Total Posts:72|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Just because you are offended doesn't mean

AlyceTheElectrician
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2016 4:45:55 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
"Just because you are offended doesn't mean you are right" -Ricky Gervais

Do you always require evidence of offense before you justify the offended feelings?
Or are all offended feelings justified, and something must be done about it no matter what?
When do you decide when something is a legit offense, or when it is nonsense?

For instance:
If a groups claims discrimination, than should we treat is as justified discrimination and implement changes to appease the offended just because they said so? An implementation that directly effects all even if the factual evidence doesn't support the claims.

What are some offenses you find legit and nonsense?

For me I think a legit offense is: The Patriot Act

a nonsense offense is: Cultural Appropriation

thank you in advance for replying.
Be who you are, Say what you feel, Because those who mind don"t matter, And those who matter don't mind.

BANGTAN! Blood, Sweat, & Tears> Check it out yes! https://www.youtube.com...
Throwback
Posts: 421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2016 3:15:20 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/6/2016 4:45:55 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
"Just because you are offended doesn't mean you are right" -Ricky Gervais

Do you always require evidence of offense before you justify the offended feelings?
Or are all offended feelings justified, and something must be done about it no matter what?
When do you decide when something is a legit offense, or when it is nonsense?

For instance:
If a groups claims discrimination, than should we treat is as justified discrimination and implement changes to appease the offended just because they said so? An implementation that directly effects all even if the factual evidence doesn't support the claims.

What are some offenses you find legit and nonsense?

For me I think a legit offense is: The Patriot Act

a nonsense offense is: Cultural Appropriation

thank you in advance for replying.

The victim status in modern American society, claimed on behalf of blacks by militants is a non offense and is dividing Americans, setting us back decades.

The victim status of the lazy members of Occupy Wall Street is a non offense, and is causing friction between the haves (who work hard) and the have not's (who don't).

The victim status of those who must lose their private health care coverage, or be forced to pay ever higher premiums due to federal overreach is legitimate.

Just some examples as I see them.
When I respond with "OK" don't take it personally. I'm simply being appropriately dismissive.
Heterodox
Posts: 293
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2016 4:15:40 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/6/2016 4:45:55 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
"Just because you are offended doesn't mean you are right" -Ricky Gervais

Do you always require evidence of offense before you justify the offended feelings?
Or are all offended feelings justified, and something must be done about it no matter what?
When do you decide when something is a legit offense, or when it is nonsense?

For instance:
If a groups claims discrimination, than should we treat is as justified discrimination and implement changes to appease the offended just because they said so? An implementation that directly effects all even if the factual evidence doesn't support the claims.

What are some offenses you find legit and nonsense?

For me I think a legit offense is: The Patriot Act

a nonsense offense is: Cultural Appropriation

thank you in advance for replying.

I really don't understand "being offended". If someone punches me in the face, I am offended - unless I am a paid fighter or something. The "wounded feelings" definition of the word is the one I don't understand.

There isn't anything wrong with discrimination. It's how it is used that usually brings up issues.
AlyceTheElectrician
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2016 10:24:50 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/8/2016 3:15:20 PM, Throwback wrote:
At 8/6/2016 4:45:55 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
"Just because you are offended doesn't mean you are right" -Ricky Gervais

Do you always require evidence of offense before you justify the offended feelings?
Or are all offended feelings justified, and something must be done about it no matter what?
When do you decide when something is a legit offense, or when it is nonsense?

For instance:
If a groups claims discrimination, than should we treat is as justified discrimination and implement changes to appease the offended just because they said so? An implementation that directly effects all even if the factual evidence doesn't support the claims.

What are some offenses you find legit and nonsense?

For me I think a legit offense is: The Patriot Act

a nonsense offense is: Cultural Appropriation

thank you in advance for replying.

The victim status in modern American society, claimed on behalf of blacks by militants is a non offense and is dividing Americans, setting us back decades.

The victim status of the lazy members of Occupy Wall Street is a non offense, and is causing friction between the haves (who work hard) and the have not's (who don't).

The victim status of those who must lose their private health care coverage, or be forced to pay ever higher premiums due to federal overreach is legitimate.

Just some examples as I see them.

Agreed

and I'd add that they all seem doomed to fail, lol.
Be who you are, Say what you feel, Because those who mind don"t matter, And those who matter don't mind.

BANGTAN! Blood, Sweat, & Tears> Check it out yes! https://www.youtube.com...
AlyceTheElectrician
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/8/2016 10:27:09 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/8/2016 4:15:40 PM, Heterodox wrote:
At 8/6/2016 4:45:55 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
"Just because you are offended doesn't mean you are right" -Ricky Gervais

Do you always require evidence of offense before you justify the offended feelings?
Or are all offended feelings justified, and something must be done about it no matter what?
When do you decide when something is a legit offense, or when it is nonsense?

For instance:
If a groups claims discrimination, than should we treat is as justified discrimination and implement changes to appease the offended just because they said so? An implementation that directly effects all even if the factual evidence doesn't support the claims.

What are some offenses you find legit and nonsense?

For me I think a legit offense is: The Patriot Act

a nonsense offense is: Cultural Appropriation

thank you in advance for replying.

I really don't understand "being offended". If someone punches me in the face, I am offended - unless I am a paid fighter or something. The "wounded feelings" definition of the word is the one I don't understand.

There isn't anything wrong with discrimination. It's how it is used that usually brings up issues.

I'm considering the last statement...I'm trying to figure out when discrimination is right...
Be who you are, Say what you feel, Because those who mind don"t matter, And those who matter don't mind.

BANGTAN! Blood, Sweat, & Tears> Check it out yes! https://www.youtube.com...
Heterodox
Posts: 293
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/9/2016 1:51:59 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/8/2016 10:27:09 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
At 8/8/2016 4:15:40 PM, Heterodox wrote:
At 8/6/2016 4:45:55 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
"Just because you are offended doesn't mean you are right" -Ricky Gervais

Do you always require evidence of offense before you justify the offended feelings?
Or are all offended feelings justified, and something must be done about it no matter what?
When do you decide when something is a legit offense, or when it is nonsense?

For instance:
If a groups claims discrimination, than should we treat is as justified discrimination and implement changes to appease the offended just because they said so? An implementation that directly effects all even if the factual evidence doesn't support the claims.

What are some offenses you find legit and nonsense?

For me I think a legit offense is: The Patriot Act

a nonsense offense is: Cultural Appropriation

thank you in advance for replying.

I really don't understand "being offended". If someone punches me in the face, I am offended - unless I am a paid fighter or something. The "wounded feelings" definition of the word is the one I don't understand.

There isn't anything wrong with discrimination. It's how it is used that usually brings up issues.

I'm considering the last statement...I'm trying to figure out when discrimination is right...

Well then, whether you know it or not, you are discriminating.
Hiu
Posts: 1,015
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/9/2016 9:42:14 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/8/2016 3:15:20 PM, Throwback wrote:
At 8/6/2016 4:45:55 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
"Just because you are offended doesn't mean you are right" -Ricky Gervais

Do you always require evidence of offense before you justify the offended feelings?
Or are all offended feelings justified, and something must be done about it no matter what?
When do you decide when something is a legit offense, or when it is nonsense?

For instance:
If a groups claims discrimination, than should we treat is as justified discrimination and implement changes to appease the offended just because they said so? An implementation that directly effects all even if the factual evidence doesn't support the claims.

What are some offenses you find legit and nonsense?

For me I think a legit offense is: The Patriot Act

a nonsense offense is: Cultural Appropriation

thank you in advance for replying.

The victim status in modern American society, claimed on behalf of blacks by militants is a non offense and is dividing Americans, setting us back decades.

The victim status of the lazy members of Occupy Wall Street is a non offense, and is causing friction between the haves (who work hard) and the have not's (who don't).

The victim status of those who must lose their private health care coverage, or be forced to pay ever higher premiums due to federal overreach is legitimate.

Just some examples as I see them.

gotta love when blacks are thrown in this subject...Ironically whites have been claiming victim status since the Civil Rights act

/Drops Mic

Walks away
Hiu
Posts: 1,015
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/9/2016 9:44:57 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/6/2016 4:45:55 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
"Just because you are offended doesn't mean you are right" -Ricky Gervais

Do you always require evidence of offense before you justify the offended feelings?
Or are all offended feelings justified, and something must be done about it no matter what?
When do you decide when something is a legit offense, or when it is nonsense?

For instance:
If a groups claims discrimination, than should we treat is as justified discrimination and implement changes to appease the offended just because they said so? An implementation that directly effects all even if the factual evidence doesn't support the claims.

What are some offenses you find legit and nonsense?

For me I think a legit offense is: The Patriot Act

a nonsense offense is: Cultural Appropriation

thank you in advance for replying.

I believe there are legitimate claims to be offended on certain instances. Let us flip the subject: Just because you cannot understand the offense does not mean you are right either......

There are things that happen to underrepresented groups that do in fact happen and do in fact warrant a legitimate complaint but just because you do not see why they take offense (or assume them being offended is unwarranted) does not mean its not legitimate. The OP is insinuating what is legitimate and what is not and its not your claim to even establish such statements.
Hiu
Posts: 1,015
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/9/2016 9:46:57 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
The OP states:

"There isn't anything wrong with discrimination."

Then you are the problem.This is why being offended is symptomatic to being discriminated against is because the unequal treatment of others is not a problem.
Foodiesoul
Posts: 579
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/9/2016 9:49:21 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/9/2016 9:46:57 PM, Hiu wrote:
The OP states:

"There isn't anything wrong with discrimination."

Then you are the problem.This is why being offended is symptomatic to being discriminated against is because the unequal treatment of others is not a problem.

I agree with you so much.

How can any rational person not see anything wrong with discrimination? It makes me sick.
Heterodox
Posts: 293
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/9/2016 10:20:46 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/9/2016 9:46:57 PM, Hiu wrote:
The OP states:

"There isn't anything wrong with discrimination."

Then you are the problem.This is why being offended is symptomatic to being discriminated against is because the unequal treatment of others is not a problem.

If you were better at discriminating, you would have noticed that it was not the OP that said that, it was me.

See the problem is that people misuse the word a lot nowadays. They only see it as racial discrimination or something that is generally viewed negatively.

Again, "There isn't anything wrong with discrimination. It's how it is used that usually brings up issues."
Throwback
Posts: 421
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/9/2016 11:14:11 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/9/2016 9:42:14 PM, Hiu wrote:
At 8/8/2016 3:15:20 PM, Throwback wrote:
At 8/6/2016 4:45:55 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
"Just because you are offended doesn't mean you are right" -Ricky Gervais

Do you always require evidence of offense before you justify the offended feelings?
Or are all offended feelings justified, and something must be done about it no matter what?
When do you decide when something is a legit offense, or when it is nonsense?

For instance:
If a groups claims discrimination, than should we treat is as justified discrimination and implement changes to appease the offended just because they said so? An implementation that directly effects all even if the factual evidence doesn't support the claims.

What are some offenses you find legit and nonsense?

For me I think a legit offense is: The Patriot Act

a nonsense offense is: Cultural Appropriation

thank you in advance for replying.

The victim status in modern American society, claimed on behalf of blacks by militants is a non offense and is dividing Americans, setting us back decades.

The victim status of the lazy members of Occupy Wall Street is a non offense, and is causing friction between the haves (who work hard) and the have not's (who don't).

The victim status of those who must lose their private health care coverage, or be forced to pay ever higher premiums due to federal overreach is legitimate.

Just some examples as I see them.

gotta love when blacks are thrown in this subject...Ironically whites have been claiming victim status since the Civil Rights act

/Drops Mic

Walks away

Pretending to not understand the topic is not a positive trait. What is today the largest group of "Nobody likes me, everybody hates me?" OBLM is. And being the racist you are, you see disagreeing with a domestic terrorist group as racist. The OP didn't disagree, despite being black. But then again, you are the one who assumes everyone is a racist; not me or the OP.
When I respond with "OK" don't take it personally. I'm simply being appropriately dismissive.
Hiu
Posts: 1,015
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2016 1:17:14 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/9/2016 10:20:46 PM, Heterodox wrote:
At 8/9/2016 9:46:57 PM, Hiu wrote:
The OP states:

"There isn't anything wrong with discrimination."

Then you are the problem.This is why being offended is symptomatic to being discriminated against is because the unequal treatment of others is not a problem.

If you were better at discriminating, you would have noticed that it was not the OP that said that, it was me.

See the problem is that people misuse the word a lot nowadays. They only see it as racial discrimination or something that is generally viewed negatively.

Again, "There isn't anything wrong with discrimination. It's how it is used that usually brings up issues."

Then the OP has my apologies then I would say you are the problem thank you for owning up to that..
Hiu
Posts: 1,015
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2016 1:17:57 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/9/2016 11:14:11 PM, Throwback wrote:
At 8/9/2016 9:42:14 PM, Hiu wrote:
At 8/8/2016 3:15:20 PM, Throwback wrote:
At 8/6/2016 4:45:55 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
"Just because you are offended doesn't mean you are right" -Ricky Gervais

Do you always require evidence of offense before you justify the offended feelings?
Or are all offended feelings justified, and something must be done about it no matter what?
When do you decide when something is a legit offense, or when it is nonsense?

For instance:
If a groups claims discrimination, than should we treat is as justified discrimination and implement changes to appease the offended just because they said so? An implementation that directly effects all even if the factual evidence doesn't support the claims.

What are some offenses you find legit and nonsense?

For me I think a legit offense is: The Patriot Act

a nonsense offense is: Cultural Appropriation

thank you in advance for replying.

The victim status in modern American society, claimed on behalf of blacks by militants is a non offense and is dividing Americans, setting us back decades.

The victim status of the lazy members of Occupy Wall Street is a non offense, and is causing friction between the haves (who work hard) and the have not's (who don't).

The victim status of those who must lose their private health care coverage, or be forced to pay ever higher premiums due to federal overreach is legitimate.

Just some examples as I see them.

gotta love when blacks are thrown in this subject...Ironically whites have been claiming victim status since the Civil Rights act

/Drops Mic

Walks away

Pretending to not understand the topic is not a positive trait. What is today the largest group of "Nobody likes me, everybody hates me?" OBLM is. And being the racist you are, you see disagreeing with a domestic terrorist group as racist. The OP didn't disagree, despite being black. But then again, you are the one who assumes everyone is a racist; not me or the OP.

Here is a challenge for you...

Copy and paste one thing I said that was racist...
Hiu
Posts: 1,015
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2016 1:19:00 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
Remember folks when I use the phrase some whites, doesn't mean I say all whites and it doesn't mean that I'm making a racist statement. But since I am being accused of racism please copy and paste the exact quote I made that was racist......This should be good.
AlyceTheElectrician
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2016 10:54:57 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/9/2016 1:51:59 PM, Heterodox wrote:
At 8/8/2016 10:27:09 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
At 8/8/2016 4:15:40 PM, Heterodox wrote:
At 8/6/2016 4:45:55 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
"Just because you are offended doesn't mean you are right" -Ricky Gervais

Do you always require evidence of offense before you justify the offended feelings?
Or are all offended feelings justified, and something must be done about it no matter what?
When do you decide when something is a legit offense, or when it is nonsense?

For instance:
If a groups claims discrimination, than should we treat is as justified discrimination and implement changes to appease the offended just because they said so? An implementation that directly effects all even if the factual evidence doesn't support the claims.

What are some offenses you find legit and nonsense?

For me I think a legit offense is: The Patriot Act

a nonsense offense is: Cultural Appropriation

thank you in advance for replying.

I really don't understand "being offended". If someone punches me in the face, I am offended - unless I am a paid fighter or something. The "wounded feelings" definition of the word is the one I don't understand.

There isn't anything wrong with discrimination. It's how it is used that usually brings up issues.

I'm considering the last statement...I'm trying to figure out when discrimination is right...

Well then, whether you know it or not, you are discriminating.

I think I get it,

Elite military teams, theme restaurants like Hooters, women only gyms, are some accepted examples of proper discrimination? There's probably more instances of proper discrimination

Ok, I accept that concept.
Be who you are, Say what you feel, Because those who mind don"t matter, And those who matter don't mind.

BANGTAN! Blood, Sweat, & Tears> Check it out yes! https://www.youtube.com...
AlyceTheElectrician
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2016 11:58:57 AM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/9/2016 9:44:57 PM, Hiu wrote:
At 8/6/2016 4:45:55 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
"Just because you are offended doesn't mean you are right" -Ricky Gervais

Do you always require evidence of offense before you justify the offended feelings?
Or are all offended feelings justified, and something must be done about it no matter what?
When do you decide when something is a legit offense, or when it is nonsense?

For instance:
If a groups claims discrimination, than should we treat is as justified discrimination and implement changes to appease the offended just because they said so? An implementation that directly effects all even if the factual evidence doesn't support the claims.

What are some offenses you find legit and nonsense?

For me I think a legit offense is: The Patriot Act

a nonsense offense is: Cultural Appropriation

thank you in advance for replying.

I believe there are legitimate claims to be offended on certain instances. Let us flip the subject: Just because you cannot understand the offense does not mean you are right either......

There are things that happen to underrepresented groups that do in fact happen and do in fact warrant a legitimate complaint but just because you do not see why they take offense (or assume them being offended is unwarranted) does not mean its not legitimate. The OP is insinuating what is legitimate and what is not and its not your claim to even establish such statements.

Ok, so is it correct that you accept that offense is justified no matter what?

What do you mean by 'understand'? Are you implying that because you are outside of the "unrepresented group" then you can not understand the offense?

How do you expect outsiders to empathize with an offense that you claim they can't understand?
Be who you are, Say what you feel, Because those who mind don"t matter, And those who matter don't mind.

BANGTAN! Blood, Sweat, & Tears> Check it out yes! https://www.youtube.com...
AlyceTheElectrician
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2016 12:08:10 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/9/2016 9:49:21 PM, Foodiesoul wrote:
At 8/9/2016 9:46:57 PM, Hiu wrote:
The OP states:

"There isn't anything wrong with discrimination."

Then you are the problem.This is why being offended is symptomatic to being discriminated against is because the unequal treatment of others is not a problem.

I agree with you so much.

How can any rational person not see anything wrong with discrimination? It makes me sick.

You didn't think it through, this happens when you lead with emotions instead of logic.

There are plenty of instances where discrimination is proper, like Adult swim or senior citizen discount at the movies, or pregnant mothers parking at the mall.
Be who you are, Say what you feel, Because those who mind don"t matter, And those who matter don't mind.

BANGTAN! Blood, Sweat, & Tears> Check it out yes! https://www.youtube.com...
AlyceTheElectrician
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2016 12:16:39 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/9/2016 9:46:57 PM, Hiu wrote:
The OP states:

"There isn't anything wrong with discrimination."

Then you are the problem.This is why being offended is symptomatic to being discriminated against is because the unequal treatment of others is not a problem.

Given that discrimination can be proper and improper, then discrimination as a whole does not necessarily equate to inequality, it's circumstantial and requires justification.

Earlier you stated that whether an offense is legit or not, cannot be established, well then how can any proper decisions be made without that establishment?
Be who you are, Say what you feel, Because those who mind don"t matter, And those who matter don't mind.

BANGTAN! Blood, Sweat, & Tears> Check it out yes! https://www.youtube.com...
Heterodox
Posts: 293
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2016 12:45:54 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/10/2016 11:58:57 AM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
At 8/9/2016 9:44:57 PM, Hiu wrote:
At 8/6/2016 4:45:55 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
"Just because you are offended doesn't mean you are right" -Ricky Gervais

Do you always require evidence of offense before you justify the offended feelings?
Or are all offended feelings justified, and something must be done about it no matter what?
When do you decide when something is a legit offense, or when it is nonsense?

For instance:
If a groups claims discrimination, than should we treat is as justified discrimination and implement changes to appease the offended just because they said so? An implementation that directly effects all even if the factual evidence doesn't support the claims.

What are some offenses you find legit and nonsense?

For me I think a legit offense is: The Patriot Act

a nonsense offense is: Cultural Appropriation

thank you in advance for replying.

I believe there are legitimate claims to be offended on certain instances. Let us flip the subject: Just because you cannot understand the offense does not mean you are right either......

There are things that happen to underrepresented groups that do in fact happen and do in fact warrant a legitimate complaint but just because you do not see why they take offense (or assume them being offended is unwarranted) does not mean its not legitimate. The OP is insinuating what is legitimate and what is not and its not your claim to even establish such statements.

Ok, so is it correct that you accept that offense is justified no matter what?

What do you mean by 'understand'? Are you implying that because you are outside of the "unrepresented group" then you can not understand the offense?

