Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

have we gotten out of hand with political correctness?

i have had some ppl in certain boards and forum get upset and threaten to report me b/c they dont agree with what i post. whether i post a story or a moment of my life or a particular view.

when did political correctness become censorship of facing issues that should be faced rather then pretend it didnt happen?

i had a mod get upset with me b/c i used the words fat and ugly while telling a story about a one night stand. she wasnt even part of my 2 way conversation.

another was talking about racism in a particular thread and explaining that ppl say things they dont mean in the heat of an emotional moment. i actually used a moment in my life where ppl around me were dying i censored the words used but did not take from the emotional turmoil i went through and named called the ones i held responsible for my friends deaths..

now i am not advocating racism but showing how one moment in a person's life does not define who he is for the rest of his life.. and again i am being reported b/c of something ppl would rather not face or acknowledge the sad part they want to censor my life experience and dont want anyone else to see it b/c it offends them morally or b/c of some warp view of political correctness.. life is not a pg13 movie things happen.

when does this political correctness get out of hand and when will it stop.. talking about it shouldnt be taboo or censored b/c of a few ppl feel uncomfortable

has there bn cases that you know of where political correctness is used as a censorship method?

nobody reported you in the Mel Gibson thread and it's best not to make entire threads that are a thinly veiled criticism of other discussions, still at the top of the thread list. you also could have pmed me if the Gibson thread wasn't a good enough place to have this discussion.

also, don't call out the mods. nobody pretends there is freedom of speech on the forums, so best not to get into a penis measuring contest so needlessly

here is how political correctness has effected national security...

yYYrWrS6fU4

http://www.thismodernworld.org/arc/1993/93politically-correct.gif

I half agree with that comic.

But, a little webcomic making fun of it doesn't make their point invalid. Political Correctness is annoying.

edit- actually that comic sucks anyway. What that guy said in the first page isn't even potlitical correctness. The entire point of the term is a reference to terms that a politician wouldn't say because they're offensive buzz words, not just for a concept in general. Saying that homosexuals should have equal rights isn't being politically correct, scolding someone for saying "f*ggot" instead of "homosexual", is being politically correct. Calling someone an "african-american" instead of "negro/black guy" is being politically correct.

So, whoever wrote that comic used inaccurate extremes to make a point and they frankly don't know what the hell they're talking about anyway. Damn you King Kandy. Damn you.

edit- Blaxican is not responsible for any ironic situations in which it is actually he who has no idea what the hell he's talking about. Blame public schools.

It still has a point to make. Also, that comic is I think from 1994, so it may be reflecting uses more at the time.

i am offended by the blaxican avatar name handle its racist.. i like it changed to black and brown instead and not mention of race in anyway..

lol... I doubt most people even understand what most people they accuse of "political correctness" are actually trying to do and what their point is. Mocking PC, you only mock a strawman caricature as divorced from real attitudes as anything you could imagine.

also whats up with ppl being called racist or antisemitic when talking about middle east politics involving Israel?

Originally posted by King Kandy
It still has a point to make. Also, that comic is I think from 1994, so it may be reflecting uses more at the time.

What point is is trying to make though? That shoehorning a concept under a specific category doesn't invalidate it? I'd agree... but that's true for just about anything.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
What point is is trying to make though? That shoehorning a concept under a specific category doesn't invalidate it? I'd agree... but that's true for just about anything.
The people in the panels are making actual arguments made by human beings. The people demeaning them are saying they're 'PC', which what we consider PC is a position almost nobody on earth holds. So if a notable figure (who isn't retarded) is being called PC, their opinion is likely more like what the people in the panels are saying. That's the point.

What do we consider "PC"?

Something like this except serious:

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i am offended by the blaxican avatar name handle its racist.. i like it changed to black and brown instead and not mention of race in anyway..

Originally posted by King Kandy
lol... I doubt most people even understand what most people they accuse of "political correctness" are actually trying to do and what their point is. Mocking PC, you only mock a strawman caricature as divorced from real attitudes as anything you could imagine.

I don't think that's quite true. At least in my experiences there are people that use the term correctly, i.e. when terminology is completely skewed in favour of not offending over accuracy. I also think that the opposite is true, that people with valid points are put into their place for not being "PC". PC does have a place so, imo, it definitely doesn't need to generally demonized. To be considerate and pleasant are good things, I think, they aren't an argument on the issue for either side though.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I don't think that's quite true. At least in my experiences there are people that use the term correctly, i.e. when terminology is completely skewed in favour of not offending over accuracy. I also think that the opposite is true, that people with valid points are put into their place for not being "PC". PC does have a place so, imo, it definitely doesn't need to generally demonized. To be considerate and pleasant are good things, I think, they aren't an argument on the issue for either side though.
I tend to agree.


I was corrected at work because I said "he might have to resign because he is gay) (that one senator/congressman that was caught doing the gay-bar thing and he was an anti-gay rights douche).

I was corrected, rather seriously, but a coworker. She took me aside and said, "You may want to watch what you say because you words could offend someone." I said, "I thought gay was the PC term?" She showed me where "homosexual" was the PC term, on the internetz (for government offices, at least..and the government usually sets the standards on what is acceptable when it comes to things like that in the work environment).



I could have sworn that "homosexual" was a pejorative, but now, and that gay was the "softer" version of it. But apparently not.

Alot of forums do that including one that I kicked off for not argeeing with them.People need to understand that all people think different and should have a choice to say what they want without people getting upset or banning you just because they don't argee with you.

Ugh, I hate people talking about the same things, making the same arguments because nothing ever gets done.

i think inimalist might have a problem with that quote and voice his opinion about you and your beliefs based on that quote which i find funny as all hell..

"i dont mind genocide so long as it is fast clean and justified." -- Wild Shadow

The forum is privately owned and run, so it's not a completely free venue for posters. Butthurt over being "censored" usually comes from people not understanding that.

That said, we do get reports from people who pretty clearly just disagree with someone, but there's no rule broken. Sometimes the line is blurred between the two and we have to make a judgment call. But we ignore the reports where someone is just in disagreement, regardless of the topic. Only when it devolves to trolling, spam, or insults do we intervene.

Btw, mods can and do get upset. We help run the forums, but also participate in them. Any issues with a mod should be handled via PM, and the rather blatent accusations in the OP, designed not to produce anything constructive but just to criticize and rally others against the mod, have me seriously considering closing this.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i think inimalist might have a problem with that quote and voice his opinion about you and your beliefs based on that quote which i find funny as all hell..

"i dont mind genocide so long as it is fast clean and justified." -- Wild Shadow

which quote?

your inflamatory point about genocide? sure, however, my view against that isn't PC. I could care less about social coheasion, in fact, i think interpersonal tension is a necessary part of a free society.

my view is that your position is evil and disturbing, not that you shouldn't be allowed to say it or that you should censor yourself. I'm making a moral argument that your position is wrong and bad, not that, for the sake of society, you have to keep quiet. in fact, i encourage you to speak your mind on these issues, as i find your position to be entirely self defeating.

and like i said, i don't report people. I think I did it once or twice because I got too heated in a debate (my appologies to QM, who i think i was debating with) or because I thought cobherst was the bot we found him out to be. not you. nobody is trying to censor you here. I am telling you some of your beliefs are disgusting.

