Racism unique to only Iowa within the college ranks?
- Thread starter hawkinarkansas
- Start date
- Status
On one side you have people that think people are pushing us in the wrong direction to end racism, then you have the extremes that are only concerned with white power. On the other side you have people thinking they are doing the right thing, then you have the extremes who are pushing the agenda to try to divide the country. I guess it can be hard for everyone to tell the difference. I've always thought I could tell who was who, but the last couple weeks makes me question which one Rob is and I still don't want to believe that so I'm holding out hope that I just can't tell.
At least Rob doesn't even pretend to want to see anyone else's viewpoints. I've tried my ass off the last 2 weeks to try to understand more. I've learned more about the path history went down to hold black people down. I've unfortunately learned zero things on how to fix it because no one talks about that. The last 2 weeks of learning have softened my feelings on white privilege and unconscious bias. But its hardened my stance on the left movement to divide.
HawkGold
Well-Known Member
In my town the only jay walking ticket given was a couple of years ago to a 14 yo black girl at an intersection where it was the logical and safe thing to do. You really are racist, but I know you don’t care.
Come on man no need for name calling. I expect that stuff from Rob, but not you.
RobHowe
Administrator
Bingo
Not an excuse just a think about this.
She was a child. Can she claim childism? She's a female so can she claim sexism? Maybe the only reason anyone ever got one and happened to be a child is because they have seen that child being unsafe about crossing the street before. Maybe they even tried talking to them about it. Is that possible? Maybe a 14 year old has a smart mouth? I was one so I know that is possible.
Maybe they wrote the ticket so the parents would find out and correct their smart mouth kid? Maybe in the grand scheme of things they wrote the ticket to keep the kid safe.
As PCHawk has said, you can't go running around assuming and screaming racism until you know all the facts. To do so is irresponsible dividing and not very intelligent. You have to know all the facts from both sides.
Last edited:
No shit. Seriously no shit. Let's not just stop with racism though, there are lots of other ism's that we haven't even begun to explore. They deserve to be heard to. They deserve a march. A riot. Burning of buildings and everything else. Otherwise that's not fair to them, it's biased and systematic.
Bigtenchamp
Well-Known Member
I really enjoy how you and PC will take a personal anecdote and try to act like you know more about it or try to discredit it with no real knowledge of the situation.
HawkGold
Well-Known Member
You read my explanation. No of it holds water. I know her. I know her family. You are a racist.
Bigtenchamp
Well-Known Member
This is a pretty good entertaining explanation.
Enlighten us. I was going off what you said.
Again the headline read Trump signs saying it is ok for public funded Catholic services adoption agency to refuse gay couples.
So pick a side. Unless you are gay you should be able to do so objectively. But the difference is, when I argue good points in return you will be more open and accepting of them, because you are being objective about it and not to close nor biased about it.
Bigtenchamp
Well-Known Member
No clue what you are talking about here.
okeefe4prez
Well-Known Member
You can't just say "pick a side" on something like this. There is something called the "State Action Test" to determine if a private person doing something is a "state actor." Knowing whether the person/entity is a state actor is critical to understanding whether the Catholic Church is on bad legal footing. Picking a side without all the facts is no bueno.
Right, because nothing else is going on in the world? Nobody else is fighting the good fight?
Google it. But I basically just gave you the headline, now act like everyone else and pick your side. If you don't need any more information facts from both sides to do it in any one case, you don't need any facts or information from both sides in any case.
If it is true in the micro, it's true in the macro and vise versa.
Ta da!!!!!
Now do I need to remind everyone that the next day after Floyd's death, the cops were fired and the FBI was called in to investigate. That same night (so 24hrs later) the riots began. Everyone was screaming racism and yet nobody actually knew squat about the situation.
That's why you can't go around screaming racism. The boy who cried wolf didn't end well if you recall.
Last edited:
You read that as him acting like he "knew" more? He was asking a whole bunch of questions that need to be asked BEFORE you can say the cop singled her out due to the color of her skin. The whole point of his post was to point out that he knew absolutely nothing about it and needed to know more. Needing more info used to be important. Now it's racist.
Last edited:
Bigtenchamp
Well-Known Member
lol no.. really no clue what you were talking about or referencing....I didn't post anything about trump or whatever the hell you are talking about.
okeefe4prez
Well-Known Member
The Narrative has displaced all other facts. The actions are irrelevant, only the parties to the action matter.
- Status
