Community > Posts By > Chazster

 
Chazster's photo
Tue 07/22/14 08:36 PM




Wow race is is ingrained in your mind set you cant seperate it from anything. This is what keeps the country from moving forward.



no, what keeps it from moving forward is those who refuse to even aknowledge the reality of the benefit in being part of the majority that may sometimes cause a disadvantage , underrepresentation, or even exclusion for the minority

which , by the way, happens in more countries than america and more races than white,,,or black

for instance, hispanics are a part of the 'general' public, and we have SPANISH channels now, but that isnt because its racist, its because its already the 'general' expectation that most other channels will be english speaking,,,they dont need to advertise 'english' in their titles, its ASSUMED as the 'norm' of the 'general' public

but when people are stuck up on the 'white' thing only , and refuse to aknowledge any bigger context,,

we will continue to have no resolutions

if its really offensive that we might have a BET, when for DECADES whites had ABC, CBS, and NBC(before cable),,,

if its really offensive that we might have an NAACP, when for DECADES whites had CONGRESS<,,lol

than, I guess the discussion is halted for many at a place of situational blindness



Nope I have been more a minority than you. And while living like that I pretty much ignored that fact. And while it still existed I didn't promote it by crying fowl and demanding "representation". Neither does my wife.



if you lived in america, you werent more of a minority.

if you arent living in america, than the concern about AMERICAN inequality wouldnt concern you.

and, btw, in america, people have a RIGHT to be represented, and expressing an interest in that right is NOT THE SAME AS promoting inequality

there is absolutely no logic to a statement that inequality is promoted when people seek to do something about it or call attention to it

do we 'promote' political ineptitude by drawing attention to it or seeking corrections for it?

do we 'promote' freedom of speech infringements by drawing attention to them or 'demanding' they be corrected?

It is clear you just will never get it,, so , Im glad for your willful ignorance on this, because it sure seems to be blissful

but it doesnt result in the same said bliss for everyone else who experiences injustices or oppression or systemic inequality,,,






I argue you are the one that doesnt get it. You thing discrimination against the minority is justified because of supposed discrimination you faced. You are in fact so ignorant to this fact that you fail to even recognize it. I do not deny that racism to minorities and differential treatment exists. I do not justify it either. However, you fail to recognize discrimination against the majority in this country and the things that others claim as racism you justify. Then you try belittle others experiences because they were not in this country. Racism is racism is it not? What does country have to do with it?

Chazster's photo
Tue 07/22/14 08:24 PM
But of course this is because i wasn't indoctrinated since birth to think about race. I think of people as people first. And think about if I am represented as if other people are there.

Chazster's photo
Tue 07/22/14 08:20 PM


Wow race is is ingrained in your mind set you cant seperate it from anything. This is what keeps the country from moving forward.



no, what keeps it from moving forward is those who refuse to even aknowledge the reality of the benefit in being part of the majority that may sometimes cause a disadvantage , underrepresentation, or even exclusion for the minority

which , by the way, happens in more countries than america and more races than white,,,or black

for instance, hispanics are a part of the 'general' public, and we have SPANISH channels now, but that isnt because its racist, its because its already the 'general' expectation that most other channels will be english speaking,,,they dont need to advertise 'english' in their titles, its ASSUMED as the 'norm' of the 'general' public

but when people are stuck up on the 'white' thing only , and refuse to aknowledge any bigger context,,

we will continue to have no resolutions

if its really offensive that we might have a BET, when for DECADES whites had ABC, CBS, and NBC(before cable),,,

if its really offensive that we might have an NAACP, when for DECADES whites had CONGRESS<,,lol

than, I guess the discussion is halted for many at a place of situational blindness



Nope I have been more a minority than you. And while living like that I pretty much ignored that fact. And while it still existed I didn't promote it by crying fowl and demanding "representation". Neither does my wife.

Chazster's photo
Tue 07/22/14 02:38 PM
Wow race is is ingrained in your mind set you cant seperate it from anything. This is what keeps the country from moving forward.

Chazster's photo
Tue 07/22/14 02:20 PM
So your racism is ok because of your experiences? You want your minority specific stuff that is fine, however claiming things for the general public are some how "white" is racist.

Chazster's photo
Tue 07/22/14 01:53 PM


So racism is due to racism?


dont hurt yourself,,lol

when people are EXCLUDED or DISCRIMINATED AGAINST< they often must rally around and support each other instead of waiting for someone else to

that is why minorities can 'market' to minorities because the majority already market to the majority,,,

And you proved my point. Claiming things that are for the general public are some how actually for white people.

Chazster's photo
Tue 07/22/14 01:47 PM
So racism is due to racism?

Chazster's photo
Tue 07/22/14 01:29 PM


Racism- when anything not specifically targeted to a minority group is considered white.



which dictionary is that from"



examples of racism:

children not being permitted to a school due to race
people hung due to their race
people born into slavery because of their race
people kept out of institutions because of race
,,

these are things that are RACIST because they do TARGET a race, not because they dont 'specifically target' a minority group











Full Definition of RACISM


1

: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race


2

: racial prejudice or discrimination


Its an example not a definition. Other races are allowed to form organizations that are strictly marketed to that race. Yet there is one race that is singled out and not allowed to do that. How is that not racial discrimination?

Chazster's photo
Mon 07/21/14 09:04 PM
Racism- when anything not specifically targeted to a minority group is considered white.

Chazster's photo
Thu 07/17/14 08:15 PM

broke yet faithful man, money can't buy happiness...

But money can buy a waverunner. You ever see someone sad on a waverunner? I dare you to try and be sad on one.

Chazster's photo
Sun 07/13/14 10:37 AM

I think as human beings , one of our greatest learning resources is each other. So, depending upon ones aim,and the type of country they wish to live in, looking at the example of others sometimes helps.

if the goal is to be prosperous, or safe, or secure, for instance:

For the third year, Norway ranked no. 1. With per capita GDP of $54,000 it is among the richest in the world and ranks first in social capital and second in safety and security.

Denmark is no. 2 for the third year. The tiny country ranks first in entrepreneurship and opportunity, based on high levels of social equality, high connectivity and the world's lowest start-up costs


Australia has moved up from fifth place in 2009, the result of excellent education, an efficient government bureaucracy and booming trade in natural resources.

New Zealand ranks no. 2 in governance, education and personal freedom. No country ranks higher in tolerance for immigrants. (Image of artist Grand Hughes, Napier, N.Z.).
http://mingle2.com/topic/reply/403720

and the top four countries with the highest income tax are:


Aruba

58.95%

$165,000


Sweden

56.6%

$81,000


Denmark

55.4%

$76,000


Netherlands

52%

$72,500


http://mingle2.com/topic/reply/403720



you get out what you put in, ,,seems like countries with the best living are the ones with citizens who are willing(and able) to put in the most

just SEEMS,,,to me



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_rates

Go here and list my max individual. Almost the same as you listed but look at who is number 5 at 55.9%. Oh wait its the US.

Chazster's photo
Sun 07/13/14 10:25 AM

One thing that should never be taxed is food, yet they still have a tax for it.

That depends where you live. I live in Texas and food is not taxed.

Chazster's photo
Wed 07/09/14 07:41 PM






pretty sure fair is more of the legal definition since we are talking trials.

1.free from bias, dishonesty, or injustice: a fair decision; a fair judge.
2.legitimately sought, pursued, done, given, etc.; proper under the rules: a fair fight.

