Racist Pick-up Truck?

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Leave the white devil alone. The hate whitey train has to keep on rollin’. After all, who else will the minority groups blame for their struggles ?[/quote]

Definately not the people who enslaved them/conquered their land/stole all their natural resources.

[quote]duffyj2 wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Leave the white devil alone. The hate whitey train has to keep on rollin’. After all, who else will the minority groups blame for their struggles ?[/quote]

Definately not the people who enslaved them/conquered their land/stole all their natural resources. [/quote]

1st, I would have to verify this, but I would venture to guess that no person from that time who did any of those things is alive.

2, generally each race has done that to themselves more than any external race. Logically concluding that they should be more mad at their own race for their troubles.

3rd, if these innocent magnificent people didn’t claim ownership, than things cannot be stolen.

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]duffyj2 wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Leave the white devil alone. The hate whitey train has to keep on rollin’. After all, who else will the minority groups blame for their struggles ?[/quote]

Definately not the people who enslaved them/conquered their land/stole all their natural resources. [/quote]

1st, I would have to verify this, but I would venture to guess that no person from that time who did any of those things is alive.

2, generally each race has done that to themselves more than any external race. Logically concluding that they should be more mad at their own race for their troubles.

3rd, if these innocent magnificent people didn’t claim ownership, than things cannot be stolen.[/quote]

1st, what does it matter? Do you think that the theft of land had no lasting impact on the Mexicans/Indians. Do you think that slavery, never mind the golden years that followed it, is just water under the bridge to the blacks?

2nd Not really true.

3rd Exactly right. So a bunch of white people came over and said they owned the place. What’s your point?

When a race is born into significantly worse conditions than another, they will not be happy. When they realise that this is mainly due to the actions of another race they will be displeased with the people in question.

[quote]duffyj2 wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]duffyj2 wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Leave the white devil alone. The hate whitey train has to keep on rollin’. After all, who else will the minority groups blame for their struggles ?[/quote]

Definately not the people who enslaved them/conquered their land/stole all their natural resources. [/quote]

1st, I would have to verify this, but I would venture to guess that no person from that time who did any of those things is alive.

2, generally each race has done that to themselves more than any external race. Logically concluding that they should be more mad at their own race for their troubles.

3rd, if these innocent magnificent people didn’t claim ownership, than things cannot be stolen.[/quote]

1st, what does it matter? Do you think that the theft of land had no lasting impact on the Mexicans/Indians. Do you think that slavery, never mind the golden years that followed it, is just water under the bridge to the blacks?

2nd Not really true.

3rd Exactly right. So a bunch of white people came over and said they owned the place. What’s your point?

When a race is born into significantly worse conditions than another, they will not be happy. When they realise that this is mainly due to the actions of another race they will be displeased with the people in question.
[/quote]

Example: Blacks were enslaving blacks long before whites did. and even once whites did who do you think sold blacks to white? Blacks cause more years of slavery to blacks than whites did. shouldn’t black people here be mad at blacks in Africa logically?

3, I’m saying it’s ironic to claim that land rightfully belongs to a group that rejects the idea of possession.

“When a race is born into significantly worse conditions than another”
This is a retarded statement. No race can possibly be born into anything. A race isn’t born at all. An individual can be born into worse conditions than another, but you cannot categorically divide individual circumstance up by race. To do so and in effect blame my success on my racist qualities and blame me for someone’s stance in life is both bigoted and racist.

So, I’m white, what conditions was I born in, and who do I owe for what I have? STFU you racist prick. Since apparently all you need to know to make judgments is race.

If the back of the truck boldy read “I HATE NIGGERS”, would you consider action against it to be punishment for free speech?

[quote]duffyj2 wrote:
When a race is born into significantly worse conditions than another, they will not be happy. When they realise that this is mainly due to the actions of another race they will be displeased with the people in question.
[/quote]

Happiness is not a right or entitlement. It is something to be worked for and earned, generally through hard work, accomplishment, and earned sell respect.
Is it not conceivable that any such worse conditions might be the result of the inactions of one’s self, group or race or whatever overemphasized correlations assigned to any number of people?

