Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[rossby]

Yes.  I'm angry because he's a bigot and frustrated because he's relentlessly insulting and won't engage in a rational discussion about it.

Again, where?

Looks like he responded to your very general question.

Are you referring to calling an end to government discrimination "affirmative action" and saying he doesn't support AA?

He's now deleted his post. But I don't recall anyone discussing AA here. AA seems irrelevant to this particular discussion.

You have not responded to him.

Are you referring to his accusation that I support affirmative action?

No idea what you're talking about.

The word "racism" is there in the same sentence in the FAQ about what's unwelcome in the FSP.  That covers the Stormfront crowd.  Is that the only form of bigotry that the FSP cares about, and if so, why add "bigotry"?

First, no, it does not "take care" of them. You can be racist and not be a bigot. Bigotry is more than just, consciously or unconsciously, having beliefs in an accordance with some discriminatory ism. Bigotry is more of an ignorant stubbornness that your opinion must be right--nothing else is possible. It is a close-mindedness. Typically, negatively judgmentalism directed at other people. We ask people not to promote that kind of behavior.

I thought Keith's answer about what bigotry is was pretty good: it could mean a number of things, and it depends on who's doing the deciding. 'Course, I didn't get the impression that the latter part of the answer was entirely sincere. But there appears to be more behind this "dispute" than either you or Keith are stating.

Do I think people that actively hate homosexuals are bigots? Yes. But I cannot speak for everyone.

He's already expressed that he would support having the Loving decision rolled back because it was an expansion of government (and raised his taxes)

And did he go on to say that interracial marriages should be illegal?

Yes. He wants all marriages to be illegal.

Where did he say this? (pointing to your own blog doesn't count.)

I have theories about what his problem is, but I won't say it here because I don't feel it adds to the conversation.  But I presume you mean a problem with regard to his involvement in the FSP.

I meant the former.

[Alex Libman]

Bigotry is an essential component of self-improvement, which in turn is an essential component of survival.  Collectivism is unfortunate and irrational, bigotry is not.  Bigotry is how I don't get drunk, because I am bigoted against drunk people, even though sometimes drinking is perfectly acceptable and a little bit won't kill you.  Etc.  One cannot be resolute without also being bigoted, at least I can't.  All of my bigotry is ultimately directed at myself.

[rossby]

Here's a follow-up thought so maybe we can move this in a productive direction.

Assuming bigotry matters, how can the FAQ be changed to inform people of the kind of behavior that is unwelcome? Should we be aspirational or realistic?

[ONLYWAY]

Not to promote your opinions???  How exactly can anyone have a discussion then?  You have to promote your opinions or should we all just say i agree with b d ross? 

I consider a bigot to be someone who judges another for the way God made them.  Commenting, in any tone, on their actions or beliefs is not bigotry.  (ie. Maybe some people are born with a predispostion to molest children but if they act on that impulse then they are sick perverts).

apparently, a bigot is just someone who disagrees with the person who is in power.

BD Ross seems to think anyone who really believes they are right is a bigot...so we should all be "open-minded"...there is no right or wrong and you shouldn't ever be domatic...ridiculous!

Not at all. I gave a definition above.

but if i called a homosexual a pervert people wold freak out...everyone is entitled to their own opinons...

You are entitled to your opinions. The guidelines don't say you can't have opinions. Certain areas, it says not to promote them.

[ONLYWAY]

If someone is making you feel guilt for being a sodomite then maybe you should think about why that is and rethink your actions.   Also, you should calmly explain to your "friend" that the word "faggot" means a bundle of sticks for a fire and promotes the idea of killing homosexuals.   I think he should be able to use whatever words he wants to describe your lifestyle and actions and still be a member in good standing with the FSP but if he really hates you so much why would you be friends with him?

Sounds to me like you're not really interested in a public dialogue; sounds like you want a witch hunt. Are you angry at him? How about frustrated?

Yes.  I'm angry because he's a bigot and frustrated because he's relentlessly insulting and won't engage in a rational discussion about it.  He calls me a fag on a regular basis and constantly reminds me that he supports government discrimination that would impact me, often bringing up the subject himself out of the blue and then getting hypocritically annoyed if I actually try to talk about it.

And trying to get specific people in public positions to be open and transparent about where they stand with regards to subjects of relevance to their position(s) is hardly a witch hunt.  Is that what you call it when reporters ask politicians probing questions to get at the truth while the politician dodges any position of substance and gives safe ambiguous answers full of happy buzz words?

Looks like he responded to your very general question.

