choose the option you want whether they like it or not.)
    babe likes this.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post

    During the WWII era, there was a prejudice against Germans, enough so that some people in the US of German heritage Anglicized their names.
    This I can attest to the truth of. My mother's second husband's name was Pfeiffer, he was a Czech not a German, and several instances of threatening behavior against his person had been made as he went back and forth to work. He never drove a car, so used public transit exclusively. Some coworkers who rode it with him were responsible for the harassment. He had his name legally changed, taking his first wife's maiden name, Sedlar, which is also Czech.

    My own name drips of Germanic origin, though it too is Czech. My Dad had a few problems because of that, but he was a fighter, whereas Pfeiffer was not. joc
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,795
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    It's ok to speak hatefully about one's own country. (Though I'm sure many conservatives disagree and would like for it to be banned.) I had many times over more respect for the flag back when it was legal to burn flags. It was a true icon of its own values, willing to allow disrespectful behavior even if it was itself the object of that disrespect.
    When did it become illegal to burn a flag?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33 The Results 
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    GEEZ! A rather scary feeling ensues to have drawn into the fray, several Mods having conflicting thoughts among themselves regarding one's initial post! Relieved it's not a knock-down brawl, though! I feel every thought expressed is worthy of consideration.

    My wife & I happen to have chosen to live in an area heavily populated by Veterans, mostly retired, some carrying obvious evidence of the extent of severity their service caused. It almost seems a clannish thing among them to have caps or shirts imprinted with their service identifying information. Personally, I choose to carry myself as anonymously as possible, even though I am not a Vet.

    Arizona is one of only two states that I know of to have enacted unlimited concealed carry of a weapon law for all it's residents, no requirements attached other than must be a non-felon not under indictment. How would it be if I got myself a cap proclaiming "Don't f..k with me, I have a GUN"?

    Sorry, off-thread! joc
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    It's ok to speak hatefully about one's own country. (Though I'm sure many conservatives disagree and would like for it to be banned.) I had many times over more respect for the flag back when it was legal to burn flags. It was a true icon of its own values, willing to allow disrespectful behavior even if it was itself the object of that disrespect.
    When did it become illegal to burn a flag?
    About the time it bcame "illegal" to "hoard" gold coins, I suppose. joc
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    As my wife & I dined last night at one of the many sumptuous buffets here, I noticed an elderly gentleman, perhaps my age, seated with his wife adjacent to our booth. As have many of the old farts we see around here, he had a black cap on his head with bold gold letters proclaiming, "ISLAM IS THE PROBLEM".

    Now, I don't deny that I have no fore-knowledge of this man's background, he was likely a Veteran, most of whom proudly proclaim their ship or unit's name, but this was unusual.

    My wife agreed he had carried his personal feelings to far, in proclaiming them thusly.

    I thought he was a fool. A target painted on his forehead would have been more effective!

    What do you think of this? jocular
    I wish more people would openly admit their unpopular opinions. That way we don't have to waste time getting to know them. We can judge them by what few qualities are obvious about them just like they do with everyone else and give our time to those who are more worthy.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by shlunka View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    Had some violent action been taken against the 'mere words' of Mein Kampf a great deal of heartache might have been avoided.
    I find this comparison rather obnoxious, JG. If I were to compare anybody to Hitler it would be the fanatical Muslims who threaten people for what they say or print.
    Yes... because the Islam as implied by the hat is applicable only to fanatical muslims...
    It looks to me like JG was endorsing the fanatical Muslims, by impying that the hat guy should have some violent action taken against him.
    Or suggesting that harsh generalizations that are deluded should be looked down upon.
    Suppose the guy had a hat that said "Religion is the problem." Would that person be engaging in harsh generalizations and would he be deluded? You will find that sentiment freely expressed here in the Scientific Study of Religion forum. Only difference is, nobody puts it on their hat.
    I have actually worn t-shirts that express that belief. I don't have anything against people expressing their opinions in their clothing. I share JG's sentiment that it makes it easier to identify (he said bigots) personality types you may want to avoid. I also appreciate t-shirts worn by people that endorse drug use and violence. Because then I know that I likely won't want anything to do with them. I dislike hip hop music and the gangsta lifestyle. So when I see people wearing excessive bling, sagging pants, gold teeth and chains, and hip hop t-shirts, I avoid them too. We all advertise who we are in some way or another by how we dress. Some of us are more bold than others are. If i see some guy who is clean cut, manicured fingers, wearing as suit and tie, I will likely think that he is an educated professionally employed upper middle class yuppie who doesn't do any manual labor and likely would not appreciate my crass humor or vulgar language. I wouldn't avoid him, but I would likely adjust my behavior so as to not freak him out too much.