[quote]
Example: Blacks were enslaving blacks long before whites did. and even once whites did who do you think sold blacks to white? Blacks cause more years of slavery to blacks than whites did. shouldn’t black people here be mad at blacks in Africa logically?

3, I’m saying it’s ironic to claim that land rightfully belongs to a group that rejects the idea of possession.

“When a race is born into significantly worse conditions than another”
This is a retarded statement. No race can possibly be born into anything. A race isn’t born at all. An individual can be born into worse conditions than another, but you cannot categorically divide individual circumstance up by race. To do so and in effect blame my success on my racist qualities and blame me for someone’s stance in life is both bigoted and racist.

So, I’m white, what conditions was I born in, and who do I owe for what I have? STFU you racist prick. Since apparently all you need to know to make judgments is race.[/quote]

I’m going to make my argument as clear as possible so that I do not have to post in this thread again.

What my argument is not.
That a person is better than another due to their race.

What my argument is.
That there is a fairly obvious reason for minorities to hate whites. Note that I did not say logical. I said obvious. Logically there is no reason to hate anyone. Does the blood pressure no good…

On to your points…

Black slavery.
This has been covered already in the logical/obvious point.

Land possession.
Ironic? Yes. Nice? No.

The rest of your point.
I refered to a race like a person to save time and space. I wanted to avoid expressions like “Statistically if one is born mexican it is likely that…”. Obviously being of a certain colour does predetermine everything that happens in your life. Nonetheless, were I, before I was born, offered the choice of being any race, I know which I would choose…

Religion =/= Race

Boo Hoo, Apparently numbers “14” and “88” make some people cry. ;_;

Forget the politics, the freedom of speech, the Hitler associations… blah blah blah.

Why would anyone want to turn such a beautiful automobile into such an eyesore?

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
If the back of the truck boldy read “I HATE NIGGERS”, would you consider action against it to be punishment for free speech?[/quote]

Yes. Unless there’s a picture to go along with it, like Oprah eating a watermelon. Now that would be too much.
However, the question is irrelevant - it doesn’t say “I hate x”, it’s a picture and a statement that does not violate the Constitution. Both the pic and the license plate are totally idiotic, I hope we can all agree on that.

[quote]archiewhittaker wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
If the back of the truck boldy read “I HATE NIGGERS”, would you consider action against it to be punishment for free speech?[/quote]

Yes. Unless there’s a picture to go along with it, like Oprah eating a watermelon. Now that would be too much.
However, the question is irrelevant - it doesn’t say “I hate x”, it’s a picture and a statement that does not violate the Constitution. Both the pic and the license plate are totally idiotic, I hope we can all agree on that.[/quote]

Sure, but it should not be illegal to be an idiot.

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]archiewhittaker wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
If the back of the truck boldy read “I HATE NIGGERS”, would you consider action against it to be punishment for free speech?[/quote]

Yes. Unless there’s a picture to go along with it, like Oprah eating a watermelon. Now that would be too much.
However, the question is irrelevant - it doesn’t say “I hate x”, it’s a picture and a statement that does not violate the Constitution. Both the pic and the license plate are totally idiotic, I hope we can all agree on that.[/quote]

Sure, but it should not be illegal to be an idiot.

[/quote]

Agreed about the idiot thing.

But if the picture of Oprah would be “too much”, then we can agree that there is a line for “too much”? And if we can agree on that, were would you set that line, and why? What decisively seperates the words “I hate niggers” on a blank background as vs those words with the aforementioned picture?

