Fixed Does Elite Trader stand behind this post ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Terms of service say you cannot post content that "victimizes, harasses, degrades, or intimidates an individual or group of individuals on the basis of religion, gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, age, or disability." So the question is, does the use of those labels degrade a group of individuals on the basis of race? Probably so if you define degrading as some form of disrespect. But I think it's impossible to have a forum on Politics and Religion that does not have critical and sometimes disrespectful views and language expressed. So that's the quandary.
 
The Terms of service say you cannot post content that "victimizes, harasses, degrades, or intimidates an individual or group of individuals on the basis of religion, gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, age, or disability." So the question is, does the use of those labels degrade a group of individuals on the basis of race? Probably so if you define degrading as some form of disrespect. But I think it's impossible to have a forum on Politics and Religion that does not have critical and sometimes disrespectful views and language expressed. So that's the quandary.
So you don't think there can be open political discourse without the use of the "N" word or its equivalents, or calls for segregation, or otherwise labeling entire groups of people of an ethnicity or color with broad brush generalizations and holding them beneath contempt?
 
Conservatives continually get this wrong. Freedom of speech means someone can't be locked up for being a bigoted foul-mouthed ignoramus. It does NOT mean his ass can't be fired for violating workplace rules of conduct, or removed from situations like cussing up a storm in a playground full of children or removed from private property for violating whatever the property owner deems proper speech and conduct. There are limits on all freedoms, including freedom of speech. You couldn't have a viable society of any kind without rules. Only lunatics and irredeemable fools believe in anarchy.



This post reeks of hypocrisy. All anyone has to do is watch the news for a day or two and they'll see liberals screaming that some negro's freedoms are being taken away after they've been kicked out of a swimming pool for breaking all rules of civilized behavior.
 
So you don't think there can be open political discourse without the use of the "N" word or its equivalents, or calls for segregation, or otherwise labeling entire groups of people of an ethnicity or color with broad brush generalizations and holding them beneath contempt?
The "N" word is out of bounds. I'm not clear if equivalents to the "N" word really exist. If we have to look up a term in a dictionary to figure out what it means, then it's too obscure to equate it with a commonly recognized term. And of course you can label groups of people to make your point. You might be wrong, but that's "open" political discourse. Get over your exaggerated outrage and have a sense of proportion. The point of the original statement was that police officers have strong disincentives to work in crime-ridden neighborhoods. The focus on a couple of the labels used was a distraction from the main point.
 
Get over your exaggerated outrage and have a sense of proportion.

You may want to sample a broader range of Gregg's posts. This is not an isolated instance but of a pattern of behavior.

However, if it is not a matter of importance to the owner, one can either take it or leave it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top