How do you expect outsiders to empathize with an offense that you claim they can't understand?

Yeah, discrimination is such a general word, but the most frequent uses of it are usually negative things so the term itself is now looked at negatively.

But it's such a general word. Being able to tell your house from your neighbors is discrimination. Bathrooms are discrimination. I mean it's literally impossible to not discriminate. What we can do is try not to discriminate and use that in a negative way.
Robkwoods
Posts: 576
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2016 2:26:57 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/6/2016 4:45:55 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
"Just because you are offended doesn't mean you are right" -Ricky Gervais

Do you always require evidence of offense before you justify the offended feelings?
Or are all offended feelings justified, and something must be done about it no matter what?
When do you decide when something is a legit offense, or when it is nonsense?

For instance:
If a groups claims discrimination, than should we treat is as justified discrimination and implement changes to appease the offended just because they said so? An implementation that directly effects all even if the factual evidence doesn't support the claims.

What are some offenses you find legit and nonsense?

For me I think a legit offense is: The Patriot Act

a nonsense offense is: Cultural Appropriation

thank you in advance for replying.

Discrimination is always ok. It's called freedom of association. I am allowed to associate or not associate with whoever I please, for any reason.
Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2016 2:56:57 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
It's baffling to me how people don't understand the literal definition of discrimination.

The Cambridge Dictionary:

Discrimination: the treatment of a person or particular group of people differently, in a way that is worse than the way people are usually treated.

Merriam-Webster:

Discrimination: the practice of unfairly treating a person or group of people differently from other people or groups of people

American Heritage:

Discrimination: To make distinctions on the basis of class or category without regard to individual merit, especially to show prejudice on the basis of ethnicity, gender, or a similar social factor.

No, this is NEVER okay.

Instead, it's easier for people like you to be obtuse and talk past everyone with a different definition of discrimination: the ability to tell a difference between two things. By that definition, I'm "discriminating" when I choose to eat Cheerios instead of Fruit Loops. That's why that definition is useless and a non-starter, and why everyone who uses it in discussion is committing the equivocation logical fallacy.
Foodiesoul
Posts: 579
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2016 4:38:52 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/10/2016 2:56:57 PM, Semiya wrote:
It's baffling to me how people don't understand the literal definition of discrimination.

The Cambridge Dictionary:

Discrimination: the treatment of a person or particular group of people differently, in a way that is worse than the way people are usually treated.

Merriam-Webster:

Discrimination: the practice of unfairly treating a person or group of people differently from other people or groups of people

American Heritage:

Discrimination: To make distinctions on the basis of class or category without regard to individual merit, especially to show prejudice on the basis of ethnicity, gender, or a similar social factor.

No, this is NEVER okay.

Instead, it's easier for people like you to be obtuse and talk past everyone with a different definition of discrimination: the ability to tell a difference between two things. By that definition, I'm "discriminating" when I choose to eat Cheerios instead of Fruit Loops. That's why that definition is useless and a non-starter, and why everyone who uses it in discussion is committing the equivocation logical fallacy.

I agree with you 100%! Discrimination is NOT okay at all!

What kind of sick psycho thinks that it's okay to discriminate?
AlyceTheElectrician
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2016 5:02:59 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/10/2016 2:56:57 PM, Semiya wrote:
It's baffling to me how people don't understand the literal definition of discrimination.

The Cambridge Dictionary:

Discrimination: the treatment of a person or particular group of people differently, in a way that is worse than the way people are usually treated.

Merriam-Webster:

Discrimination: the practice of unfairly treating a person or group of people differently from other people or groups of people

American Heritage:

Discrimination: To make distinctions on the basis of class or category without regard to individual merit, especially to show prejudice on the basis of ethnicity, gender, or a similar social factor.

No, this is NEVER okay.

Instead, it's easier for people like you to be obtuse and talk past everyone with a different definition of discrimination: the ability to tell a difference between two things. By that definition, I'm "discriminating" when I choose to eat Cheerios instead of Fruit Loops. That's why that definition is useless and a non-starter, and why everyone who uses it in discussion is committing the equivocation logical fallacy.

Ok so, "Discrimination is never ok", by it's first definition under any circumstance whatsoever?

Unless you've been living under a rock, there are plenty of acceptable instances of discrimination based on race, gender, age, physical disabilities, etc. I've named a few in previous post.

