Round Earthers and other progressions

[Chaka-Z0]

Are you sure? How exactly is showing Muslims in a faux-prolife pamphlet supposed to convert someone from prolife to prochoice?

That would be the point you missed. The point being I was decieved into reading some religious pamphlets, by a kid. Soul' satire is not meant to be taken literally. Notice how you talk in length about argumentation yet you didn't address the part about children being forced into their parents' zeal.

I see regularly 3-4-5 year old girls with hijabs, kids handing out horrible images to Chaka which could very well induce trauma or nightmares. I'm Canadian, you're American. We both share common values and core values such as freedom of choice. Let the kids come of age and only then decide for themselves if they want in or not.

[aretood2]

so you're still missing the point
with propaganda this is irrelevant what matters is how it's perceived

I wholeheartedly disagree for the same reasons that I would argue against whitewashing. The way we communicate impacts our perception of the world. If we communicate with bigoted stereotypes, then that impacts our perceptions towards bigotry. This is why the "It's just a joke" shtick doesn't quite work as much as some people pretend to, because the "joke" perpetuates the ideology it uses even if it truly was not being serious about it. There are ways to go it in order not to perpetuate stereotypes, but it's a fine line.

the same way you think showing half eaten baby corpses is supposed to convert a pro-choicer to Prolife™?

PS. I'd say more but maybe I'll save the rest for next week

When have I ever expressed this? I want quotes/links.

That would be the point you missed. The point being I was decieved into reading some religious pamphlets, by a kid. Soul' satire is not meant to be taken literally. Notice how you talk in length about argumentation yet you didn't address the part about children being forced into their parents' zeal.

I see regularly 3-4-5 year old girls with hijabs, kids handing out horrible images to Chaka which could very well induce trauma or nightmares. I'm Canadian, you're American. We both share common values and core values such as freedom of choice. Let the kids come of age and only then decide for themselves if they want in or not.

I don't care about the point, that's the thing. Let me illustrate.

Let's say a city has a lot of people who never lock their doors and wants to convince these people that they should lock their doors (Home doors or car car doors, take your pick). It's an excellent piece of advice that we should always do, anywhere really, for reasons that I think are obvious and don't need explaining between us. So this city launches an ad campaign to get these people to lock their doors. We can both agree that the point is valid, good, and worthwhile.

So the ad campaign includes commercials, billboards, flyers, posters, bus paint jobs, radio commercials, and internet ads....the works. All of them share messages and examples of why locking the doors is a good idea and why not doing so is a bad idea. Two statements we can all agree with, right? Yes, of course. Now, what are in these ads? Racist crap.

For example, a poster shows a very racist depiction/caricature of a black man taking things from a white person's car with captions that say "These thugs like it when you don't lock your doors". Bill boards have similar things with menacing black people standing around a house and the door unlocked and the captions say "A lot of blacks live here, they think that leaving doors unlocked is a good idea...but are your possessions and white girls safe?". And all the other ads follow the same pattern.

Would you not call out this ad campaign for its racism? Should such an ad campaign be taken down even though it is advocating a good thing (the locking of doors)? Should it be changed? Should people demand that it not peddle racist imagery in order to make its point? I hope you answer yes to all of these questions.

I am most certainly ignoring the abortion aspect of this, and I am also ignoring the issue of, as you say, children and their parents' zeal because the imagery used pedals islamophobia just as my we would ignore the point of this hypothetical ad campaign because the imagery and argument it uses is disgusting.

Do you understand now? Do you get it why I didn't even bother with the abortion and kids thing? Using a crappy argument is not justified, especially if it perpetuates bigotry. What we say impacts perception, and that's just a fact. Peddle in islamophobic imagery and the impact will be Canadians and New Zealanders shooting up mosques, as they have done so in the past. All of those anti-semitic jokes are also part of the framework that resulted in the shootings of synagogues here in the US. It's never really only a joke and it's never really only satire. But it is most certainly hardwired human psychology.

[SoulReaver]

I wholeheartedly disagree for the same reasons that I would argue against whitewashing. The way we communicate impacts our perception of the world. If we communicate with bigoted stereotypes, then that impacts our perceptions towards bigotry. This is why the "It's just a joke" shtick doesn't quite work as much as some people pretend to, because the "joke" perpetuates the ideology it uses even if it truly was not being serious about it. There are ways to go it in order not to perpetuate stereotypes, but it's a fine line.

except ours isn't the side that started this & set the norm. take it up with those responsible (unless you agree with them for religious and/or other reasons?). basically it's a question of lesser evils if this is the most effective way to fight fascism in that country then it's a lot better than the alternative
come to think of it an even more effective method in the faux Prolife-propaganda idea would be to show a picture of Bin Laden or the ISIS leader (instead of some random woman) to lead the public to equate that with the Prolife(tm) crowd & bam hit them where it hurts

When have I ever expressed this? I want quotes/links.

sometimes it's not what you say but what you don't say. the original propaganda painting pro-choicers as baby-killers didn't seem to bother you even though to pick up on what you said this leads to terrorist attacks against abortion clinics - you good with that?

I don't care about the point, that's the thing. Let me illustrate.

Let's say a city has a lot of people who never lock their doors and wants to convince these people that they should lock their doors (Home doors or car car doors, take your pick). It's an excellent piece of advice that we should always do, anywhere really, for reasons that I think are obvious and don't need explaining between us. So this city launches an ad campaign to get these people to lock their doors. We can both agree that the point is valid, good, and worthwhile.

So the ad campaign includes commercials, billboards, flyers, posters, bus paint jobs, radio commercials, and internet ads....the works. All of them share messages and examples of why locking the doors is a good idea and why not doing so is a bad idea. Two statements we can all agree with, right? Yes, of course. Now, what are in these ads? Racist crap.

For example, a poster shows a very racist depiction/caricature of a black man taking things from a white person's car with captions that say "These thugs like it when you don't lock your doors". Bill boards have similar things with menacing black people standing around a house and the door unlocked and the captions say "A lot of blacks live here, they think that leaving doors unlocked is a good idea...but are your possessions and white girls safe?". And all the other ads follow the same pattern.

Would you not call out this ad campaign for its racism? Should such an ad campaign be taken down even though it is advocating a good thing (the locking of doors)? Should it be changed? Should people demand that it not peddle racist imagery in order to make its point? I hope you answer yes to all of these questions.

oi! I'll answer too
comparing dogma & race very bad analogy
I figured you'd choose racism as an argument at some point cause that's always the easy way isn't it
for starters there's a fundamental difference between culture & colour (hint one of them you never get to choose). lifelong muslims in muslim countries have given up their religion for another & conversely westerners have converted to islam
for this reason discriminating against someone for what they're born as isn't the same as discriminating against someone for what they believe in
racism's far worse
also between a religious group & an ethnic group one of them's about advocating a certain set of rules & guidelines do's & dont's (you know just like we're discussing politics & abortion law) the other just is. you once asked what sharia means so here's a better question do you even know what the word islam literally means? now find something similar in your analogy some factual basis - anything - that allows you to say that an ethnic group's inherently more predisposed to crime & maybe you'll start to have a point

I am most certainly ignoring the abortion aspect of this

along with the whole terrorist-attacks-against-women-who-abort aspect

What we say impacts perception, and that's just a fact. Peddle in islamophobic imagery and the impact will be Canadians and New Zealanders shooting up mosques, as they have done so in the past

take it up with abortion clinic bombers there's a lot more of those

[SoulReaver]

I see regularly 3-4-5 year old girls with hijabs

worst part is the parents know full well if someone like child protection services tries to intervene they'll get blamed for discrimination lol

[Annoyed]

Let's say a city has a lot of people who never lock their doors and wants to convince these people that they should lock their doors (Home doors or car car doors, take your pick). It's an excellent piece of advice that we should always do, anywhere really, for reasons that I think are obvious and don't need explaining between us. So this city launches an ad campaign to get these people to lock their doors. We can both agree that the point is valid, good, and worthwhile.

So the ad campaign includes commercials, billboards, flyers, posters, bus paint jobs, radio commercials, and internet ads....the works. All of them share messages and examples of why locking the doors is a good idea and why not doing so is a bad idea. Two statements we can all agree with, right? Yes, of course. Now, what are in these ads? Racist crap.