Originally posted by Digi
Btw, mods can and do get upset. We help run the forums, but also participate in them. Any issues with a mod should be handled via PM, and the rather blatent accusations in the OP, designed not to produce anything constructive but just to criticize and rally others against the mod, have me seriously considering closing this.

its a response to me in the Mel Gibson thread, I don't think a real slight to the mods. Hes upset because I called his opinion, that some races should be steralized to promote population control, disgusting. He thinks im trying to be PC

this has grown from my initial example, it had less to do with mods and ppl and more on the focus of political correctness..

cTBQW-FYEKg

but you aren't talking about political correctness

you are talking about wanting to be allowed to be racist without anyone calling you on it.

YOU are the one who wants PC, you want to be able to say what you want with no question, you want to be allowed to say gross nonsense and feel victimized when people call you on it.

i have no problem with ppl calling me racist.. i admitted that i am to an extend, my problem is that many ppl pretend they are not b/c they dont say things out loud. my examples were stereo type jokes which has no real meanness to it.. while others would rather cry and moan that they are offended vy it but then are the same ppl who cross the streets when they see a group of ppl who are different then them walking toward them. yet these same ppl would have you believe they are not the slight bit racist.. all i ask for is honesty with oneself.

now my sterilization comment which i thought was funny was about the planet population overall... it is such a problem that a particular group of ppl do practice certain lvl of population control now does that make me racist and disgusting evil bad.. no, all that it is, is matter of moral opinion and more then likely based on religion.

nobody is pretending at anything

im NOT racist in the way you are

and what way em i racist, i ask you?

i dont burn flags, i dont want to kill anyone.. i dont march and yell against a group of ppl.. i believe we are all equal regardless of race and deserve equality and fairness and right to live in our country of our choice if that country's laws allow it.

i am racist b/c i laugh at comedians and their racial stereo type joke?

or b/c i acknowledge a population problem.. i guess the Chinese must be racist against themselves since they practice population control and i make a light spirited comment?

acknowledging a problem and saying something needs to be done does not make me racist(at least not hitler lvl more like stand up comedian).. that's the problem with ppl they are so quick to point a finger and name call and label some one that they ignore the issue completely

iliNaspGVDg

I would agree that soon world wide birthcontrol will become a neccessary evil, china is already doing it and for some reason in a lot of industrial countries the population is going down by itself, some people say it's because of wealth but the thing is the planet is just to small for that amount of people sooner or later the population has to be decreased, I would say it's better to do it like china instead of killing or sterilize the people. Another pretty ****ed up thing that decreases the population is that lot's of farmers are now growing bio fuel instead of food cause it brings more money and therefore a lot of people start starving in these countries. And if that trend goes on the problem could fix itself even if it's very cruel and sad.

actually, you are right, racist is the wrong word, I'm sorry.

its too late, i dont want your apology.. political correctness at its worse{hypocrisy}
eNtDrUhcKyQ&feature=related

by the way i have no problem with racist ppl working alongside me so long as they allow me to work.. me being offended by what they do outside of work has no place nor gives me or anyone else the right to get them fired b/c i dont like their views whether blk, brw or white of something they said out of work and me knowing about it..


hell, i met and had to work with a lot of racist backwater @$$holes in the marines. my 1st gunny was outright ignorant racist.. did it bother me? yes. did i cry about it? no. i did my job and after work went home if they went to the bar and talked n$@$^ this and too many sp#%s in the marines that.. thats their problem.. they left me alone at work and respected my rank as i did theirs i just didnt hang out with them.. civility and fairness is all that is asked, which can be given even if racist.

now you have ppl being fired from places they bn working for yrs b/c someone found out he was a member of certain hate group even though they were polite every day at work..

me.. i'll fight for the right of the white guy who is burning a flag talking about n$^$# this sp#% that as well for the al sharpton @sshole who is all less sue them and make a race issue out of this etc etc,,, the hispanic who is all why em i being carded regularly i deserve to be in this country, dirty pig gringo.. mayade etc etc..

i'll fight for the annoying broad who is in the room.. *cough* hello woman in the room? you said guys and not ladies.. i''ll never date this race of men or men in general b/c i was raped or i know some one that was raped by one..

qNbIY5rDHmI

People sometimes have to keep saying the same thing when debating because the person they are debating with keeps saying the same thing as well.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
and what way em i racist, i ask you?

Are you claiming you weren't being even a tiny bit racist when you said you wanted to exterminate all the sandniggers from Iraq to Palestine to Israel?

I keep hearing this little voice complaining about "two faced hypocrisy". Of course the louder voice is the one saying you're a sick **** and the racism pales in comparison.

edit: well lookit that, we can say sandniggers. weird

i admitted it.. i brought out my outburst i never denied it.. do i think that now? no.. was i angry at losing my friend was stationed overseas when i said that? yes.. i wanted everyone dead.. i aint denying anything which is why "i" brought it up.. i dont see how that helps your point in the least.

my quote:
i have no problem with ppl calling me racist.. i admitted that i am to an extend, my problem is that many ppl pretend they are not

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Are you claiming you weren't being even a tiny bit racist when you said you wanted to exterminate all the sandniggers from Iraq to Palestine to Israel?

I keep hearing this little voice complaining about "two faced hypocrisy". Of course the louder voice is the one saying you're a sick **** and the racism pales in comparison.

edit: well lookit that, we can say sandniggers. weird

Obviously. "Sand" negates all the badness in the world sandfaggot, sandbitch, sandmother****er...see?

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
my quote:
i have no problem with ppl calling me racist.. i admitted that i am to an extend, my problem is that many ppl pretend they are not

How do you differentiate between people who aren't racist and people who just say they aren't racist? And if you just assume "everyone is racist" have you considered who insanely stupid and self righteous that sounds?

have you ever bn prejudice or judgmental about some one?

a small child isnt racist if she doesnt grasp the concept and meanness and is simply inquisitive..

the 2001 planet of the apes is racist and anti blk where is Al sharpton?


i wanna sue, i keep 40% while al keeps 60% and sticks me for the taxes on my share and his... or keeps it all himself since he paid for it all even though its my cause.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
here is how political correctness has effected national security...

yYYrWrS6fU4 How the hell does that show that political correctness was respomsible for that attack?

Originally posted by Parmaniac
I would agree that soon world wide birthcontrol will become a neccessary evil, china is already doing it and for some reason in a lot of industrial countries the population is going down by itself, some people say it's because of wealth but the thing is the planet is just to small for that amount of people sooner or later the population has to be decreased, I would say it's better to do it like china instead of killing or sterilize the people. Another pretty ****ed up thing that decreases the population is that lot's of farmers are now growing bio fuel instead of food cause it brings more money and therefore a lot of people start starving in these countries. And if that trend goes on the problem could fix itself even if it's very cruel and sad.

Over population is a real source of environmental degradation on a planetary scale but overconsumption even more so. That makes it even more relevant to lower the consumption and production rates of industrialized nations than to shrink the total poulation fo the planet - although that is also necessary. But because that means deliberate shrinking of the economy, nobody wants to consider that. Besides even thought the opulation in first world nations is stabilizing and even shrinking, their rates of consumptions and waste of resources and emission of pollution keep growing. Not to mention that there arent enough resources on the planet to spread the life standards, in terms of material consumption, of the first world to the entire human race. Material wealth and its consequent reduction in birth rates simply cant offer a way out of the ecological crisis.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
the 2001 planet of the apes is racist and anti blk where is Al sharpton?

He is most likly back in jail again.

why is al sharpton so hated here?

Originally posted by 753
why is al sharpton so hated here?

Loud, pompous people only attract those who are highly sympathetic to their cause. He's also the type of person who responds to the observation that he's not paying his taxes by claiming it's a political attack.