Thus the unbiased part is why you have the right to an impartial jury and innocent until proven guilty.


interpretation

but THE CONSTITUTION,nowhere states that there is a right to a 'fair' trial,,,

an 'impartial' jury is not going to happen in the media age,,,,,




It also doesn't say you have the right to eat. So what? It doesnt have to explicitly say everything.



and therefore, though I may argue that I have the 'right to eat', I could not use the COHSITTUON as the basis

most likely I would use the popular and vague 'inalienable right' argument about 'life liberty and pursuit of happiness'



Yes you could. 9th amendment. Let me further this by saying, what YOU think and what constitutional law allows is not the same thing.



the ninth amendment says something about 'right to eat'? really?


let me check,,

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people


NOPE, not there


let me add, the column is about the flaws in the thinking of 'literalists' who use the LITERAL and verbatim, words of the Constitution to define everything,,,,

what is LITERALLY there, and what one THINKS it means, are not the same thing,,

Actually it does. It basically says that just because certain rights are stated in the constitution does not mean rights not stated in the constitution are not rights. The fact that there are many cases of constitutional significance and rulings after such cases, of things not explicitly stated in the constitution prove that you are wrong.

Chazster's photo
Wed 07/09/14 10:54 AM
Edited by Chazster on Wed 07/09/14 10:56 AM




pretty sure fair is more of the legal definition since we are talking trials.

1.free from bias, dishonesty, or injustice: a fair decision; a fair judge.
2.legitimately sought, pursued, done, given, etc.; proper under the rules: a fair fight.

Thus the unbiased part is why you have the right to an impartial jury and innocent until proven guilty.


interpretation

but THE CONSTITUTION,nowhere states that there is a right to a 'fair' trial,,,

an 'impartial' jury is not going to happen in the media age,,,,,




It also doesn't say you have the right to eat. So what? It doesnt have to explicitly say everything.



and therefore, though I may argue that I have the 'right to eat', I could not use the COHSITTUON as the basis

most likely I would use the popular and vague 'inalienable right' argument about 'life liberty and pursuit of happiness'



Yes you could. 9th amendment. Let me further this by saying, what YOU think and what constitutional law allows is not the same thing.

Chazster's photo
Tue 07/08/14 01:37 PM


pretty sure fair is more of the legal definition since we are talking trials.

1.free from bias, dishonesty, or injustice: a fair decision; a fair judge.
2.legitimately sought, pursued, done, given, etc.; proper under the rules: a fair fight.

Thus the unbiased part is why you have the right to an impartial jury and innocent until proven guilty.


interpretation

but THE CONSTITUTION,nowhere states that there is a right to a 'fair' trial,,,

an 'impartial' jury is not going to happen in the media age,,,,,




It also doesn't say you have the right to eat. So what? It doesnt have to explicitly say everything.

Chazster's photo
Tue 07/08/14 12:55 PM
I bet shoot to kill orders on border hoppers would reduce the numbers drastically. That plus deportation.

Chazster's photo
Tue 07/08/14 09:50 AM
pretty sure fair is more of the legal definition since we are talking trials.

1.free from bias, dishonesty, or injustice: a fair decision; a fair judge.
2.legitimately sought, pursued, done, given, etc.; proper under the rules: a fair fight.

Thus the unbiased part is why you have the right to an impartial jury and innocent until proven guilty.

Chazster's photo
Tue 07/08/14 09:44 AM

the challenge

find these nine phrases

Innocent until Proven Guilty:
2. The Right to a Fair Trial
2. Right to a Jury of Your Peers:
3. The Right to Vote
1. The Right to Travel
2. Judicial Review
1. The Right to Marriage
1. The Right to Procreate
1. The Right to Privacy

anywhere in the US CONSTITUTION

or continue debating individual INTTERPRETATIONS Of what is actually, literally, there,,,


1. - would be covered under the 9th Amendment.
2. - Would be covered under the 6th Amendment.
3. - Would be covered under the 15th Amendment.

Most things were not specifically stated because of the obvious. Do we need to list that you have the right to walk, eat, drink, cut down a tree, swim, build a house, ride a horse, etc?


Chazster's photo
Tue 07/08/14 09:31 AM
Love me some League

Chazster's photo
Thu 06/26/14 04:17 PM


I always felt too ugly to date as well. Many of us struggle with self doubt over one thing or another. The hardest person to convince that you are good enough is yourself.


Preachin' to the choir


I am married now, broke my fair share of hearts, and still always considered myself unattractive. Just be the best you that you can be.

1 2 5 6 7 9 11 12 13 24 25