    Everyone judges by appearance and we tend to dress according to how we want to be perceived. This man is bold enough to say what he really thinks and I doubt he is ignorant enough to think no one would find his opinion offensive. I know if I dress in the style I prefer, I will turn heads and make some people uncomfortable. I'm ok with that. The ones that would judge me for wearing black and having blue hair are not the people I would want to associate with. I prefer to attract the type of people I enjoy being around. Art nerds, comic book geeks, and out casts.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    I prefer to attract the type of people I enjoy being around. Art nerds, comic book geeks, and out casts.
    But, it is often said people comingle because of similar interests. You say you enjoy these three categories, but I believe I KNOW you to not be thus classified. I think. joc
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    Quote Originally Posted by jocular View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by seagypsy View Post
    I prefer to attract the type of people I enjoy being around. Art nerds, comic book geeks, and out casts.
    But, it is often said people comingle because of similar interests. You say you enjoy these three categories, but I believe I KNOW you to not be thus classified. I think. joc
    LOL you don't know me vewy well. My friends in school were the weirdos that drew gore comics, I love super hero movies, and would never dress normal if I had hte finances to dress as I wished.

    I splurged though this week and bought myself a proper steam punk outfit at the mall for once with this as the main attraction of the outfit.
    http://www.hottopic.com/hottopic/Gir...t-10015364.jsp

    Hot topic is my favorite store at the mall.
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    1,771
    Classy! joc
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Theatre Whore babe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Resident of Big Island of Hawai'i since 2003, and in Bayside, Ca. since 1981, Humboldt since 1977
    Posts
    13,159
    I rather got in a bit of trouble with the TSA a few years ago. I think when I question the one I wound up with 4 huge men surrounding this 98 pound woman, standing 5'3 and unfortunately I am tenacious, and rather told them that they were f****** stupid, in those words. However since I was one foot in domestic and the other in international....I think they were a bit confused. Let's just say the next time I was in SFO.......a very clear sign was posted. *grin*
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold14370 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    It's ok to speak hatefully about one's own country. (Though I'm sure many conservatives disagree and would like for it to be banned.) I had many times over more respect for the flag back when it was legal to burn flags. It was a true icon of its own values, willing to allow disrespectful behavior even if it was itself the object of that disrespect.
    When did it become illegal to burn a flag?

    I had to research it to make sure, but yeah. It's not illegal. Quite a number of laws aimed at making it illegal have been passed over the years, and it seems that all of them have been struck down by the Supreme Court.


    Timeline of Flag Desecration Issues

    They used to burn a flag every year at scout camp, as a means of retiring it (not meant to be offensive, of course.) Then one year they stopped, and I guess I got the wrong idea. Good to know I still live in a free country. Maybe I'll go burn a flag tomorrow just for fun, and see if the police come after me for it, just to make sure. Or maybe I'll just pinch myself to make sure I'm not dreaming.

    It's nice to suddenly find out I still live in a free country after all. Who knows? Maybe I'll go buy a flag and not burn it. Hang it somewhere instead.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 11
    Last Post: May 7th, 2009, 06:33 PM
  2. Regarding offensive People
    By Liongold in forum Site Feedback
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: March 1st, 2009, 02:50 AM
  3. Gnosis. From fame to fool.
    By Greatest I am in forum Scientific Study of Religion
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: February 19th, 2009, 11:07 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •