Release List Reviews Shop Join News DVD Giveaways Video Games Advertise
DVD Reviews | Theatrical Reviews | Price Search Buy Stuff Here
DVD Talk
DVD Reviews DVD Talk Headlines HD Reviews


Add to My Yahoo! - RSS 2.0 - RSS 2.0 - DVD Talk Podcast RSS -


Go Back   DVD Talk Forum > General Discussions > Other Talk > Religion, Politics and World Events

Religion, Politics and World Events They make great dinner conversation, don't you think? plus Political Film

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-06-17, 08:37 AM   #626
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Llama School
Posts: 6,539
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

Quote:
Originally Posted by creekdipper View Post
Your subsequent post was entirely irrelevant since it addressed an entirely different matter and is just thrown in as a red herring.
I can't multitask. I can't put two and two together. One topic at a time!
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-17, 08:40 AM   #627
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Llama School
Posts: 6,539
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

Let's talk about not being able to overcome our biases when actual facts are right in our face.

http://www.sciencealert.com/our-bias...perceive-facts

https://www.cmu.edu/news/stories/arc...lind-spot.html

Fear fueled cowards, bigots, and racists are their own worst enemies.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-17, 08:42 AM   #628
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
mspmms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Indianapolis,IN
Posts: 6,398
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

TheAllPurposeNothing

Supermallet's words showed his thinking - and Creek is demonstrating that, many just don't want to see it.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-17, 09:09 AM   #629
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Reisterstown, MD
Posts: 1,642
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

Quote:
Originally Posted by mspmms View Post
TheAllPurposeNothing

Supermallet's words showed his thinking - and Creek is demonstrating that, many just don't want to see it.
But that doesn't answer my question:

do either of you have any sense as to what creek thinks is supermallet's "blatant racism"?

Of course this is now moot as creek has verified what he meant. But if you were in the wayback machine to 11 pm last night, at that time, did you understand what creek took to be "blatant"? It's a yes or no question.
__________________
-Mumford, the All Purpose Nothing

A million monkeys with a million brushes still would only eat the paint.
-Poundcake
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-17, 09:13 AM   #630
DVD Talk Legend
 
creekdipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 17,866
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

What prize does he win if he gets it right?

(Sorry, AllPurpose...just too good to pass up)
__________________
"With all due respect, the forum is unusable and people are abandoning it, largely due to creekdipper's posts and people's reactions to them."
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-17, 09:32 AM   #631
DVD Talk Legend
 
hdnmickey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 10,001
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandoman View Post
If you are suggesting that white supremacists are a "race" deserving of protection, you are sadly mistaken,
It's now White Nationalists... try to keep up.

Sadly because this is an online forum it's impossible to tell if people actually keep a straight face as they use that term, thinking it means something other than modern nazi.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-17, 09:32 AM   #632
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Llama School
Posts: 6,539
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

Quote:
Originally Posted by creekdipper View Post
If you're afraid to answer "yes" or "no" because of a "gotcha" debate...

then you (and others) must be afraid that they'll be "gotten."
How many "yes" or "no" questions has the quoted sidestepped? When did he first gain the "coward" label?

One still seems to think that "choice" is an actual born trait. Being a piece of shit Nazi is not a born trait. It is learned and chosen. Wanting to end Nazism is not racism, it is wanting to end a train of thought.

"Free speech! Free speech! Death to Jews! 1st amendment!"
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-17, 10:25 AM   #633
Time Lord
 
Supermallet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Termite Terrace
Posts: 53,181
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

Just a reminder: you don't get to tell minorities how they should protest.
__________________
Never stop punching fascists.
Stop employing thugs and murderers: Abolish police, abolish the military.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-17, 10:27 AM   #634
DVD Talk Legend
 
Why So Blu?'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 24,724
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supermallet View Post
Just a reminder: you don't get to tell minorities how they should protest.


  Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-17, 10:30 AM   #635
DVD Talk Legend
 
hdnmickey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 10,001
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supermallet View Post
Just a reminder: you don't get to tell minorities how they should protest.
Seems pretty clear ato me to me, but I'm not a White Nationalist, so what do I know?
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-17, 10:32 AM   #636
DVD Talk Legend
 
creekdipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 17,866
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

Quote:
Originally Posted by Why So Blu? View Post
Still signing on to those racist statements, Blu?

__________________
"With all due respect, the forum is unusable and people are abandoning it, largely due to creekdipper's posts and people's reactions to them."
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-17, 10:33 AM   #637
Dan
DVD Talk Legend
 
Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: More drinks, more fun!
Posts: 14,451
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supermallet View Post
Just a reminder: you don't get to tell minorities how they should protest.
Well, that's a blatantly racist statement!

note: this is sarcasm.
__________________
"...you've taken a side in an ideological battle, while pretending all the way
that you're simply defending the supposedly neutral value of free speech.
Don't think we don't notice which instances of speech you choose to defend." - Contrapoints
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-17, 10:43 AM   #638
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,016
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

Quote:
Originally Posted by creekdipper View Post
No, you're wrong. So very wrong.

Your subsequent post was entirely irrelevant since it addressed an entirely different matter and is just thrown in as a red herring.

Supermallet stated emphatically that non-minorities have no right to tell minorities "how to protest." You keep bringing up "white supremacists" and going off on that tangent.

Grip says that being racist has to involve a feeling of superiority of one's own group toward other groups. That certainly qualifies as one type of racism, but so does singling out particular races...whether majority or minority...and treating them differently without any specific legal justification. I gave examples of basic rules for civic behavior that ALL races & ethnicities should be expected to follow. You seem to agree except for exemptions based upon special circumstances (which we discussed). But then you leave that line of reasoning to jump over to "white supremacists"...whose views no one here is defending.

Can you explain why majority members should not have to follow traffic laws? Can you explain why minority members should not have to follow traffic laws?

That is the question...NOT "white supremacy," "black supremacy," or any other color of "supremacy." Bringing that up is simply a distraction intended to avoid the actual question of preferential treatment toward anyone...majority or minority.

Just answer the actual questions. WHY should any United States citizen not be able to voice an opinion on whether other United States citizens should follow the same laws as all other citizens? If a person says that all U.S. citizens should be subject to the draft, for instance, does that opinion suddenly become moot when race is introduced? It's okay to express the opinion based upon other criteria (age, gender, citizenship status, etc.) but NOT if the race of the citizen is involved?

That's patently absurd and patently racist. To use grip's criteria, it's affording a "special" status to some racial groups when no special status is required to address a particular grievance. You're just treating some people differently based upon their race. It doesn't matter whether they benefit or suffer from that treatment...it's still treating them differently.

If that's not being racist, then no amount of reasoning will convince you.

If Supermallet had suggested that no minority member should be able to tell a majority member how to protest, would you so vigorously agree with that statement as a perfectly reasonable and acceptable approach? Keep in mind that the discussion involved matters of legal/illegality, not using legal means of protest available to all. The latter was never questioned.

If you want to argue that some citizens...based upon race...should be able to ignore laws that are designed to apply to all citizens...then, by all means, please do so. I'm genuinely curious to see what legal argument you would use in court to advance that proposition in a way that would convince reasonable people that such a proposition is (a) legal; (b) constitutional; (c) ethical; (d) desirable.

And...for the life of me...I don't understand this "If you are suggesting..." yada yada stuff. No, I'm not suggesting anything of the sort, any more than you are "suggesting" that all white people should immediately leave for Finland. Why either of us would indulge in that specious tactic "in order to score internet points" is puzzling...at least to me. It's dishonest, it's irrelevant, and it serves no purpose other to directly avoid the question. And I'm surprised that you continue to do that.
The question at hand is "Creekdipper is accusing Supermallet's of overt Racism and provides the quote supermallet used as proof"

In my response, I defined RACISM from a well established source, which then defined racism as related to race, not to any particular group.

If you would, please provide a definition to your meaning of racism.

I most certainly did not mean to include any group of people. Racism is directly related to the firm belief of superiority of a particular race of people.

In paragraph 4 and paragraph 8, you misquote (at most) or misunderstand (at least ) me. What you are speaking of is possibly discrimination and that is not what you stated originally and continue to assert. I request you correct that.

In paragraph 7, Bando answered your question. It was a clear response to it and you even seemed to acknowledge it. In your response here, you decide to persist at the false logic by providing obvious detailed seemingly rhetorical questions about how laws should be followed and again assert race. A paragraph prior, you disconnected race from this.

In paragraph 10, you assert "if you want to argue that...." followed by a supposition. My opinion of your supposition is definitely no. No race should assert usurpation of laws just because they are a race. I'm having difficulty finding such assertions others have made though I'm sure it exists.

However in your final paragraph you state you abhor directly what you did in the paragraph previous. And you are right. It obfuscates the discussion by diverting from the point you have asserted to begin this.

I request that you define racism, from an established source, as you see it. Then we can revisit your post here and attempt to apply it to exactly how Supermallet's comment is overtly racist.

Thanks
__________________
"They bought their tickets.....they knew whats they was getting into...

I SAY LET EM CRASH"
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-17, 11:07 AM   #639
DVD Talk Legend
 
creekdipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 17,866
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

Sure.

I define being racist as treating people of different races differently given the same set of circumstances. I believe that a random sampling of the population would agree with that definition. If common consensus is not a sufficient source, we'll see how your own definition dovetails below.

(Just to quickly deal with one of your questions: Paragraph #4 & #8 were directed toward Bandoman's comments, not yours.)

Also an important semantic distinction: When someone says, "If you're suggesting...," etc., that is implying that such a suggestion actually took place. When someone says, "If you want to argue...," etc. that is recognizing the logical implications of a particular argument. The first is pretending actual dialogue exists; the latter suggests where thinking will lead if continued along that line. Apples and oranges.

I don't understand the "Paragraph #7" comment at all, unless you are saying that Bandoman confirmed that Supermallet was making an exceptional case for minorities not having to follow the same rules as non-minorities. That, after all, was the crux of the argument.

Again, read Supermallet's statement, which he generously re-posted above. In it, he says that non-minorities "don't get to tell minorities how to protest."

That clearly establishes a separate category based upon race (or ethnicity...take your pick). If minorities are doing something illegal or unconstitutional, why should citizens who are not members of minorities NOT have not only the right but also the duty to protest illegal, unconstitutional actions? You will note that no one ever reverses the advice and says to a minority member, "You don't get to tell majority members how to protest."

And you know the reason why. Because it would be racist...and, according to your own definition, establishing a position of superior privilege for some racial or ethnic groups over others."

In other words...racism.

Hope that answered your questions, and thanks for the excellent discussion (which I hope will continue in the future).
__________________
"With all due respect, the forum is unusable and people are abandoning it, largely due to creekdipper's posts and people's reactions to them."
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-17, 11:36 AM   #640
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
mspmms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Indianapolis,IN
Posts: 6,398
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

TheAllPurposeNothing:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mspmms View Post
Yes
Spoiler:
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-17, 11:40 AM   #641
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Llama School
Posts: 6,539
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

Hey ****** you can't march for your rights! And you better not tell me to stop being a bigoted racist. You telling those bigots of my race to treat your race equally is racism, and I am about to cry.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-17, 11:50 AM   #642
DVD Talk Special Edition
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,016
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

MMM...perhaps I'm thinking we separate in the idea of "minorities" as a race. It is my belief that "minorities" are NOT race based but any group of peoples who are not a majority of the society at large. That could be sliced up in too many ways, including by ethnic heritage (or race), but also by poor or welfare recipients or any one of a number of examples (groups not tied to race). I dont subscribe to the use of "minorities" as a good qualifier for this discussion as it is way too broad and can be applied from both perspectives. Racism, refers specifically to a race. It is not defined in anyway as any group.

As for Paragraph 4 and 8, you quote me directly using your interpretation of minorities as race. I now see that your application was based on the perspective you provided with which I disagree.

Quote:
That clearly establishes a separate category based upon race (or ethnicity...take your pick). If minorities are doing something illegal or unconstitutional, why should citizens who are not members of minorities NOT have not only the right but also the duty to protest illegal, unconstitutional actions? You will note that no one ever reverses the advice and says to a minority member, "You don't get to tell majority members how to protest."

And you know the reason why. Because it would be racist...and, according to your own definition, establishing a position of superior privilege for some racial or ethnic groups over others."
Given what I stated above and clarifying the separation of Minority and Race, I disagree with you completely. The grouping of "Minorities" can be applied way to broadly, but I can see how you applied it using your perspective as well.

So it is for Supermallet's quote, from my understanding of those terms, this is not a racist quote. By your reckoning, it is.

On another note I would like to address the paragraph with the phrase "If minorities are doing something illegal or unconstitutional, why should citizens who are not members of minorities NOT have not only the right but also the duty to protest illegal, unconstitutional actions?"

I believe they do (by that I mean your "not members of minorities"). I believe anyone does. I would be delighted in equality in the applications of our laws and constitutional rights. But as you know, those laws and even the constitution can be viewed VERY differently by different perspectives. It's what makes our country so great and so frustrating.

Your "if" statement states the logic that if you are of one perspective, the converse of that perspective you must be against. This is definitely not so. I cant subscribe to that mentality.

To be clear, I'm a 3rd generation Mexican-American. I have personally seen the injustices and mishandling of my constitutionally guaranteed rights of myself, my friends and my family at the hands of not only authorities sworn to protect me, but by the systematic discrimination by a wide and varied group of people. I will not call that "Racism", as my own group were some of ones doing the discriminating, in addition to other persons who are not part of my ethnic background. I am a firm believer that equality of justice does not exist in practice. But our laws allow for the interpretation of fairness to be debated depending on your perspective and logic. And that logic is affected by ones own biases, dislikes, likes and of potentially ones own prejudice and racism.
__________________
"They bought their tickets.....they knew whats they was getting into...

I SAY LET EM CRASH"
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-06-17, 12:13 PM   #643
DVD Talk Legend
 
creekdipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 17,866
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

I believe that the context of the discussion involved racial minorities, but it's possible that it didn't. I didn't see that offered as an excuse, but fair is fair.

You reasoning makes sense. If we are including all minorities such as the categories you described), then I agree with you 100%

I will note that other posters vehemently disagreeing with me, including an attorney, seemed to pick up on the same "race" vibe that I did. For instance, Bandoman said, "A statement that takes race into account isn't by definition a racist statement." That indicates to me that he also thought the discussion was focused on racial minorities.

I appreciate the nuance you discuss in your last paragraph and totally agree that "the letter of the law" has to be tempered by extenuating circumstances. As an authority figure, I often used discretion in dealing with similar offenses depending on a wide range of factors. Justice is not always a "one size fits all" approach.

However...and I am subject to correction...I believe that the discussion at the time focused on the illegal use of force to suppress speech being used as a tactic of "protest." While that is a stand-alone topic that transcends race, the statement about non-minority citizens not having the moral right to object to illegal actions establishes a double standard for minorities and non-minorities. If use of the term "minorities" was not intended to refer to racial minorities, then "racist" would obviously not apply. I'm not sure what term would apply, but the precedent doesn't change. Minorities would be judged by one standard; majorities another. And we're not talking about "marching," "making signs," "chanting," or any other form of legal protest. We're talking about proactively acting violently against others who are exercising their constitutional rights. And I agree with you that no American citizen has the right to usurp the constitutional rights of others regardless of how well-intentioned their reasons may be.

Because then each person would be free to decide when they are justified in taking extralegal actions, whether it be shooting KKK members or shooting abortion doctors.
__________________
"With all due respect, the forum is unusable and people are abandoning it, largely due to creekdipper's posts and people's reactions to them."
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-17, 09:44 AM   #644
DVD Talk Hero
 
inri222's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 38,178
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

__________________
The triumph of evil requires a lot of good people, doing a bit of it [evil], in a morally disengaged way, with indifference to the human suffering they cause.

- Albert Bandura
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-17, 12:18 PM   #645
DVD Talk Hero
 
inri222's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 38,178
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

DACA student targeted by classmate says university has done nothing to help

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/outed-d...ia-university/
__________________
The triumph of evil requires a lot of good people, doing a bit of it [evil], in a morally disengaged way, with indifference to the human suffering they cause.