I'd like to add NFL/NBA Professional cheerleading to be acceptable discrimination of which there is no male or land whale equivalent.

Are you offended by pro cheerleaders? Should action be taken to allow males and land whales to be pro cheerleaders?

There should be a pro cheerleading competition, that would be fun.
Be who you are, Say what you feel, Because those who mind don"t matter, And those who matter don't mind.

BANGTAN! Blood, Sweat, & Tears> Check it out yes! https://www.youtube.com...
Semiya
Posts: 405
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2016 5:04:56 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/10/2016 5:02:59 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
At 8/10/2016 2:56:57 PM, Semiya wrote:
It's baffling to me how people don't understand the literal definition of discrimination.

The Cambridge Dictionary:

Discrimination: the treatment of a person or particular group of people differently, in a way that is worse than the way people are usually treated.

Merriam-Webster:

Discrimination: the practice of unfairly treating a person or group of people differently from other people or groups of people

American Heritage:

Discrimination: To make distinctions on the basis of class or category without regard to individual merit, especially to show prejudice on the basis of ethnicity, gender, or a similar social factor.

No, this is NEVER okay.

Instead, it's easier for people like you to be obtuse and talk past everyone with a different definition of discrimination: the ability to tell a difference between two things. By that definition, I'm "discriminating" when I choose to eat Cheerios instead of Fruit Loops. That's why that definition is useless and a non-starter, and why everyone who uses it in discussion is committing the equivocation logical fallacy.

Ok so, "Discrimination is never ok", by it's first definition under any circumstance whatsoever?

Correct.

Unless you've been living under a rock, there are plenty of acceptable instances of discrimination based on race, gender, age, physical disabilities, etc. I've named a few in previous post.

I'd like to add NFL/NBA Professional cheerleading to be acceptable discrimination of which there is no male or land whale equivalent.

Are you offended by pro cheerleaders? Should action be taken to allow males and land whales to be pro cheerleaders?

No to the first, yes to the second.

There should be a pro cheerleading competition, that would be fun.
AlyceTheElectrician
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2016 5:20:17 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/10/2016 4:38:52 PM, Foodiesoul wrote:
At 8/10/2016 2:56:57 PM, Semiya wrote:
It's baffling to me how people don't understand the literal definition of discrimination.

The Cambridge Dictionary:

Discrimination: the treatment of a person or particular group of people differently, in a way that is worse than the way people are usually treated.

Merriam-Webster:

Discrimination: the practice of unfairly treating a person or group of people differently from other people or groups of people

American Heritage:

Discrimination: To make distinctions on the basis of class or category without regard to individual merit, especially to show prejudice on the basis of ethnicity, gender, or a similar social factor.

No, this is NEVER okay.

Instead, it's easier for people like you to be obtuse and talk past everyone with a different definition of discrimination: the ability to tell a difference between two things. By that definition, I'm "discriminating" when I choose to eat Cheerios instead of Fruit Loops. That's why that definition is useless and a non-starter, and why everyone who uses it in discussion is committing the equivocation logical fallacy.

I agree with you 100%! Discrimination is NOT okay at all!

What kind of sick psycho thinks that it's okay to discriminate?

The kind that allows pregnant women head of the line when boarding planes. And the kind that implemented preferred seats for handicap at baseball games.
Be who you are, Say what you feel, Because those who mind don"t matter, And those who matter don't mind.

BANGTAN! Blood, Sweat, & Tears> Check it out yes! https://www.youtube.com...
AlyceTheElectrician
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2016 5:24:36 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/10/2016 2:26:57 PM, Robkwoods wrote:
At 8/6/2016 4:45:55 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
"Just because you are offended doesn't mean you are right" -Ricky Gervais

Do you always require evidence of offense before you justify the offended feelings?
Or are all offended feelings justified, and something must be done about it no matter what?
When do you decide when something is a legit offense, or when it is nonsense?

For instance:
If a groups claims discrimination, than should we treat is as justified discrimination and implement changes to appease the offended just because they said so? An implementation that directly effects all even if the factual evidence doesn't support the claims.

What are some offenses you find legit and nonsense?

For me I think a legit offense is: The Patriot Act

a nonsense offense is: Cultural Appropriation

thank you in advance for replying.