Originally posted by ADarksideJedi
Originally posted by Wild Shadow
the 2001 planet of the apes is racist and anti blk where is Al sharpton?

He is most likly back in jail again.

why was he in jail in the 1st place?

Political correctness is joke. I'd rather if someone were racist, misogynist or any other "ist" that they'd be upfront about it. Sure they may offend me, but I'd always know where they (and in turn I stood).

Originally posted by KharmaDog
Political correctness is joke. I'd rather if someone were racist, misogynist or any other "ist" that they'd be upfront about it. Sure they may offend me, but I'd always know where they (and in turn I stood).

I'd rather they not be racist or misogynist.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
Political correctness is joke. I'd rather if someone were racist, misogynist or any other "ist" that they'd be upfront about it. Sure they may offend me, but I'd always know where they (and in turn I stood).

but, in turn, that means we get to call them the disgusting idiots they really are

Originally posted by inimalist
but, in turn, that means we get to call them the disgusting idiots they really are

Many intelligent people believe blacks are mentally lacking; are they still disgusting idiots?

Oh geez...

People who get offended at racial slurs or the like seem pretty selfish and cowardly in my opinion. I don't understand why a person wouldn't want to be associated by their actions, unless of course they are ashamed of said action.
For example, if someone called a homosexual "f@g", what sort of thought process has to take place for the homosexual to be offended at being recognized for the very thing he is? Our society has caused the word "f@g" to mean "homosexual" the same way "sodomite" meant "homosexual" years ago. Or like when "cool" gained the dual-meaning of "low temperature" and "likable personality".

Originally posted by LLLLLink
Oh geez...

People who get offended at racial slurs or the like seem pretty selfish and cowardly in my opinion. I don't understand why a person wouldn't want to be associated by their actions, unless of course they are ashamed of said action.
For example, if someone called a homosexual "f@g", what sort of thought process has to take place for the homosexual to be offended at being recognized for the very thing he is? Our society has caused the word "f@g" to mean "homosexual" the same way "sodomite" meant "homosexual" years ago. Or like when "cool" gained the dual-meaning of "low temperature" and "likable personality".

Freedom Is: Feeling the emotions you're told to.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Many intelligent people believe blacks are mentally lacking; are they still disgusting idiots?

Name ten clearly intelligent people that believe blacks are inherently inferior to whites mentally.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Name ten clearly intelligent people that believe blacks are inherently inferior to whites mentally.

In my life I've known more than ten people who think that about blacks, who would fit that description. I could sit here and give you a list of names exceeding 10, but since you never knew any of them, that would seem a little pointless. And most people I've known--and currently know--who don't like black people were actually Hispanic and not white (intelligent or otherwise).

The founders of Eugenics and other forms of scientific racism in the 19th Century were clearly intelligent, so were the academic figures who endorsed the theories. Even today among scientists and doctors, you honestly don't think they are intelligent people who think blacks are mentally inferior?

A racist doesn't have to be an unaware knuckle-dragging idiot with a small vocabulary. He can also be an Ivy League alum, wear a suit and make a six-figure salary.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Many intelligent people believe blacks are mentally lacking; are they still disgusting idiots?

to save you my ranting and hair splitting over needless stuff, yes

I actually stopped hanging out with an old friend because his racism and sexism ended up bothering me too much

Originally posted by LLLLLink
Oh geez...

People who get offended at racial slurs or the like seem pretty selfish and cowardly in my opinion. I don't understand why a person wouldn't want to be associated by their actions, unless of course they are ashamed of said action.
For example, if someone called a homosexual "f@g", what sort of thought process has to take place for the homosexual to be offended at being recognized for the very thing he is? Our society has caused the word "f@g" to mean "homosexual" the same way "sodomite" meant "homosexual" years ago. Or like when "cool" gained the dual-meaning of "low temperature" and "likable personality".

Probably the intent behind the word; not just the word itself, eg the person calling a homosexual a "***", likely is implying that being gay is a negative in of itself.

Originally posted by Robtard
Probably the intent behind the word; not just the word itself, eg the person calling a homosexual a "***", likely is implying that being gay is a negative in of itself.

But you see how hypocritical that person would be with that mindset? By disliking another's dislike of gays, race, lifestyle, etc, you (not actually you, Rob) become a hypocrite. Therefore, the only fair way is that either both parties are tolerant or both parties are refrained from having an opinion.

Of course, actual hate crimes are a whole other discussion than hate speech. Nothing wrong with disliking something, just don't act upon it if you don't want to suffer consequences. Speech must be interpreted and acted upon by the receiver(s) to have an effect.

Originally posted by LLLLLink
But you see how hypocritical that person would be with that mindset? By disliking another's dislike of gays, race, lifestyle, etc, you (not actually you, Rob) become a hypocrite. Therefore, the only fair way is that either both parties are tolerant or both parties are refrained from having an opinion.

Of course, actual hate crimes are a whole other discussion than hate speech. Nothing wrong with disliking something, just don't act upon it if you don't want to suffer consequences. Speech must be interpreted and acted upon by the receiver(s) to have an effect.

what is hypocritical about that position?

Originally posted by inimalist
what is hypocritical about that position?

My Guess:
Alice hates gays. Bob hates homophobes. Both dislike something but Alice is morally superior because she isn't also a hypocrite.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
Political correctness is joke. I'd rather if someone were racist, misogynist or any other "ist" that they'd be upfront about it. Sure they may offend me, but I'd always know where they (and in turn I stood). you rock.. i rather ppl be honest as well as oppose to fictitious and two face...

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Name ten clearly intelligent people that believe blacks are inherently inferior to whites mentally. can we use 1800 ppl and forefathers?

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
you rock.. i rather ppl be honest as well as oppose to fictitious and two face...

You won't rather a world where people, I don't know, aren't racist in the first place?

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
can we use 1800 ppl and forefathers?

Last 50 years, once the era of such beliefs being extremely widespread had started to fade. Of course this ignore the more salient problem with my request, that people can't be simply classified as "intelligent" in useful ways, smart people will usually hold one stupid belief or another (thus saying that "Einstein didn't believe in evolution" is as meaningless as saying that "Alice didn't believe in evolution", since neither Einstein nor Alice are experts on biology).

sure. then i could also ask for a world where women are 3 to 1 on men.. for now i just want ppl to be honest to themselves and realize we all have prejudice in one form or another.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
sure. then i could also ask for a world where women are 3 to 1 on men.. for now i just want ppl to be honest to themselves and realize we all have prejudice in one form or another.

Okay, I want people to be honest with themselves and realize how stupid, dangerous and harmful those prejudices are and work to overcome them. Defending racist speech and tossing about claims like "everyone is racist" has the exact opposite effect, people are very quick to equate normality and goodness. Explaining to people "that's racism, we know from history that it's wrong and that it hurt peoples" is a much better use of time than demanding people laugh at jokes about how stupid black people supposedly are.

ppl can admit to be prejudice and consciously try to overcome them and realize how counter productive it can be,, i know i try everyday.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
ppl can admit to be prejudice and consciously try to overcome them and realize how counter productive it can be,, i know i try everyday.

Except that when people say "hey, you're desire to kill sandniggers is racist" you brush it off by saying "everyone is racist". So no, you clearly don't. Unless you mean that they'll realize how counter-productive it is to try overcoming prejudice, in which case there's something seriously wrong with you.