- Albert Bandura
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-17, 06:12 PM   #646
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
mspmms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Indianapolis,IN
Posts: 6,398
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

Illegal Immigrants Protest Pelosi Press Conference

Pelosi lectures "You don't know what you're talking about"

  Reply With Quote
Old 10-10-17, 11:25 PM   #647
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
GreenMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 5,003
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

Bump

Didn't see that much discussion of this in the main Trump thread.

White House Makes Hard-Line Demands for Any ‘Dreamers’ Deal

Quote:
WASHINGTON — The White House on Sunday delivered to Congress a long list of hard-line immigration measures that President Trump is demanding in exchange for any deal to protect the young undocumented immigrants known as Dreamers, imperiling a fledgling bipartisan push to reach a legislative solution.

Before agreeing to provide legal status for 800,000 young immigrants brought here illegally as children, Mr. Trump will insist on the construction of a wall across the southern border, the hiring of 10,000 immigration agents, tougher laws for those seeking asylum and denial of federal grants to “sanctuary cities,” officials said.

The White House is also demanding the use of the E-Verify program by companies to keep illegal immigrants from getting jobs, an end to people bringing their extended family into the United States, and a hardening of the border against thousands of children fleeing violence in Central America. Such a move would shut down loopholes that encourage parents from Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras to send their children illegally into the United States, where many of them melt into American communities and become undocumented immigrants.

“Now is the time for Congress to adopt these immigration priorities,” Marc Short, the president’s legislative director, told reporters during a conference call on Sunday night. Otherwise, he added, illegal immigration “will likely increase.”

While it is unclear whether Mr. Trump views the demands as absolute requirements or the beginning of a negotiation, the proposals, taken together, amount to a Christmas-in-October wish list for immigration hard-liners inside the White House. Immigration activists have long opposed many of the proposals as draconian or even racist.
Wonder if Democrats will blink on this at all. He's basically reneged on his handshake deal with Pelosi & Schumer (big surprise).
__________________
"I believe that only scientists can understand the universe. It is not so much that I have confidence in scientists being right, but that I have so much in nonscientists being wrong." - Isaac Asimov
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-17, 09:55 AM   #648
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
mspmms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Indianapolis,IN
Posts: 6,398
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

Supreme Court dismisses case against Trump’s expired travel ban

The Supreme Court on Tuesday night dismissed one of the challenges to a now-expired version of President Trump’s travel ban, and the legal battle over his latest efforts to ban some immigrants will need to start anew.

The Supreme Court's Order dismissing the 4th Circuit case:

Quote:
We granted certiorari in this case to resolve a challenge to “the temporary suspension of entry of aliens abroad under Section
2(c) of Executive Order No. 13,780.” Because that provision of the Order “expired by its own terms” on September 24, 2017, the appeal no longer presents a “live case or controversy.” Burke v. Barnes, 479 U. S. 361, 363 (1987). Following our established practice in such cases, the judgment is therefore vacated, and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit with instructions to dismiss as moot the challenge to Executive Order No. 13,780. United States v. Munsingwear, Inc., 340 U. S. 36, 39 (1950). We express no view on the merits.

Justice Sotomayor dissents from the order vacating the judgment below and would dismiss the writ of certiorari as improvidently granted.


I predict a dismissal of 9th Circuit/Hawaii case later this month.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-17, 10:02 AM   #649
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Rosemount, MN
Posts: 25,495
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

Wasn't it dismissed because the order expired? Since mspmms posted it I assumed it would be a "win" for Trump. It just went away. That's a big difference.
__________________
Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow. - Men in Black
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-17, 10:34 AM   #650
DVD Talk Hero
 
JasonF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 38,100
Re: One & Only Illegal Immigration Thread: Part IX

Quote:
Originally Posted by Draven View Post
Wasn't it dismissed because the order expired? Since mspmms posted it I assumed it would be a "win" for Trump. It just went away. That's a big difference.
Correct. They dismissed the case about the original (expired) travel ban. The one about the current travel ban is still on the docket.
__________________
These are my DVDs
360 GamerTag: William T Bunny
PSN ID: William_T_Bunny
"JasonF can do no wrong!" -- Rockmjd23
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:36 PM.


Copyright 2011 DVDTalk.com All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0