For example, a poster shows a very racist depiction/caricature of a black man taking things from a white person's car with captions that say "These thugs like it when you don't lock your doors". Bill boards have similar things with menacing black people standing around a house and the door unlocked and the captions say "A lot of blacks live here, they think that leaving doors unlocked is a good idea...but are your possessions and white girls safe?". And all the other ads follow the same pattern.

How is this racism? Your own situation states that there are a large number of blacks living in the area. Given that, wouldn't the advert creators simply be drawing an accurate picture of demographics of the area by showing blacks?

Not everything has racist motivations. in fact, we are far too likely to hang the "ism" tag on just about anybody who shows any minority or other specially protected group in anything but a favorable light.

Look at what the media is doing to Trump. Trump stated that a Maryland congresscritter's home district was a rat infested sewer that no one would want to live in. Since this congresscritter happens to be black, of course, Trump must have said that because he is a racist bigot. It couldn't be because he's telling the truth about the district, could it?

[Chaka-Z0]

I wholeheartedly disagree for the same reasons that I would argue against whitewashing. The way we communicate impacts our perception of the world. If we communicate with bigoted stereotypes, then that impacts our perceptions towards bigotry. This is why the "It's just a joke" shtick doesn't quite work as much as some people pretend to, because the "joke" perpetuates the ideology it uses even if it truly was not being serious about it. There are ways to go it in order not to perpetuate stereotypes, but it's a fine line.

I've been around people of different origins all my life: Somalia, Israël, Sénégual, Bénin, etc. Literally every single black co-worker have never been bothered at all by jokes regarding race, not once. It is the intent, how you say it. If I spit ''Freaking Wetbacks, best get em back to their tacos!'' obviously that's meant to be racist, but if I see my coworker Pablo eating a taco during lunch break I might crack a joke such as ''Getting some of your life essence back P ?''. And you know what? They ALL laugh, NONE of them ever raised a concern about this and I obviously always ensure the person I speak to is fine with that.And if I realize it makes the person uncomfortable, such as Susan the stock-up b*tch I was working with, then I just stop because Chaka knows this person is offended.

People that pull the racist card as often as, no offense but it clearly shows in the amount of time you mention it, you, are the reason why those jokes are taken seriously in the first place. Ever thought about that? You think it's any different when English Canadians make fun of me for being from Québec? It's not. I think it's actually funny because most stereotypes such as ''Freaking Quebecers they drive like mad men'' have a little bit of truth in it, and if folks were laughing at it instead of being offended our world would be a much more peaceful place.

That is the difference between crazy-religious-countries and our western societies, you don't get riots over a sketch of Mohammed, because we're not triggered on a whim contrary to those folks where dogma tells them that it is blasphemy and must be punished by death or acid throwing in the face or using a whip to mutilate yourself because you've had sexual thoughts about someone else as a christian monk.

Not sure if you remember, I think it's Men in Black 1 or 2, when Smith goes to the cops ''just because I'm a black dude driving a nice car doesn't mean it's stolen!''. This is exactly the type of joke that is funny, acceptable, and if said in a light-hearted way with people that actually don't mind is absolutely fine. Mind you, he's a black man himself, and if I recall I read somewhere that Will Smith himself wanted to make fun of that and asked to have an extra line in the dialogue.

[jelgate]

How is this racism? Your own situation states that there are a large number of blacks living in the area. Given that, wouldn't the advert creators simply be drawing an accurate picture of demographics of the area by showing blacks?

Not everything has racist motivations. in fact, we are far too likely to hang the "ism" tag on just about anybody who shows any minority or other specially protected group in anything but a favorable light.

Look at what the media is doing to Trump. Trump stated that a Maryland congresscritter's home district was a rat infested sewer that no one would want to live in. Since this congresscritter happens to be black, of course, Trump must have said that because he is a racist bigot. It couldn't be because he's telling the truth about the district, could it?

maybe both are true

[Chaka-Z0]

Let's leave Trump out of this shall we. With the amount of times he slipped (Sh*thole countries, all migrants are criminals) I don't even imagine what he says in private.

Besides this is the progression thread therefore as the OP, I forbid the mention of Trump.

[jelgate]

I suggest progress on ending world hunger. All it will take is the genocide of the Unas

[aretood2]

except ours isn't the side that started this & set the norm. take it up with those responsible (unless you agree with them for religious and/or other reasons?). basically it's a question of lesser evils if this is the most effective way to fight fascism in that country then it's a lot better than the alternative
come to think of it an even more effective method in the faux Prolife-propaganda idea would be to show a picture of Bin Laden or the ISIS leader (instead of some random woman) to lead the public to equate that with the Prolife(tm) crowd & bam hit them where it hurts

That would solve the issue of being islamophobic.

sometimes it's not what you say but what you don't say. the original propaganda painting pro-choicers as baby-killers didn't seem to bother you even though to pick up on what you said this leads to terrorist attacks against abortion clinics - you good with that?

Are you seriously justifying strawman arguments? You and annoyed have a lot more in common than you'd care to admit.

oi! I'll answer too
comparing dogma & race very bad analogy
I figured you'd choose racism as an argument at some point cause that's always the easy way isn't it
for starters there's a fundamental difference between culture & colour (hint one of them you never get to choose). lifelong muslims in muslim countries have given up their religion for another & conversely westerners have converted to islam
for this reason discriminating against someone for what they're born as isn't the same as discriminating against someone for what they believe in

Now we are justifying discrimination on the account of religion. Let me know when you decide to justify setting up "reeducation" camps to purge the impure from the Earth....you're not the only one who can play with strawmen.

racism's far worse

Tell that to the victims of religious persecution, somehow they are supposed to feel better that they are being rapped, killed, beatened, shot, ostracized etc... just because it's not based on skin color? I'm calling BS on that one.

also between a religious group & an ethnic group one of them's about advocating a certain set of rules & guidelines do's & dont's (you know just like we're discussing politics & abortion law) the other just is. you once asked what sharia means so here's a better question do you even know what the word islam literally means? now find something similar in your analogy some factual basis - anything - that allows you to say that an ethnic group's inherently more predisposed to crime & maybe you'll start to have a pointalong with the whole terrorist-attacks-against-women-who-abort aspect
take it up with abortion clinic bombers there's a lot more of those

The analogy isn't to compare race to religion. It's to compare the problem of using a flawed medium to make a point regardless of the point's validity. Your choice to ignore this is not my problem nor a flaw of the analogy. It's your unwillingness to realize that using harmful messaging to get a point across is not a good thing no matter how honorable, valid, or correct said point is. The analogy merely describes that the ends don't always justify the means.

So why not use pamphlets that showcase abortion bombings et al? I do wonder what your actual motivation is. If I were to guess as you do, I'd say this has a lot more to do with your hate for certain religions than your concerns about reproductive rights.

How is this racism? Your own situation states that there are a large number of blacks living in the area. Given that, wouldn't the advert creators simply be drawing an accurate picture of demographics of the area by showing blacks?

Are you for real? The propaganda is saying that there are a lot of black people there...Oh my God...how can you not tell the racism? I went out of my way to make it as racist as I could! The propaganda is literally saying that it's black people taking from white people....dear Lord. You sure you're not racist? Or are you just that naive?

Not everything has racist motivations. in fact, we are far too likely to hang the "ism" tag on just about anybody who shows any minority or other specially protected group in anything but a favorable light.

That hypothetical campaign is supposed to be racist....

Look at what the media is doing to Trump. Trump stated that a Maryland congresscritter's home district was a rat infested sewer that no one would want to live in. Since this congresscritter happens to be black, of course, Trump must have said that because he is a racist bigot. It couldn't be because he's telling the truth about the district, could it?

Honestly you have to learn to compartmentalize.

I've been around people of different origins all my life: Somalia, Israël, Sénégual, Bénin, etc. Literally every single black co-worker have never been bothered at all by jokes regarding race, not once. It is the intent, how you say it. If I spit ''Freaking Wetbacks, best get em back to their tacos!'' obviously that's meant to be racist, but if I see my coworker Pablo eating a taco during lunch break I might crack a joke such as ''Getting some of your life essence back P ?''. And you know what? They ALL laugh, NONE of them ever raised a concern about this and I obviously always ensure the person I speak to is fine with that.And if I realize it makes the person uncomfortable, such as Susan the stock-up b*tch I was working with, then I just stop because Chaka knows this person is offended.