Also, what prevents people from being polite and trying to eliminate predjudice?

if you read my comment you know i said it during an emotional moment.. i didnt deny it was racially motivated but to label me on that one moment is also wrong especially since i dont believe that..

if ppl want to label me fine do it on what i believe not what i said half a decade ago.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
You won't rather a world where people, I don't know, aren't racist in the first place?


Do you not realize how many great jokes would be vanquished? Maybe think before you say something like that.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
if you read my comment you know i said it during an emotional moment.. i didnt deny it was racially motivated but to label me on that one moment is also wrong especially since i dont believe that..

Okay, now you're just being PC. It's okay, everyone is racist, you can admit that the sandniggers need to die. Better than being a hypocrite after all. ****ing pussy.

i am not being a hypocrite i made it blatantly clear in my initial post when i told that story...

i said i made a racist comment when i lost my friend i wanted everyone of that race dead.. i also knew how wrong it was.. and although i wanted that with my whole being that was then.. i simply looked deep at myself and realize how stupid it was to think that. if i am racist then call me that b/c of what i believe not what i said in an out burst...

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i am not being a hypocrite i made it blatantly clear in my initial post when i told that story...

i said i made a racist comment when i lost my friend i wanted everyone of that race dead.. i also knew how wrong it was.. and although i wanted that with my whole being that was then.. i simply looked deep at myself and realize how stupid it was to think that. if i am racist then call me that b/c of what i believe not what i said in an out burst...

No, see you're lying here because you want to be PC. You don't have to bottle up those feelings. Remember man, everyone is racist at heart wanting to kill all the sandniggers doesn't make you different from anyone else.

it doesnt. i dont hate middle eastern ppl... i was angry back then i am not angry now nor do i have any animosity toward them...

i am not being PC if i still hated and felt that way about middle eastern ppl i would tell you. i have nothing to be ashamed of to lie to you about it. you want me to still feel that way and gratefully i do not i dont hate any race the way i felt back then..

i might laugh at some jokes and whatnot but i dont hate in such a manner i dont think i could ever be that angry again to think and feel the way i once did.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i dont hate middle eastern ppl...

Everyone hates mid eastern people.

To save time I'll assume that you'll deny this as well and point out that when I said "I'm not racist" your response was to baselessly claim that "everyone is racist". The truth is that I'm not racist in any meaningful way (unless you're one of those people who includes the ability to see colors as racist), I don't even find racial jokes particularly funny.

I am however, incredibly sexist. Separate problem

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
My Guess:
Alice hates gays. Bob hates homophobes. Both dislike something but Alice is morally superior because she isn't also a hypocrite.

I get that part, I just don't get what is hypocritical. I mean, what is hypocritical about not being racist and also disliking racist people? is it really that not hating someone for trivial reasons like race or religion also means you can't hate people for logical and reasonable things? such as their dislike of trivial qualities if others?

conversely, wouldn't this also mean that if someone admits to being a little bit racist they must also hate everyone? I don't mean that in a glib way either, the same logic would imply that a racist must then have no friends, or else they are a hypocrite.

though I find the logic silly in the first place. reasons for disliking people are not equal. disliking someone because they willfully hold disgusting and potentially dangerous things about people based on physical characteristics or sexual preference is demonstrably better than disliking someone based on said physical characteristics.

Originally posted by inimalist
I get that part, I just don't get what is hypocritical. I mean, what is hypocritical about not being racist and also disliking racist people?


It's not that. It's that fact that you dislike someone else for his views and opinions and its okay to criticize him for having such a narrow mindset, but if he calls you gay, liberal, or any term that might be interpreted as derogatory, he is wrong and needs to lose his job. See how unfair that is?


That's true. If he associates with anyone who meets his "racist" criteria, he is a hypocrite.

But then again, I guess I'm being impartial to those who are hypocrites because of my moral values. It's very true that no one is perfect. All we can do is base our thoughts on our experiences.

what if he calls you gay outside of work at a bar?

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
what if he calls you gay outside of work at a bar?

Is the guy really gay in this scenario?

does it matter? apparently gay isnt PC...

it was used in this manner..
TVicCD8FmMs

Originally posted by LLLLLink
It's not that. It's that fact that you dislike someone else for his views and opinions and its okay to criticize him for having such a narrow mindset, but if he calls you gay, liberal, or any term that might be interpreted as derogatory, he is wrong and needs to lose his job. See how unfair that is?

No. If I explain to someone how his belief that gays are going to rape his kids and kill his wife is inaccurate and his only response to call me a ****** I have zero sympathy for him. And as people have been saying, reasoning for disliking people are not equal. Racism is, provably, irrational and harmful. Trying to get people to not be racist should hardly be equated with racism.

Who's ever been fired for calling someone a liberal?

Originally posted by LLLLLink
But then again, I guess I'm being impartial to those who are hypocrites because of my moral values. It's very true that no one is perfect.

Your moral values place hypocrisy below racism? And who's been claiming to be perfect anyway?

Originally posted by LLLLLink
All we can do is base our thoughts on our experiences.

No we can do a lot more that that. We're not ducks, we're thinking creatures. You don't suppose the world is flat do you?

well during religious debates some have posted the question how do i know the world isnt flat? that i am simply being told. this line of reasoning leads me to speculate some ppl might think the world is flat.

Originally posted by LLLLLink
It's not that. It's that fact that you dislike someone else for his views and opinions and its okay to criticize him for having such a narrow mindset, but if he calls you gay, liberal, or any term that might be interpreted as derogatory, he is wrong and needs to lose his job. See how unfair that is?

yes, but that isn't hypocritical at all.

actually,'scratch that, I also don't understand how that is unfair.

if a person is making comments of any nature that might be offensive at their place of work it is the whim of the employer to enforce it to their desire. I might agree if you could show me an instance where a company is going against it's own policy to reprimand racism over another type of offense, however, even then, I would support an employer's rights in that case, and racial offense threatens their market value much more than other types.

just in terms of word use, nobody is arguing that referring to a situation as "gay" to describe lameness is homophobic, and the only accusations of racism have been toward people proposing racially based sterilization and violence. this hang up on who uses what words is stupid, one can be a racist without ever saying ******, and my academic use of the term there is certainly not evidence that I'm racist.

hell, even if we just talk about word use it isn't hypocritical. if you call people f-a-g-s, you are using a term that you are well aware is offensive to people. they criticize you for the fact that you are going out of your way to use offensive vocabulary when you don't need to. maybe they pick the wrong term (homophobe instead of anti-social douche) but critisizing you for that is in no way hypocritical. again, you might have a point that racial and sexual orientation offenses are a type of offense people are more sensitive to, but if that is the case, it really only proves my "you are just a douche bag" thesis, as it shows you know exactly how people are going to react to your words, meaning you have nothing to complain about when people get offended

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
well during religious debates some have posted the question how do i know the world isnt flat? that i am simply being told. this line of reasoning leads me to speculate some ppl might think the world is flat.

Yes. These people are ducks. They should have two of the various proofs explained to them. If they still don't get it they should be eaten for Thanksgiving.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
No. If I explain to someone how his belief that gays are going to rape his kids and kill his wife is inaccurate and his only response to call me a ****** I have zero sympathy for him. And as people have been saying, reasoning for disliking people are not equal. Racism is, provably, irrational and harmful. Trying to get people to not be racist should hardly be equated with racism.

Who's ever been fired for calling someone a liberal?



Your moral values place hypocrisy below racism? And who's been claiming to be perfect anyway?



No we can do a lot more that that. We're not ducks, we're thinking creatures. You don't suppose the world is flat do you?

