Freedom of religion - no

[Cyclone 10]

Hmm, is that true?  You can certainly end up doing time for words you say or type.  Simple libel, right up to hate speech, all clearly are 'actions' in the form of speech.

 

I guess you identify the large group of English based on them speaking.  Why do you cringe though, is it because you anticipate a certain kind of behaviour?  Does it even matter as English isn't a race?  English, Dutch and Germans are all caucasian.

Would it not lead to action?  You just expressed a preference, but you're saying you wouldn't act on it?  You wouldn't sit somewhere else, deviate from your path even slightly or choose to hang out with a different group if you had the option.  That would be bizarre, to deliberately go against your preference, which is itself based on past experience of behaviour...

I have a preference not to hang out with racists because I find their opinions to be offensive and know that neither I nor they will enjoy spending time together.  To try to make that out as bigotry is ridiculous.  I also have a preference for dating women not men, that's not bigotry against men.  I don't like the taste of lemon cake and so I avoid eating it, that's not bigotry against lemon cake.

Edited May 27, 2019 by Cyclone

[Voice of reason 0]

Bigotry exists in many forms, as does intolerance. This forum is a shocking example of how some people who claim to have a higher moral position are actually in many ways the worse culprits.

[JamesR123 0]

8 minutes ago, Cyclone said:

Hmm, is that true?  You can certainly end up doing time for words you say or type.  Simple libel, right up to hate speech, all clearly are 'actions' in the form of speech.

 

I guess you identify the large group of English based on them speaking.  Why do you cringe though, is it because you anticipate a certain kind of behaviour?  Does it even matter as English isn't a race?  English, Dutch and Germans are all caucasian.

Would it not lead to action?  You just expressed a preference, but you're saying you wouldn't act on it?  You wouldn't sit somewhere else, deviate from your path even slightly or choose to hang out with a different group if you had the option.  That would be bizarre, to deliberately go against your preference, which is itself based on past experience of behaviour...

I have a preference not to hang out with racists because I find their opinions to be offensive and know that neither I nor they will enjoy spending time together.  To try to make that out as bigotry is ridiculous.  I also have a preference for dating women not men, that's not bigotry against men.  I don't like the taste of lemon cake and so I avoid eating it, that's not bigotry against lemon cake.

With your analogies at the bottom it suggests that you don't know what bigotry is.  Bigotry is not against a gender, but against beliefs or opinions.

 

If you are intolerant of racists, you are  bigot.  But that is my point, bigotry is absolutely underdtanable. Racism is, in my opinion, not acceptable.

 

The concept of racism usually considers nationalities a race.  If I openly despised Pakistanis, most would consider me racist.

1 minute ago, Voice of reason said:

Bigotry exists in many forms, as does intolerance. This forum is a shocking example of how some people who claim to have a higher moral position are actually in many ways the worse culprits.

I agree with the first part, and would substitute the form for wider society as I lack the experience on this forum to comment

 

[Voice of reason 0]

4 minutes ago, JamesR123 said:

 

I agree with the first part, and would substitute the form for wider society as I lack the experience on this forum to comment

 

Id say in the forum, there are a large proportion of people happy to mud sling, strawman and be open to bigotted generalisations, in the vane hope it closes down any discussion they don't like.

In the real world that is much less prevalent.

Keyboard warrior syndrome.

[Top Cats Hat 10]

44 minutes ago, JamesR123 said:

Speech is generally not considered action.

You may not think so but the law would disagree with you.

[Cyclone 10]

27 minutes ago, JamesR123 said:

With your analogies at the bottom it suggests that you don't know what bigotry is.  Bigotry is not against a gender, but against beliefs or opinions.

 

If you are intolerant of racists, you are  bigot.  But that is my point, bigotry is absolutely underdtanable. Racism is, in my opinion, not acceptable.

 

The concept of racism usually considers nationalities a race.  If I openly despised Pakistanis, most would consider me racist.

I agree with the first part, and would substitute the form for wider society as I lack the experience on this forum to comment

 

Given that we clarified what bigotry was on just the previous page you'd be wrong...  Perhaps you don't know what analogies are though?

 

Intolerance of racists is not bigotry, racism isn't just an opinion, it's action as well.  QED not bigotry.

 

No, nationalism and xenophobia are only called racism by those who don't know the correct terms, clearly English, Dutch, German and many more countries are made up of people of various ethnic backgrounds, but predominantly caucasian.

 

You only addressed part of my post though, ignoring several questions which I guess you find inconvenient...

 

Quote

Would it not lead to action?  You just expressed a preference, but you're saying you wouldn't act on it?  You wouldn't sit somewhere else, deviate from your path even slightly or choose to hang out with a different group if you had the option.  That would be bizarre, to deliberately go against your preference, which is itself based on past experience of behaviour...

20 minutes ago, Voice of reason said:

Id say in the forum, there are a large proportion of people happy to mud sling, strawman and be open to bigotted generalisations, in the vane hope it closes down any discussion they don't like.

In the real world that is much less prevalent.

Keyboard warrior syndrome.

Are you saying that the racists only express their feelings behind a keyboard?

Edited May 27, 2019 by Cyclone

[Voice of reason 0]

38 minutes ago, Cyclone said:

 

Are you saying that the racists only express their feelings behind a keyboard?

No. Racists post online and act in real life.

Other bigots post online and act in real life.

The intolerant post online and act in real life.

The online version of all those is much more prevalent. A large number of posts in here show large degrees of intolerance.

I think those types gravitate to the internet, because there are much less repurcussions  for their unacceptable behaviour. As I said it's a well known phenomenon.

[Cyclone 10]

I think there's a word for those who tolerate racism, 'cowards'.  Yes, fairly sure that's right.

[JamesR123 0]

3 hours ago, Cyclone said:

Given that we clarified what bigotry was on just the previous page you'd be wrong...  Perhaps you don't know what analogies are though?

 

Intolerance of racists is not bigotry, racism isn't just an opinion, it's action as well.  QED not bigotry.

 

No, nationalism and xenophobia are only called racism by those who don't know the correct terms, clearly English, Dutch, German and many more countries are made up of people of various ethnic backgrounds, but predominantly caucasian.

 

You only addressed part of my post though, ignoring several questions which I guess you find inconvenient...

 

Are you saying that the racists only express their feelings behind a keyboard?

I addresses a good part of your answer tbh.

 

Racism does not require action, no matter how many times you state it does.  Racism can be defined as 

the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.

 

[Top Cats Hat 10]

2 hours ago, Voice of reason said:

A large number of posts in here show large degrees of intolerance.

Including of course, yours! 😂

[Voice of reason 0]

3 hours ago, Top Cats Hat said:

Including of course, yours! 😂

I'm happy for people to believe and say what they want so long as it doesn't harm anyone else. I'm only intolerant of intolerance.

[Top Cats Hat 10]

55 minutes ago, Voice of reason said:

I'm happy for people to believe and say what they want so long as it doesn't harm anyone else. I'm only intolerant of intolerance.

Exactly.

 

A bonkers circular logic!