People that pull the racist card as often as, no offense but it clearly shows in the amount of time you mention it, you, are the reason why those jokes are taken seriously in the first place. Ever thought about that? You think it's any different when English Canadians make fun of me for being from Québec? It's not. I think it's actually funny because most stereotypes such as ''Freaking Quebecers they drive like mad men'' have a little bit of truth in it, and if folks were laughing at it instead of being offended our world would be a much more peaceful place.

That is the difference between crazy-religious-countries and our western societies, you don't get riots over a sketch of Mohammed, because we're not triggered on a whim contrary to those folks where dogma tells them that it is blasphemy and must be punished by death or acid throwing in the face or using a whip to mutilate yourself because you've had sexual thoughts about someone else as a christian monk.

Not sure if you remember, I think it's Men in Black 1 or 2, when Smith goes to the cops ''just because I'm a black dude driving a nice car doesn't mean it's stolen!''. This is exactly the type of joke that is funny, acceptable, and if said in a light-hearted way with people that actually don't mind is absolutely fine. Mind you, he's a black man himself, and if I recall I read somewhere that Will Smith himself wanted to make fun of that and asked to have an extra line in the dialogue.

Those jokes are not the type of jokes that I had in mind when I said what I said. I'm talking about actual "Rape Joke" level crap. Things that aren't even funny, just straight up racism given the smoke screen of "It's only a joke" similar to the bully telling the teacher "We're only messing around" when caught bullying someone. I'm saying Soul has ulterior motives that have little to do with abortion/reproductive rights and more to do with "I hate Muslims/Christians" crap.

I can assure you, racists don't talk about Mexicans eating tacos or black people being pulled over far too often by the police without justification or the driving skills of French Canadians when they make their "jokes". I quote that because the things they say really aren't jokes, humor really isn't a part of it. It's just a cover, a smoke screen. An insincere "We're just messing around".

[Annoyed]

Are you for real? The propaganda is saying that there are a lot of black people there...Oh my God...how can you not tell the racism? I went out of my way to make it as racist as I could! The propaganda is literally saying that it's black people taking from white people....dear Lord. You sure you're not racist? Or are you just that naive?



That hypothetical campaign is supposed to be racist....

You posited a situation where a media campaign was showing black folks in an unfavorable light; threatening manners and such. But your situation specified a high percentage of blacks living in the area. Suppose it's an area where 80% of the population is black, as is common in inner cities/urban areas. Wouldn't you expect around the same proportion of criminals to be black?

That's not racism, it's simple statement of fact.

[SoulReaver]

That would solve the issue of being islamophobic.

at least 1 point of agreement

Are you seriously justifying strawman arguments? You and annoyed have a lot more in common than you'd care to admit.

says he who used a racism argument to make a point about religion and tried the terrorism argument even though it works better in my favour. just admit you lost that one man
you know your president himself likes to call out 'racism!' (he did so just recently) you & he have a lot in common
quid pro quo see how easy it is to play that game

COLOR=#000080]Now we are justifying discrimination on the account of religion. Let me know when you decide to justify setting up "reeducation" camps to purge the impure from the Earth....you're not the only one who can play with strawmen.
[/COLOR]

lol you were called out on a bad analogy. don't try to weasel your way outa that one

Tell that to the victims of religious persecution, somehow they are supposed to feel better that they are being rapped, killed, beatened, shot, ostracized etc... just because it's not based on skin color? I'm calling BS on that one.

better call it quits instead
"our father who art in heaven etc." you're familiar with those words do you know that was also one of the methods soldiers used in the Reich & its occupied territories to catch many who pretended to be christian (the official state religion) to escape capture? they'd stop & ask the person to recite those verses
but word spread fast till parents began learning & teaching the verses to their kids just in case they'd come across an SS or Gestapo patrol
now let's see if you can tell us how someone who's black could so easily pull off a similar survival strategy