There is nothing wrong with not liking someone for something. It's only wrong when you act upon it. Racism is not harmful until someone acts upon it. If they are somehow "damaged" by words, it's only because they have interpreted words in a way that wounds their spirit, pride, or whatever. And that is their own fault.

And yes, I place hypocrisy below racism.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Yes. These people are ducks. They should have two of the various proofs explained to them. If they still don't get it they should be eaten for Thanksgiving. my response is: have you ever flown and looked at the horizon how it curves..

how the daylight rises and sets at a particular time in different time zones and how the movement of the sun also appears ecliptical.

also how many of the planetary objects in the sky all appear circular..

plus most importantly why no one has fallen off the planet with the technology at our disposal from planes, walk abouts, cars and boats...


i really want to cry when i hear that famous comment.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
my response is: have you ever flown and looked at the horizon how it curves..

Don't trust planes. Think about it: birds fly because they weigh so little but planes weigh a lot. It reeks of a cover up. Most likely what you see out the window is a video screen.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
how the daylight rises and sets at a particular time in different time zones

Ah, but have you ever been in two time zones at once! Of course not. Conveniently you can't be in two at the same time. They're something that was made up to support the ridiculous notion of a spherical Earth.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
and how the movement of the sun also appears ecliptical.

Why shouldn't the movement of the sun around the Earth be elliptical!

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
also how many of the planetary objects in the sky all appear circular..

Yes, like a disk. The proof of the flat Earth mounts!

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
plus most importantly why no one has fallen off the planet with the technology at our disposal from planes, walk abouts, cars and boats...

Because the edges are carefully guarded by the government to keep people from seeing them. They're at the "arctic" and the "antarctic". Think about it, they're in opposite places but they're exactly the same environment? Suspicious. A more reasonable explanation is that it's all one long edge, folded through a wormhole.

what i really want is a fundamentalist creationist who believes in the flat earth to debate with an astronaut like neal armstrong or buzz..

i've seen the face of an archeologist and its priceless now i want an astronaut

buzz aldren punched a moon landing denier in the face, I imagine similar results for the flat earth crowd

see what i mean about freedom of speech but also being consequences?

yea, that has also been exactly what myself, sym and bardock have been arguing. there is nothing PC about calling people on their BS, such as, when someone thinks Asian people need to have a type of forced population control to stop their breeding

Originally posted by inimalist
buzz aldren punched a moon landing denier in the face, I imagine similar results for the flat earth crowd

That's pretty cool.




Mythbusters did a thing on the moon landing. They busted all of the major myths.

Originally posted by inimalist
yea, that has also been exactly what myself, sym and bardock have been arguing. there is nothing PC about calling people on their BS, such as, when someone thinks Asian people need to have a type of forced population control to stop their breeding of course not you can call out who ever you want just make sure that you do more then call him out when they answer the call..

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
of course not you can call out who ever you want just make sure that you do more then call him out when they answer the call..

answer the call? like making a new thread about how I feel victimized by people calling me out on my opinions?

Originally posted by dadudemon
That's pretty cool.




Mythbusters did a thing on the moon landing. They busted all of the major myths.

lol, slow day for myths? or was it the low hanging fruit episode.

did palin overstep herself with crosshairs when talking about politicians?

http://vodpod.com/watch/3297539-christian-flat-earth-extremist-half-gov-sarah-palin-advocates-violence

start watching at 3:50

Political correctness is society's way of of sweeping predjudices that will forever exist (no matter what they are) under the carpet so that those who can comfortably put their head in the sand can feel like the world is becoming a kinder and gentler place.

If you paint a rotten wood plank white, you hide the rot...for a while...by the time you see it again the board is finished. Political correctness hides the rot.

If you expose the rot, you either replace it or repair it. Hiding what others think does not change what they think. Dressing up phrases does not change the fact the the person is picking the exact right words to comfort an uncomfortable feeling, situation or belief.

If I offend someone, I try and find out what offends them. If I am sensitive to their beliefs or feelings, instead of being politically correct, I will try to address the situation. However, If I am not sympathetic, I will not pretend to be. I will not call a white dude who hates blacks a "proud caucasion rights activist" nor will I call a black man who hates white people a "racially empowering African American".

I will call each as they are...douche bags. And I won't be terribly upset if I offend either one of them, or any that proscribe to their beliefs.

Originally posted by inimalist
lol, slow day for myths? or was it the low hanging fruit episode.

It's not like their myth busting is usually incredibly deep.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
Political correctness is society's way of of sweeping predjudices that will forever exist (no matter what they are) under the carpet so that those who can comfortably put their head in the sand can feel like the world is becoming a kinder and gentler place.

If you paint a rotten wood plank white, you hide the rot...for a while...by the time you see it again the board is finished. Political correctness hides the rot.

If you expose the rot, you either replace it or repair it.

Your analogy doesn't work. You began by claiming that these prejudices will exist forever, evidently you can't repair the wood (but you can replace it, which would be the analogy for killing all the racists I guess). Now we can either live in a nice looking piece of rotten wood or a rotten looking piece of rotten wood that we can't do anything about.

funny how ppl use PC do be sensitive to ppl and not insult or hurt ppl's feelings but they dont feel nothing wrong with insulting and singling out ppl who think different or say something different..

example: hillary duff says dont use the word gay but in the same commercial uses gay to insult the person to prove her point..


now cigarettes commercials sponsored by educational sponsors who also make the dont be prejudice dont be judgmental etc etc.. they single out negatively the person who smokes by having them shunned for his habit and singled out..

anyways what always gets to me is if i swear and say F#@#@... @$$hole,, f@g...!!sh#$ etc etc you have some one say it isnt very nice to say that or name call ppl using profanity and derogatory language is a sign of poor grammatical skills and a limited mind it shows you ignorance etc etc.. now keep in mind that you are not calling this person a name directly yet this person who wants you to be PC and not hurt ppl's feeling just outright singled you out and insulted you but some how its okay b/c he is being subversive in his response.

PC/hypocrisy

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Your analogy doesn't work. You began by claiming that these prejudices will exist forever,

They may not exist for ever, they'll just be replaced with new ones.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
evidently you can't repair the wood (but you can replace it, which would be the analogy for killing all the racists I guess).

I'm just saying that hiding something doesn't make it go away. But if you want to go a different direction with it to try and prove your own point..,well I am not going to get my knickers in a twist over it.


Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Now we can either live in a nice looking piece of rotten wood or a rotten looking piece of rotten wood that we can't do anything about.

Wow, you make reality seem so harsh.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
They may not exist for ever, they'll just be replaced with new ones.

Thus, prejudice never goes away. You can't fix the wood.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
Wow, you make reality seem so harsh.

I don't want to sugar-coat your own philosophy you.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
funny how ppl use PC do be sensitive to ppl and not insult or hurt ppl's feelings but they dont feel nothing wrong with insulting and singling out ppl who think different or say something different..

example: hillary duff says dont use the word gay but in the same commercial uses gay to insult the person to prove her point..


now cigarettes commercials sponsored by educational sponsors who also make the dont be prejudice dont be judgmental etc etc.. they single out negatively the person who smokes by having them shunned for his habit and singled out..

Second hand smoke hurts people. Racism hurts people. Telling people not to smoke or be racist doesn't hurt people. These are thing we should tell people not to do.

As inimalist and I have said several times, not are judgments and discrimination are equal.

If we apply your reasoning then imprisoning someone for murder is bad because it is hypocritically taking rights from someone in response to them infringing on someone else's rights. Your analysis is incredibly naive.