Are you referring to calling an end to government discrimination "affirmative action" and saying he doesn't support AA?

You have not responded to him.

Are you referring to his accusation that I support affirmative action?  I've never, to my knowledge, expressed support for anything remotely akin to AA.  I don't know how to explain how ending discrimination by the government is not AA other than to say to learn your definitions of words.  It seems to me that the comparison is erroneous and he needs to explain how he comes to such an absurd conclusion.  Otherwise, can you quote exactly what you're referring to where I've not responded to him because I'm sincerely baffled.  I wrote an entire article debunking his cover story for supporting government discrimination.

One of the biggest reasons for the policy is because we get angry racist-types that show up and it makes the whole project look bad. For some reason--don't know why--the media makes this idiotic leap from "the FSP wants liberty activists in one state" to "Oh, well they must be racists." Obviously, that doesn't make a damned bit of sense. But when you have Stormfront-types showing up, it doesn't like good.

The word "racism" is there in the same sentence in the FAQ about what's unwelcome in the FSP.  That covers the Stormfront crowd.  Is that the only form of bigotry that the FSP cares about, and if so, why add "bigotry"?  Why aren't you worried about Fred Phelps types?  We do get those around here too, in case you haven't noticed.  Oh, but when that subject comes up, FSP spokespeople start throwing around "big tent" and other buzz words.

The point is that people in the Project should play well with others. Fortunately, most FSP types are quite tolerant and peaceful, so this isn't normally an issue. it's just when intolerant people show up and start making a mess of things.

That sounds like empty rhetoric to me.  Actions vs. words.  I will admit that I don't play well with others when they're bigots.  Normally I just avoid them.  That's what I'll start doing with Keith, I s'pose.

He's already expressed that he would support having the Loving decision rolled back because it was an expansion of government (and raised his taxes)

And did he go on to say that interracial marriages should be illegal?

Yes.  He wants all marriages to be illegal (an end to "government marriage") and he has expressed that discrimination by the government with regards to which marriages it recognizes as valid is an acceptable form of incremental progress toward that goal.  I quoted him and he hasn't denied that the quote came from him, even though he changed his answer because he didn't think the general public would get it and therefore would be upset by his answer.  Keith...  Ya think so?

How would you feel if you were black, and this person in the FSP made a point at EVERY POSSIBLE OPPORTUNITY to remind you that they don't support the government acknowledging inter-racial marriages as valid and when you tried to get them to rationally defend their support for a policy of government discrimination, said "Why does this issue matter to you?  It's so trivial and unimportant.  Why do you dwell on this subject so much?  It's not a big deal if people are racist.  The FSP is just a bus anyway."?

I would not try to change his mind. I cannot do that. If he had a serious problem, first, I would listen. What is his problem?

I've stopped trying to change his mind too.  I have listened.  Oh... have I listened, far longer than I should have.  I have theories about what his problem is, but I won't say it here because I don't feel it adds to the conversation.  But I presume you mean a problem with regard to his involvement in the FSP.  I would say his problem is not sharing certain goals of the FSP and having stated as much such as "bigotry is not a big deal", but if you can't change his mind, maybe teach him to keep his bigotry to himself, especially around the people he has decided to arbitrarily take issue with.

See, my friends may call me "fag" occasionally and I laugh with them, because it's so obviously in jest.  My friends are mostly liberty-lovers who want me treated as an equal.  Keith is not my friend.  I suggest you convince him that he's a face of the FSP in my presence and many others and he should conduct himself accordingly, i.e. in a professional manner.

[rossby]

Not to promote your opinions???  How exactly can anyone have a discussion then?

Perhaps you're forgetting the "bigotry" part. Bigots don't generally "discuss" or have much interest in discussion. Typically, they simply declare simply The Way It Is. And, when challenged, make no attempt at discussion. Typically, they instead play name-calling games and "I'm the victim".

I consider a bigot to be someone who judges another for the way God made them. Commenting, in any tone, on their actions or beliefs is not bigotry.  (ie. Maybe some people are born with a predispostion to molest children but if they act on that impulse then they are sick perverts).

I don't think either of those things is bigotry.

In your specific example, note--in fact--you did not comment or characterize the person's actions or their beliefs. You're still commenting on the person--the way God made them. By your standard above, that would make you a bigot.

[ONLYWAY]

you are missing my point...just because someone is born with a certain inclination or even socialized into a certian direction that doesnt justify THEIR ACTIONS.  They are not a pervert until they act on their impulse.  Commenting on someones actions is not bigotry.  

everyone is born with a desire to sin...all kinds of sins.  Everyone has different and similar temptations, but they are not a "sinner" until they act on that "sin". 

Not to promote your opinions???  How exactly can anyone have a discussion then?

Perhaps you're forgetting the "bigotry" part. Bigots don't generally "discuss" or have much interest in discussion. Typically, they simply declare simply The Way It Is. And, when challenged, make no attempt at discussion. Typically, they instead play name-calling games and "I'm the victim".

I consider a bigot to be someone who judges another for the way God made them. Commenting, in any tone, on their actions or beliefs is not bigotry.  (ie. Maybe some people are born with a predispostion to molest children but if they act on that impulse then they are sick perverts).

I don't think either of those things is bigotry.

In your specific example, note--in fact--you did not comment or characterize the person's actions or their beliefs. You're still commenting on the person--the way God made them. By your standard above, that would make you a bigot.

[rossby]

you are missing my point...just because someone is born with a certain inclination or even socialized into a certian direction that doesnt justify THEIR ACTIONS.  Commenting on someones actions is not bigotry.

Pretty sure I got your point. As I pointed out, you're not really commenting on someone's actions at all.

[dalebert]

Again, where?

He works very hard to keep his more controversial behavior and statements off the record.  Calling me a fag and spouting "fucking faggots" is something he does frequently and in person.  It might be as simple as just asking him what I've said that he denies.  Ask him if I mis-quoted him on the other thread and if he actually typed that.  It was a copy & paste.  It still has my typing errors.  Ultimately people will just have to judge for themselves who's being the more open and honest person here.  I don't expect anything to happen.  I just want a light shined on this bullshit and for people to see him as he really is and not as this carefully-crafted paper cutout he presents to the world.

My guess is he won't lie outright.  He'll bend over backwards to avoid saying anything, then he'll avoid a direct answer, and then he'll have a cover story.  That's the familiar pattern.

I thought Keith's answer about what bigotry is was pretty good: it could mean a number of things, and it depends on who's doing the deciding. 'Course, I didn't get the impression that the latter part of the answer was entirely sincere. But there appears to be more behind this "dispute" than either you or Keith are stating.

It's not nearly as complicated as you might think.  He calls me a fag and to loves to say "fucking faggots" angrily under the pretense of humor only no one laughs but him.  I know a barrage of gay jokes that are actually funny and I'm all for hearing new ones, but insulting people isn't funny.  It ought to be clear it's not funny dozens of times later when no one else is laughing.  He's been TRYING to get a rise out of me for quite some time, and my patience just finally wore thin.  He got what he wanted.

Yes. He wants all marriages to be illegal.

Where did he say this? (pointing to your own blog doesn't count.)

JUST ASK HIM.  Experience the same run-around that I always experience when I challenge his bullshit answers.  Meanwhile, try to figure out why he's singling out ONE type of marriage when it makes no sense, even under his own cover story for it.  Don't bother doing it here.  He doesn't want the public to know who he really is.

Note: I took the end part of this out.  It's getting too much into my personal speculation about Keith's motives for here.

[dalebert]

If someone is making you feel guilt for being a sodomite then maybe you should think about why that is and rethink your actions.

The Sodomites were violent rapists.  That doesn't describe me so it doesn't make me feel guilt.  But I've already explained why I went a step past just ignoring Keith.  I was writing my post at the same time as 4 other posts came up.

Also, you should calmly explain to your "friend" that the word "faggot" means a bundle of sticks for a fire and promotes the idea of killing homosexuals.   I think he should be able to use whatever words he wants to describe your lifestyle and actions and still be a member in good standing with the FSP but if he really hates you so much why would you be friends with him?

I'm not anymore.  The words are hateful and imply violence exactly for the reasons you described.  "Fag" and "faggot" were words used to describe witches historically, something good only for burning, as well as a number of other types of people who were particularly hated at various times.  And trying to enshrine your personal views into government policy, or keep them enshrined there, is also violent.  It's that violent element which I believe makes the leap from expressing an opinion to bigotry.

[freedomroad]

Again, where?

He works very hard to keep his more controversial behavior and statements off the record.  Calling me a fag...

OK, I will not try to escalate by including anything else as the last thing I want discussed here are the details of a messy break-up of a good friendship.  You have brought this up 3 times and I think it may be character assassination, which I cannot support.  Dale and I have both called each other a fag more than one time in more than one year.  I've also been called a fag by several other people and likewise said similar things to them.  Much of my circle of friends has watched South Park (which even did an episode based around the word) and understands this as acceptable interact b/t this particular group of good friends.  The same is true for the gay jokes (both dale and I and some my circle of friends...)

No matter what you people feel about the word or this drama, I'm sorry you were needlessly exposed to this drama.

[ONLYWAY]

actually the sodomites didnt get a chance to rape the angels and there is no evidence that they raped anyone else.

I agree that faggot is not a good word to use and I don't...at least try very hard not to...can't even think of that time I did.   BUT it is only a word and I don't think most people using it want to burn anyone.

Of course the govt has no right to speak on the subject.

If someone is making you feel guilt for being a sodomite then maybe you should think about why that is and rethink your actions.

The Sodomites were violent rapists.  That doesn't describe me so it doesn't make me feel guilt.  But I've already explained why I went a step past just ignoring Keith.  I was writing my post at the same time as 4 other posts came up.

Also, you should calmly explain to your "friend" that the word "faggot" means a bundle of sticks for a fire and promotes the idea of killing homosexuals.   I think he should be able to use whatever words he wants to describe your lifestyle and actions and still be a member in good standing with the FSP but if he really hates you so much why would you be friends with him?

I'm not anymore.  The words are hateful and imply violence exactly for the reasons you described.  "Fag" and "faggot" were words used to describe witches historically, something good only for burning, as well as a number of other types of people who were particularly hated at various times.  And trying to enshrine your personal views into government policy, or keep them enshrined there, is also violent.  It's that violent element which I believe makes the leap from expressing an opinion to bigotry.

[ONLYWAY]

Don't think you are getting it...let me try again.

people are born with dessire to sin but until they sin they are not a "sinner"...let's take a simple one...lying.  People are born with a desire to lie but until they lie they are not a liar.  it is the action, the choice, the decision that changes things.   Commenting on someone's actions is NOT bigotry.  NOR is it discrimination to judge someone based on what they choose to do.

it some one is born black they don't have to make any decision or do anything to be black.  It wasn't their choice...it was God's.  Making judgement calls about that person is bigotry and a slap in the face of God.

you are missing my point...just because someone is born with a certain inclination or even socialized into a certian direction that doesnt justify THEIR ACTIONS.  Commenting on someones actions is not bigotry.

Pretty sure I got your point. As I pointed out, you're not really commenting on someone's actions at all.

[dalebert]

OK, I will not try to escalate by including anything else as the last thing I want discussed here are the details of a messy break-up of a good friendship.

What do you suggest is my motivation if not this?  Are you implying that I arbitrarily, for no reason whatsoever, decided I don't want to be friends with you, and that I just chose to fuck with you all of a sudden?  This is THE REASON we can't be friends, Keith.  When one person is consistently rude, disrespectful, and dishonest to another person, that's not a good friendship.

I don't deny I have used the word "fag" casually some time in the past in the way that openly gay people have a tendency to do to describe other gay people.  There's an analogy here between other minorities using a word casually that is otherwise consistently understood to be a very hateful word to defuse the power of the word.  But I don't subscribe to that tactic anymore.  I've made a concerted effort for some time now to avoid using the word to describe gay people.  I only use it to describe guys who ride Harleys.  I acknowledge it's possible, but I honestly don't recall ever calling you that.  I know I have on many occasions implied that you're probably gay and eventually just outright suggested it, but that's not an insult coming from me and it was almost always as a response to your hate talk.  I have sincerely tred to explain on multiple occasions that anti-gay bravado does not make you seem more masculine.  Many people have the common sense to see it for what it is.  If I've tolerated it this long, it's only because I held out hope you would work through whatever personal issues are driving you to this behavior and eventually stop, but I don't have any reasonable amount of hope for that any longer.

I still wish you luck in working through this, but it is not healthy for me and my own self-esteem to endure your abuse and act like we are friends.

[John Edward Mercier]

Don't think you are getting it...let me try again.

people are born with dessire to sin but until they sin they are not a "sinner"...let's take a simple one...lying.  People are born with a desire to lie but until they lie they are not a liar.  it is the action, the choice, the decision that changes things.   Commenting on someone's actions is NOT bigotry.  NOR is it discrimination to judge someone based on what they choose to do.

it some one is born black they don't have to make any decision or do anything to be black.  It wasn't their choice...it was God's.  Making judgement calls about that person is bigotry and a slap in the face of God.

you are missing my point...just because someone is born with a certain inclination or even socialized into a certian direction that doesnt justify THEIR ACTIONS.  Commenting on someones actions is not bigotry.

Pretty sure I got your point. As I pointed out, you're not really commenting on someone's actions at all.

So the biblic 'Judge not, lest thee be judged' means what?