Discrimination is always ok. It's called freedom of association. I am allowed to associate or not associate with whoever I please, for any reason.

I'm convinced that it depends on the circumstance. There are instances where it's not ok generally speaking.
Be who you are, Say what you feel, Because those who mind don"t matter, And those who matter don't mind.

BANGTAN! Blood, Sweat, & Tears> Check it out yes! https://www.youtube.com...
AlyceTheElectrician
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2016 5:40:40 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/10/2016 2:26:57 PM, Robkwoods wrote:
At 8/6/2016 4:45:55 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
"Just because you are offended doesn't mean you are right" -Ricky Gervais

Do you always require evidence of offense before you justify the offended feelings?
Or are all offended feelings justified, and something must be done about it no matter what?
When do you decide when something is a legit offense, or when it is nonsense?

For instance:
If a groups claims discrimination, than should we treat is as justified discrimination and implement changes to appease the offended just because they said so? An implementation that directly effects all even if the factual evidence doesn't support the claims.

What are some offenses you find legit and nonsense?

For me I think a legit offense is: The Patriot Act

a nonsense offense is: Cultural Appropriation

thank you in advance for replying.

Discrimination is always ok. It's called freedom of association. I am allowed to associate or not associate with whoever I please, for any reason.

I'm convinced that it depends on the circumstance. There are instances where it's not ok to discriminate, like selling 'whites only" chocolate pies, that's unacceptable.
Be who you are, Say what you feel, Because those who mind don"t matter, And those who matter don't mind.

BANGTAN! Blood, Sweat, & Tears> Check it out yes! https://www.youtube.com...
Foodiesoul
Posts: 579
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2016 5:56:34 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/10/2016 5:20:17 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
At 8/10/2016 4:38:52 PM, Foodiesoul wrote:
At 8/10/2016 2:56:57 PM, Semiya wrote:
It's baffling to me how people don't understand the literal definition of discrimination.

The Cambridge Dictionary:

Discrimination: the treatment of a person or particular group of people differently, in a way that is worse than the way people are usually treated.

Merriam-Webster:

Discrimination: the practice of unfairly treating a person or group of people differently from other people or groups of people

American Heritage:

Discrimination: To make distinctions on the basis of class or category without regard to individual merit, especially to show prejudice on the basis of ethnicity, gender, or a similar social factor.

No, this is NEVER okay.

Instead, it's easier for people like you to be obtuse and talk past everyone with a different definition of discrimination: the ability to tell a difference between two things. By that definition, I'm "discriminating" when I choose to eat Cheerios instead of Fruit Loops. That's why that definition is useless and a non-starter, and why everyone who uses it in discussion is committing the equivocation logical fallacy.

I agree with you 100%! Discrimination is NOT okay at all!

What kind of sick psycho thinks that it's okay to discriminate?

The kind that allows pregnant women head of the line when boarding planes. And the kind that implemented preferred seats for handicap at baseball games.

The handicap one I understand but the pregnant women one just seems rude and unfair.

Humans are retards.
Foodiesoul
Posts: 579
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/10/2016 5:57:41 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 8/10/2016 5:40:40 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
At 8/10/2016 2:26:57 PM, Robkwoods wrote:
At 8/6/2016 4:45:55 PM, AlyceTheElectrician wrote:
"Just because you are offended doesn't mean you are right" -Ricky Gervais

Do you always require evidence of offense before you justify the offended feelings?
Or are all offended feelings justified, and something must be done about it no matter what?
When do you decide when something is a legit offense, or when it is nonsense?

For instance:
If a groups claims discrimination, than should we treat is as justified discrimination and implement changes to appease the offended just because they said so? An implementation that directly effects all even if the factual evidence doesn't support the claims.

What are some offenses you find legit and nonsense?

For me I think a legit offense is: The Patriot Act

a nonsense offense is: Cultural Appropriation

thank you in advance for replying.

Discrimination is always ok. It's called freedom of association. I am allowed to associate or not associate with whoever I please, for any reason.

I'm convinced that it depends on the circumstance. There are instances where it's not ok to discriminate, like selling 'whites only" chocolate pies, that's unacceptable.

I don't think there are any instances where it's okay to discriminate but it's your opinion.