Wait let me make that less PC. You're a ****ing moron.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
anyways what always gets to me is if i swear and say F#@#@... @$$hole,, f@g...!!sh#$ etc etc you have some one say it isnt very nice to say that or name call ppl using profanity and derogatory language is a sign of poor grammatical skills and a limited mind it shows you ignorance etc etc.. now keep in mind that you are not calling this person a name directly yet this person who wants you to be PC and not hurt ppl's feeling just outright singled you out and insulted you but some how its okay b/c he is being subversive in his response.

If you just stand somewhere and scream profanities at people then, yes, something is seriously wrong with your brain. I can't imagine why you would claim differently.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Thus, prejudice never goes away. You can't fix the wood.



I don't want to sugar-coat your own philosophy you.

It's magical wood, it gets better by hitting it with a hammer. AoE-style

Originally posted by Bardock42
It's magical wood, it gets better by hitting it with a hammer. AoE-style

See. You know the deal.


Glad to see ome oldschoolers on the board still.

Originally posted by Bardock42
It's not like their myth busting is usually incredibly deep.

true, I've really never found the moon landing myth all that believable in the first place, I guess.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
See. You know the deal.


Glad to see ome oldschoolers on the board still. I was quite shocked to see you posting. You took a very, very long leave this time.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Second hand smoke hurts people. Racism hurts people. Telling people not to smoke or be racist doesn't hurt people. These are thing we should tell people not to do.

As inimalist and I have said several times, not are judgments and discrimination are equal.

If we apply your reasoning then imprisoning someone for murder is bad because it is hypocritically taking rights from someone in response to them infringing on someone else's rights. Your analysis is incredibly naive.

Wait let me make that less PC. You're a ****ing moron.



If you just stand somewhere and scream profanities at people then, yes, something is seriously wrong with your brain. I can't imagine why you would claim differently. are we now allowed to insult each other by the forum rules?

anyways... you missed the point and are doing the same thing to me what you did with dogkarma.. playing semantics and dismissing the entire post with a sm@rt@$$ response... i am not saying scream on the side of the road whcih by the way we have that happening every day here in america by various doomsayers and religious fanatics and whatnot..

i am talking if the examples i gave not hypocritical hiding behind the mask of PC?

you can make extreme examples and disagree with yourself all you want but i am asking a very reasonable question not asinine examples

Originally posted by Bardock42
I was quite shocked to see you posting. You took a very, very long leave this time.

If by "shocked" you meant "giddy with excitement"...then thanks. As for the extended leave, the board just ain't what it used to be...and I'm like the hailey's comet of posters.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
dogkarma..

What? I mean, that ain't even close.

There are so many things to debate and discuss. PC'ness is what it is, and you won't be able to disuade a PC'er from their beliefs as it is a cloak of safety.

kharmadog...

sorry short term memory due to drugs and A.D.D.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
If by "shocked" you meant "giddy with excitement"...then thanks. As for the extended leave, the board just ain't what it used to be...and I'm like the hailey's comet of posters.

Yeah, but the comet keeps to his schedule. Though it seems like there's a whole new set of people here now than when I first came here, so I guess it makes sense.

Symmetric Chaos, no need to insult people, man. Keep it chill.

On topic, folks (though good to see you K-Dog.)

Originally posted by REXXXX
Symmetric Chaos, no need to insult people, man. Keep it chill.

Way to censor me man. Besides it would offend WS if I were polite, he repeatedly made that clear.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
are we now allowed to insult each other by the forum rules?


Don't want to irritate you by being PC Wouldn't you rather have me say how I feel rather than be two-faced?

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
anyways... you missed the point and are doing the same thing to me what you did with dogkarma.. playing semantics and dismissing the entire post with a sm@rt@$$ response...

Showing you exactly why your beliefs make no sense and cannot possibly be applied consistently is hardly playing semantics.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i am not saying scream on the side of the road whcih by the way we have that happening every day here in america by various doomsayers and religious fanatics and whatnot..

Yes those doomsayers and religious nuts are generally pretty nuts. What's your point?

Also let's look at your post:

"if i swear and say F#@#@... @$$hole,, f@g...!!sh#$"
That's a person standing there shouting profanities. Literally. There's no other way to parse a string of profanities other than as a string of profanities. You may have intended something different but you sure didn't say it.

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
you can make extreme examples and disagree with yourself all you want but i am asking a very reasonable question not asinine examples

Woah, woah, woah. You're offended by me being a dick? That's insanely two-faced. Your whole thing has been very clearly about how people should be free to express their feelings in the way they want and now you're offended when people do.

sigh.. i am pointing out the hypocrisy of the PC ppl and asking you if you dont see it yourself.. your post seem to be a prime example of the PC/hypocrisy

and following forum rules has nothing to do with PC since it blatantly makes it clear what one can do when one signs up and ppl agree to the rules when they sign up.

my example is when some one randomly swears for whatever reason some PC ppl feel the need to correct them by insulting them which would be contradictive of the PC view.

your examples of the extreme from ppl committing murder and being in prison is not remotely the same when it comes to sensitivity of how ppl feel with words... words no one is being physically hurt, maimed or jailed..

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
sigh.. i am pointing out the hypocrisy of the PC ppl and asking you if you dont see it yourself.. your post seem to be a prime example of the PC/hypocrisy

and following forum rules has nothing to do with PC since it blatantly makes it clear what one can do when one signs up and ppl agree to the rules when they sign up.

my example is when some one randomly swears for whatever reason some PC ppl feel the need to correct them by insulting them which would be contradictive of the PC view.

your examples of the extreme from ppl committing murder and being in prison is not remotely the same when it comes to sensitivity of how ppl feel with words... words no one is being physically hurt, maimed or jailed..

words are offensive, though. not all, but some.

i agree words can be offensive but should ppl forced to be PC by the law or by majority of society where even society in general will punish you via: sueing, loss of job possibly jailed even when it is not even a work related situation.. i firmly believe that hurting a person's feeling does not warrant such a response in the land of the free..

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i agree words can be offensive but should ppl forced to be PC by the law or by majority of society where even society in general will punish you via: sueing, loss of job possibly jailed even when it is not even a work related situation.. i firmly believe that hurting a person's feeling does not warrant such a response in the land of the free..

some people need to have sense. if you call a black person the n word in any sort of professional arena, then that's your fault and you should be kicked. why? because a workplace is supposed to be free from persecution or bullying.

you're basically saying total freedom means you should be allowed to infringe on other people's freedoms.

no, i said that when it isnt even a work related area... if a person harasses another person in a work environment i agree they should be fired after having the situation reviewed.. but should ppl be punished and fired for what they do outside of work?

i have seen on the news where ppl are fired b/c they were seen at a rally for or against certain issues from race to politics..

do you think that's going a lil to far?

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
no, i said that when it isnt even a work related area... if a person harasses another person in a work environment i agree they should be fired after having the situation reviewed.. but should ppl be punished and fired for what they do outside of work?

i have seen on the news where ppl are fired b/c they were seen at a rally for or against certain issues from race to politics..

do you think that's going a lil to far?

that? it depends on what it is, tbh.

in some cases, yes, they should be canned.

http://www.asylum.com/2009/07/10/can-you-be-fired-for-being-a-racist-on-your-own-time/
The courts have been characteristically unhelpful in these cases. A judge ruled in favor of NYC employees who rode, off-duty, on a parade float called "Black to the Future: Broad Channel 2098," on First Amendment grounds. An appeals court later overturned that decision, so thanks for that.