I’m not sure exactly where I stand on the truck. Its stupid, yeah, but I can just ignore it. A muslim in America dealing with the stereotype that everyone who follows Islam is a terrorist, maybe that guy doesn’t have the luxury to just ignore it - maybe something like that truck, meant to offend/infuriate/intimidate muslims and rally anti-Islam sentiments, well, isn’t that kind of like painting swasticas all over the truck? What limits does a government/society have the right to put on freedom of expression when that expression can directly or indirectly incite violence?

Now, I have to ask everybody to do me a favor and try to keep this discussion within actual real reality. Please, no comments like “Well, putting an American flag on my car could anger someone who hates America! Therefore, since anything could be seen as offensive, it doesn’t matter how offensive something is!!”

In reality, a show of national pride like a flag or “Proud to be American” is nowhere near something like the back of this truck.

Thanks in advance.

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Now, I have to ask everybody to do me a favor and try to keep this discussion within actual real reality. Please, no comments like “Well, putting an American flag on my car could anger someone who hates America! Therefore, since anything could be seen as offensive, it doesn’t matter how offensive something is!!”

In reality, a show of national pride like a flag or “Proud to be American” is nowhere near something like the back of this truck.

Thanks in advance.[/quote]

Do we have freedom of speech to protect ideas that we all agree on?

No we dont.

Either we defend it on the fringes or it does not matter any longer whether we defend it any longer because main stream opinions do not need protection.

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Now, I have to ask everybody to do me a favor and try to keep this discussion within actual real reality. Please, no comments like “Well, putting an American flag on my car could anger someone who hates America! Therefore, since anything could be seen as offensive, it doesn’t matter how offensive something is!!”

In reality, a show of national pride like a flag or “Proud to be American” is nowhere near something like the back of this truck.

Thanks in advance.[/quote]

Do we have freedom of speech to protect ideas that we all agree on?

No we dont.

Either we defend it on the fringes or it does not matter any longer whether we defend it any longer because main stream opinions do not need protection.

[/quote]

I’m sorry, I don’t mean to be rude, but I don’t exactly follow what you mean here.

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Now, I have to ask everybody to do me a favor and try to keep this discussion within actual real reality. Please, no comments like “Well, putting an American flag on my car could anger someone who hates America! Therefore, since anything could be seen as offensive, it doesn’t matter how offensive something is!!”

In reality, a show of national pride like a flag or “Proud to be American” is nowhere near something like the back of this truck.

Thanks in advance.[/quote]

Do we have freedom of speech to protect ideas that we all agree on?

No we dont.

Either we defend it on the fringes or it does not matter any longer whether we defend it any longer because main stream opinions do not need protection.

[/quote]

I’m sorry, I don’t mean to be rude, but I don’t exactly follow what you mean here.
[/quote]

You must defent freedom of speech for the fringes of public opinion because only those need protection.

To “just restrict it a little bit” effectively kills it entirely because those things we all believe in are not controversial.

Therefore to kill freedom of speech only for those ideas that are “too far out there” kills it for all ideas for which the protection of speech actually matters.

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Now, I have to ask everybody to do me a favor and try to keep this discussion within actual real reality. Please, no comments like “Well, putting an American flag on my car could anger someone who hates America! Therefore, since anything could be seen as offensive, it doesn’t matter how offensive something is!!”

In reality, a show of national pride like a flag or “Proud to be American” is nowhere near something like the back of this truck.

Thanks in advance.[/quote]

Do we have freedom of speech to protect ideas that we all agree on?

No we dont.

Either we defend it on the fringes or it does not matter any longer whether we defend it any longer because main stream opinions do not need protection.

[/quote]

I’m sorry, I don’t mean to be rude, but I don’t exactly follow what you mean here.
[/quote]

Btw, you are sorry AND you do not mean to be rude?

What has PWI come to?

[quote]duffyj2 wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Leave the white devil alone. The hate whitey train has to keep on rollin’. After all, who else will the minority groups blame for their struggles ?[/quote]

Definately not the people who enslaved them/conquered their land/stole all their natural resources. [/quote]

Hey go fuck yourself, I’m white and have never done any of those things nor has any white people I know.