Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why do 90% of black people vote for Democrats?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • STAY ON TARGET
    If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
    ){ :|:& };:

    Comment


    • Why would I live in a place where I was regularly verbally abused, occasionally physically abused, and found my employment and social options severely limited by discrimination? Either Americans are wanted, or we're feared. And if we're not either of those things, I wouldn't go.

      Maybe the Paks really had no choice in the matter, and for that I sympathize with their plight. But in any event, I'd probably look at the word "yank" contextually, just as I would now. In the South it's a term of extreme hatred, while in the North it has a much more benign meaning. Just because Southerners say it with hate doesn't mean that I take it as a hateful word though.
      John Brown did nothing wrong.

      Comment


      • I don't think that many southerners say it with any real hate. Just sort of in a teasing jest.
        If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
        ){ :|:& };:

        Comment


        • It used to be more hateful, but you'd be surprised how much anger there still is in some places.
          John Brown did nothing wrong.

          Comment


          • Most of the anger seems to come from people like Oerdin.
            If there is no sound in space, how come you can hear the lasers?
            ){ :|:& };:

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Ben Kenobi View Post
              Fair enough. However, as a ruler, I believe he did more good than harm and he was a good ruler of England.
              I don't recall reading anything about a "scale" of good versus bad deeds. I just read, "don't kill"... etc. Also, saving lives isn't a prerequisite. So it counts for didley squat. Even if it was a scale, you would have a whole bunch of bad deeds and nothing to balance it with.

              I don't see how ending a policy of mass murder is somehow considered a "good" thing. It's more like a "NO DUH" thing.

              I mean, there are things in life where apathy doesn't matter. I can forget to take the garbage out and its not big deal. But forget to end slavery? That's the kind of thing you need to end or you will go to hell. You don't get brownie points for that.

              That's like Jeffrey Dahmer saying, "Well God, I thought about butchering a few dozen other families, but I decided not to. They owe their lives to me because I didn't kill them. I saved their lives from myself. So in the grand scheme of things, I did more good than bad. I'm a good guy and deserve to go to heaven."

              That's some ****ed up **** BK.


              So what you are saying is what we should hate the sin of child molestation. Love the sinner, hate the sin.
              No. I'm not saying it. It's written in the Bible. Plus, it makes pretty damn good sense. Hate the sin. Condemn the sinner. Love them? Well, I can love them in the sense that they are a human soul that deserves the same love that I do. But the aforementioned individuals are still pieces of garbage. Pieces of garbage like that deserve condemnation for the things they do. There is a level of "love" that every human being deserves. Certainly. But they don't get to be the leader of a global corporate mega church. They don't get to be arch bishops. They don't get to be priests.

              I can love them just fine when they are rotting in a jail cell.

              Yes, because they find it hard to rely on Jesus and not on their own means. Not sure where it says that being rich is evil.
              I says it right there... in Matthew 19... from the Bible... I just posted it. Maybe you have a blind spot in your vision and conveniently missed it? Being rich is bad enough that Jesus equates it with KILLING PEOPLE.

              So put that through the little pinball machine of a brain you've got there until the switch flips.

              We've got to get you fixed.

              How is it false witness?
              Perhaps you misunderstood. I was saying, perhaps in too subtle a manner, that by failing to believe in Christian principles that I have directly referenced in Matthew 19... the direct words of Jesus Christ... you are not a Christian. And yet, by considering yourself a Christian, you are in fact lying to everyone... bearing false witness. And I implied that only Satan and his followers do that.

              So basically, I was calling you a devil worshiper... not necessarily in the candles and pentagram sense... but "King of Lies" sense.


              Why is a white person calling black people with whom he disagrees as 'Uncle Toms?'
              I don't understand. I called Cain and Thomas, Uncle Toms.
              To us, it is the BEAST.