Even Supreme Court nominee (and tank-top aficionado) Sonia Sotomayor seems to have conflicting ideas about the policing of off-duty speech. She ruled in favor of a cop who was found to have anonymously sent racist letters in response to charitable solicitations (there's a stand-up guy), but then ruled against a student blogger for calling school administrators "douchebags" in a non-school blog.

While the free speech angle is the sexy one (just ask Larry Flynt or 2 Live Crew), there are lots of variables in that kind of argument. A different, if not better, question is this: When does your boss have to let go and STFU about what you do -- as socially unacceptable as it may be -- on your own time?

Originally posted by LLLLLink
But you see how hypocritical that person would be with that mindset? By disliking another's dislike of gays, race, lifestyle, etc, you (not actually you, Rob) become a hypocrite. Therefore, the only fair way is that either both parties are tolerant or both parties are refrained from having an opinion.
Isn't that kind of like saying "Neo Nazis kill Jews, the police arrest Neo-Nazis to stop them from killing jews, therefore Neo Nazis are morally superior to police"?

ill put it to you this way.

You run an office. Say there's, a dozen people working there. Half are black, half are white. It becomes made aware that even though it was on their off hours, one of your white employees is a member of the KKK.

Do you honestly think it's ok to keep that person on when you know the black employees are going to have a problem with it and things might escalate?

i wouldnt fire them and chances are whoever is bringing the issues to work will be fired blk or white..

if the black guy is coming to work riled up and aggravating the situation at work b/c he doesnt agree with the white person's personal and even religious views b/c sometimes racism is rooted in their own form of religion. i would fire the blk if the white guy is just doing hs job,.. what the white guy does on his own time isnt my business as long as he can separate his attitude for a more professional one at work and doesnt allow his views to interfere with his work performance and decision making..

Originally posted by Wild Shadow
i wouldnt fire them and chances are whoever is bringing the issues to work will be fired blk or white..

if the black guy is coming to work riled up and aggravating the situation at work b/c he doesnt agree with the white person's personal and even religious views b/c sometimes racism is rooted in their own form of religion. i would fire the blk if the white guy is just doing hs job,.. what the white guy does on his own time isnt my business as long as he can separate his attitude for a more professional one at work and doesnt allow his views to interfere with his work performance and decision making..

even though his mere presence antagonises the black workers?

Originally posted by -Pr-
ill put it to you this way.

You run an office. Say there's, a dozen people working there. Half are black, half are white. It becomes made aware that even though it was on their off hours, one of your white employees is a member of the KKK.

Do you honestly think it's ok to keep that person on when you know the black employees are going to have a problem with it and things might escalate?

Keep home away from work. You break the rules, you get disciplined. Bias should not be allowed at work from a manager.


If the racist guy says something racist, you send him through the "cultural sensitivity" training course that should already be in place.


Next offense: fired.

If any of the black folk say something to him and he asks them to stop, subsequent approaches are considered harassment and then they would go through the appropriate HR training course.

Subsequent harassment will net them a firing.





There's no reason one cannot be an effective manager in a situation like that. The company will spend thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars trying to get a new employee hired and trained. It's in the best interest to keep the employees. If they don't do anything illegal and the behave at work, it would be ethically, morally, and even potentially legally, wrong.

yes.. i would have a workshop meeting with constitutional right reviews and have some ppl talk about tolerance and freedom of speech and religious tolerance outside the work place whether we agree with them or not..

i will then have some vets talk about what they fought for.. at the end if they cant leave it outside the door.. then they can pick up their last pay check for disrupting the work area.. blk or white if it is done inside work hours.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Way to censor me man. Besides it would offend WS if I were polite, he repeatedly made that clear.

Excuses, excuses. You bashed by calling him a 'f***ing moron,' and I told you not to. Just do as you're asked and don't insult him. If he's being problematic, I'll handle it.

Otherwise, be civil. Pretty simple.

-

I agree, if you can't leave your problems or prejudices at the door, you shouldn't be allowed to work somewhere. I wouldn't like working with a Neo-Nazi or KKK member any more than the next guy because I think they're full of shit, but unless their actions or attitude disrupts the workplace, they shouldn't be penalized for it.

Though personally if someone is going to hold those beliefs I think they should disappear in a dark, deep hole...

Originally posted by Bardock42
It's not like their myth busting is usually incredibly deep.

It's not hard to disprove the "astronaut in the shadow" claim, the footprint claim, the flag waving in a vacuum claim, or the multiple light sources claim.


The most difficult one to do, for them, was the astronaut in the shadow, claim. They go the reflectivity index correct..lighting...etc.


All the others are relatively easy to debunk. (With the vacuum one being the most difficult..due to needing a vacuum container to put a flag in. lol


Personally, I think NASA should sue people that try and make money off of claiming the moon myth.



Originally posted by REXXXX
I agree, if you can't leave your problems or prejudices at the door, you shouldn't be allowed to work somewhere. I wouldn't like working with a Neo-Nazi or KKK member any more than the next guy because I think they're full of shit, but unless their actions or attitude disrupts the workplace, they shouldn't be penalized for it.

Though personally if someone is going to hold those beliefs I think they should disappear in a dark, deep hole...

Ditto. You can't be a good manager if you can't check your prejudices at the door...even if your prejudices are against people that have prejudices concerning race: it's still a prejudice. Discrimination is prejudice in action...gotta check that shit at the door.

Yeah, definitely. I guess with my above statement that I was assuming that it was discovered during their employment that they were a member of a prejudice group. If I were in the process of hiring someone and found out that they were actively involved in Nazism or the Klan, it would alter my decision in hiring them depending on the manner in which I found out.

For example, if I saw there were complaints from previous jobs about his prejudices causing problems, too bad, so sad, you don't get the job. If there weren't such things, I'd still consider hiring him so long as I thought he could contribute positively to the work atmosphere and not cause problems. If it didn't work out because he said/did something offensive, I'd gladly be the first to put a black mark on his record.

Originally posted by REXXXX
For example, if I saw there were complaints from previous jobs about his prejudices causing problems, too bad, so sad, you don't get the job. If there weren't such things, I'd still consider hiring him so long as I thought he could contribute positively to the work atmosphere and not cause problems. If it didn't work out because he said/did something offensive, I'd gladly be the first to put a black mark on his record.

Well, that's just being a good manager. It would be foolish for someone to hire a "record bearing" prejudiced prick if there were other qualified individuals on the list.

Unless, of course, he or she said that they were a reformed person and no longer involved in that. Then, you'd have to pick up on "bullshitting" cues to make sure they aren't lying.

Of course.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Ditto. You can't be a good manager if you can't check your prejudices at the door...even if your prejudices are against people that have prejudices concerning race: it's still a prejudice. Discrimination is prejudice in action...gotta check that shit at the door.
Damn, I just found out my employee was going to bring a bomb into the building. Now I realize I shouldn't call the cops because that would be prejudice against people carrying bombs.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Damn, I just found out my employee was going to bring a bomb into the building. Now I realize I shouldn't call the cops because that would be prejudice against people carrying bombs.

Nah. That'd be stupid.

Also, discriminating against your employees because of their religious beliefs is stupid, too.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Keep home away from work. You break the rules, you get disciplined. Bias should not be allowed at work from a manager.


If the racist guy says something racist, you send him through the "cultural sensitivity" training course that should already be in place.


Next offense: fired.

If any of the black folk say something to him and he asks them to stop, subsequent approaches are considered harassment and then they would go through the appropriate HR training course.