              Comment


              • Second kentonio. It would appear the entire idea of context, connotation and every symbol aquiring meaning in connection to other symbols ('discourse') has not spread very far among the ignorant Apolyton audience? Seeing what wonderful posters have been driven away around here, that wouldn't surprise me in the least.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
                  Most of the anger seems to come from people like Oerdin.
                  and the people that search for him
                  To us, it is the BEAST.

                  Comment


                  • People who belong a dominant racial group can't understand why oppressed minority racial groups think certain slurs which were (and in many cases still are) used against them by the dominant racial group are offensive?! I'm shocked!
                    “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
                    - John 13:34-35 (NRSV)

                    Comment


                    • While it isn't shocking news, it's all the more important to teach those majority whities some manners.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui View Post
                        People who belong a dominant racial group can't understand why oppressed minority racial groups think certain slurs which were (and in many cases still are) used against them by the dominant racial group are offensive?! I'm shocked!
                        You know why I love being not a racist? Because I can make offensive jokes... and know they are offensive.

                        Like I can say, hey Imran, while you are busy posting, somewhere there's a 7/11 not getting managed

                        and then you can be like, WTF? I'm not even indian you dumas

                        and then i can make indian accented DUR DUR DUR noises at you

                        and you can say, jesus christ you are an idiot

                        but it's not like i think we should have seperate drinking fountains... or that you shouldn't be allowed to marry white women...

                        BECAUSE THATS JUST CRAZY

                        plus, i have tourrettes of the face when it comes to being an *******
                        whether it be racist mexican 7/11 jokes or whatever
                        To us, it is the BEAST.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Hauldren Collider View Post
                          I'm with Felch here. Also, it should be noted that there's a huge double standard with the N word that I think is pathetically stupid. The inability of people to ignore racial slurs baffles me.
                          Nobody is preventing you from calling black people "******s." Heck, maybe you'll be able to teach them that racial slurs don't matter - just explain the morphology of the word "******" to them and tell them that they're behaving irrationally by taking offense at a racial slur.
                          <p style="font-size:1024px">HTML is disabled in signatures </p>

                          Comment


                          • Still waiting on you to show me a map of ******stan, loin. Hop to it.
                            John Brown did nothing wrong.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Felch View Post
                              What about calling them Paks? Is that horrible? It would at least follow the ****ing pattern.

                              Look I'm sorry that the British are horrible. They were horrible to some of my ancestors too. But I'm not British, and I don't say Pak or Paki with any special hatred in my heart. I'm peeved that the ISI supports terrorism and is complicit in the killing of Americans, but I can understand that the typical Paki is not involved in that sort of business. I don't say Paki because it's offensive, I say it because it's the only reasonable way to describe somebody from Pakistan. If Pak is the preferred word, I'm happy to change. It's got fewer letters, and it fits the pattern with all the other -stans. I'm not going to call Afghans "Afghanistanis."

                              And kentonio, I'd never go to your country anyways, not until the right to bear arms is honored and the Crown is worn by a Catholic.
                              A foreign poster on another forum I frequent initially referred to black people as "Negroes" because that's the literal translation of how black people were referred to in his native tongue ("negers" or something, I forget). The native English speakers explained to him that "Negro" was kind of a weird archaic term (and that it might also be considered offensive), and to use "black people" instead. When he got this information he could have either a. gone with what we'd told him because it would have required zero effort on his part to do so, or b. explained that "Negro" was correct according to the rules of grammar, that it's completely irrational for anybody to tell him that he shouldn't use the word "Negro," and that he therefore didn't give a **** about the Negroes' opinions about the words used to refer to them. Both are valid methods of incorporating information from another culture, although the latter way would have made him look like an *******.

                              Similarly, you're being an *******.
                              <p style="font-size:1024px">HTML is disabled in signatures </p>

                              Comment


                              • Negro is archaic, but if a foreigner were to use it innocently, reasonable people should be cool with it. Only a complete ******* is offended by words regardless of their intent.
                                John Brown did nothing wrong.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X