Subsequent harassment will net them a firing.





There's no reason one cannot be an effective manager in a situation like that. The company will spend thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars trying to get a new employee hired and trained. It's in the best interest to keep the employees. If they don't do anything illegal and the behave at work, it would be ethically, morally, and even potentially legally, wrong.

what bias are you talking about?

Originally posted by dadudemon
Nah. That'd be stupid.

Also, discriminating against your employees because of their religious beliefs is stupid, too.
Bringing a KKK member into a primarily black group is allowing a bomb in. A ticking time bomb.

Originally posted by -Pr-
ill put it to you this way.

You run an office. Say there's, a dozen people working there. Half are black, half are white. It becomes made aware that even though it was on their off hours, one of your white employees is a member of the KKK.

Do you honestly think it's ok to keep that person on when you know the black employees are going to have a problem with it and things might escalate? Of course not the only option would be to fire all black employees

it really comes down to do you dp the right thing although unpopular or do you do the wrong thing which is very popular..

if neither group has done anything it wouldnt be fair to fire either but if one who is in the wrong and it is the majority do side with them and fire some one who done nothing wrong..


the old saying: doing the right thing isnt always the easy thing to do nor most popular thing to do.

Originally posted by dadudemon


Ditto. You can't be a good manager if you can't check your prejudices at the door...even if your prejudices are against people that have prejudices concerning race: it's still a prejudice. Discrimination is prejudice in action...gotta check that shit at the door. Hating racists isnt a prejudice. It's not a preconceived judgment of a person based on traits not related to character like skin colour. It is a an opinion based on fact and reason, racism isn't.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Damn, I just found out my employee was going to bring a bomb into the building. Now I realize I shouldn't call the cops because that would be prejudice against people carrying bombs.

Not the same thing at all. Hiring a KKK member and labeling a ticking time bomb is not a good hiring practice. If you think he is a ticking time bomb, don't hire him. You establish that at hiring.

Originally posted by 753
Hating racists isnt a prejudice. It's not a preconceived judgment of a person based on traits not related to character like skin colour. It is a an opinion based on fact and reason, racism isn't.

No, hating racists is prejucdiced.

"unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, esp. of a hostile nature, regarding a racial, religious, or national group."


If you hate a racist, that's prejudice. If you discriminate against a racist at work when that racist person does not, at all, bring their racism into work, then you have done something illegal.


Cognitive dissonance, however, has the racist person probably doing something racist, anyway.

Originally posted by -Pr-
what bias are you talking about?

Any that are affecting the work place.

Originally posted by dadudemon
If you hate a racist, that's prejudice. If you discriminate against a racist at work when that racist person does not, at all, bring their racism into work, then you have done something illegal.


Cognitive dissonance, however, has the racist person probably doing something racist, anyway.

How do you know the person is racist if they're not do racist things?

this all started if you find out someone is racist or anti certain politics b/c you see him outside of work participating at some event..

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
How do you know the person is racist if they're not do racist things?

In the hiring process, you actually do a damn good job and investigate the people you are hiring.




I don't want to say too much because that could ruin the moment with my inane posts, but, what do you think some hiring managers do when they are reviewing potential employees?

Well, the last time I applied for a job, when I was interviewed the first thing the guy did when I entered his office was give me a gun and a holster, which he told me to attach to one of my belt loops. After I did so he asked me to pose like I was guarding something, and to rest my right hand on the gun, which I did. After like thirty seconds of that he told me I had the job.

DOES THAT SUPPORT YOUR ARGUMENT?!

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
Well, the last time I applied for a job, when I was interviewed the first thing the guy did when I entered his office was give me a gun and a holster, which he told me to attach to one of my belt loops. After I did so he asked me to pose like I was guarding something, and to rest my right hand on the gun, which I did. After like thirty seconds of that he told me I had the job.

DOES THAT SUPPORT YOUR ARGUMENT?! are you an L.A cop? kidding some kind of security i am guessing or a model.

lol!

I was applying for a security guard position on the outskirts of a junkyard, yeah. The only reason the recruiter hired me was becaise I'm a big black dude who looks good in a suit. I guess that can be considered a time where discrimination is a good thing lol.

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
Well, the last time I applied for a job, when I was interviewed the first thing the guy did when I entered his office was give me a gun and a holster, which he told me to attach to one of my belt loops. After I did so he asked me to pose like I was guarding something, and to rest my right hand on the gun, which I did. After like thirty seconds of that he told me I had the job.

DOES THAT SUPPORT YOUR ARGUMENT?! http://clashofthetitans.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/zoolander.jpg

Originally posted by dadudemon
]No, hating racists is prejucdiced.

"unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, esp. of a hostile nature, regarding a racial, religious, or national group."


That definition is exactly the same as what I described as prejudice in my post and like I said back then: It's not unreasonable to hate racists. Quite the contrary.


If you hate a racist, that's prejudice.

No it's not. It's not a preconceived notion with no basis in reality, it's a judgmente of character based on a person's actual character not on their skin colour. It's not irrational, logically unjustifiable or unreasonable like racial hate is. It is not based on generalizations of the behavior of an individual as behavior of a race. It is disgust by unnacceptable behavior.


If you discriminate against a racist at work when that racist person does not, at all, bring their racism into work, then you have done something illegal. What would be the law violated in your jurisdiction?

Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
Well, the last time I applied for a job, when I was interviewed the first thing the guy did when I entered his office was give me a gun and a holster, which he told me to attach to one of my belt loops. After I did so he asked me to pose like I was guarding something, and to rest my right hand on the gun, which I did. After like thirty seconds of that he told me I had the job.

DOES THAT SUPPORT YOUR ARGUMENT?!

liar

Originally posted by 753
That definition is exactly the same as what I described as prejudice in my post and like I said back then: It's not unreasonable to hate racists. Quite the contrary.

That's your opinion, not fact. And, hating anyone is considered unreasonable for some. Most Christian religions preach that (but hypocritically follow after others ideals, too), lots of Buddhists sects, bla bla bla bla.


As a manger, I say it's unreasonable to hate anyone based on their political, religious, sexual, bla bla bla.

If my KKK employee does nothing racist at work, and people harass him, who do you think I'll discipline?: the guy that did nothing wrong or the people that did something wrong?



Originally posted by 753
No it's not. It's not a preconceived notion with no basis in reality, it's a judgmente of character based on a person's actual character not on their skin colour. It's not irrational, logically unjustifiable or unreasonable like racial hate is. It is not based on generalizations of the behavior of an individual as behavior of a race. It is disgust by unnacceptable behavior.

What would be the law violated in your jurisdiction?
No, what I said is correct.


You have your own specific definition of what qualifies as prejudice. That's fine. Just stop pretending it's the only one.

firing a person due to their own personal beliefs that could and sometimes is rooted in their own warped "religion"...

also jobs usually have firing procedures from verbal warnings a set number of written right ups and then firing..

Originally posted by REXXXX
Not the same thing at all. Hiring a KKK member and labeling a ticking time bomb is not a good hiring practice. If you think he is a ticking time bomb, don't hire him. You establish that at hiring.
You should never hire them in the first place if they're a KKK member. If you hired them then oops, you screwed up, and you should rectify it.

Originally posted by King Kandy
You should never hire them in the first place if they're a KKK member. If you hired them then oops, you screwed up, and you should rectify it.

That seems awfully harsh. Why not ust let them go about their business if they do their job well. It's not a companies place to morally educate their workers, is it?

if they took you to court what reason would you give when on the stand for why you choose not to hire them?