The analogy isn't to compare race to religion. It's to compare the problem of using a flawed medium to make a point regardless of the point's validity. Your choice to ignore this is not my problem nor a flaw of the analogy. It's your unwillingness to realize that using harmful messaging to get a point across is not a good thing no matter how honorable, valid, or correct said point is. The analogy merely describes that the ends don't always justify the means.

and your choice to make a big deal out of it & use a false analogy is not my problem either. between one course of action which involves a means of communication that might result in someone carrying out a violent act against those who choose to adopt a certain set of beliefs (for reminders : I'm not responsible for how others choose to interpret something) and lack of said action which will definitely involve a blatant violation of people's rights by depriving them of the right to choose (for reminder² : those who pass laws restricting people's rights, are responsible for restrictions of said rights. duh) I say one of those 2 evils is definitely greater. at least from a purely libertarian point of view

btw you said counter-propaganda using Bin Laden's mug would be ok but using your logic do you realize this could still encourage islamophobia?

So why not use pamphlets that showcase abortion bombings et al?

that'd be another viable method
cept it wouldn't work on lot of Prolifers since they support the bombings ("those heathen baby-killers had it coming! insh'Allah Deus vult!")
using the extremes endorsed by an extremist group to make said group change their minds, not the best idea
besides your media already talk about these bombings

that's like calling Trump an islamophobe if you haven't noticed it only results in him gaining more votes than he loses. people like AOC or Omar are just too dumb to understand that (even after 2016)

[color] I do wonder what your actual motivation is. If I were to guess as you do, I'd say this has a lot more to do with your hate for certain religions than your concerns about reproductive rights.

and of course when the Right makes heavy use of religion to curtail said rights you don't see the connection '_'
go enquire on the abysmal human rights situation in Salvador & how the church itself encourages it then come back & say what you think of it
I do wonder what your actual motivation is. If I were to guess as you do, I'd say this has a lot more to do with your hate for reproductive rights than your concerns about certain religions (and TY Microsoft for copy-paste)

[Chaka-Z0]

Unas rule supercedes your interpretation ofthe forum rules.

It is forbidden unasterally. It is known.

[aretood2]

You posited a situation where a media campaign was showing black folks in an unfavorable light; threatening manners and such. But your situation specified a high percentage of blacks living in the area. Suppose it's an area where 80% of the population is black, as is common in inner cities/urban areas. Wouldn't you expect around the same proportion of criminals to be black?

That's not racism, it's simple statement of fact.

The bolded part, that's wrong. Reread my post. Nowhere did I describe the demographics of the hypothetical city. The ad campaign is basically saying because there are "a lot" of black people, you will be a victim of theft. That's why I mentioned white "victims". Furthermore "a lot" doesn't give any real number. "A lot of black people" for a racist can be any number really. To a racist one is one too many. But what I find most interesting is your knee jerk reaction to deny racism. It works to the point where the clearly racist thing is taken as "suppose it's an area where 80% blah blah blah". The thing is, I set the hypothetical with the parameters that the campaign is racist. Therefore no, there is no area of 80% black people in the inner city, because the campaign is being racist they are making up racist crap.

says he who used a racism argument to make a point about religion and tried the terrorism argument even though it works better in my favour. just admit you lost that one man

I wasn't making a point about religion. I was saying that the ends (abortion issue) don't justify the means (Perpetuating Islamophobia).

you know your president himself likes to call out 'racism!' (he did so just recently) you & he have a lot in common

I'm the one that has been pointing out his racism....what are you talking about?

quid pro quo see how easy it is to play that game lol you were called out on a bad analogy. don't try to weasel your way outa that onebetter call it quits instead

Let me get this straight. You made wild assumptions about me, I called you out and modeled your wild assumptions. Then you modeled my modeling of your wild assumptions to teach me about making wild assumptions? I can't find a word to describe this, the closest I can think of is hypocrisy...but the kind where you don't even recognize what you are doing.

"our father who art in heaven etc." you're familiar with those words do you know that was also one of the methods soldiers used in the Reich & its occupied territories to catch many who pretended to be christian (the official state religion) to escape capture? they'd stop & ask the person to recite those verses
but word spread fast till parents began learning & teaching the verses to their kids just in case they'd come across an SS or Gestapo patrol

Never heard of this. Seems more like a myth if you ask me, and a pretty stupid strategy too. The thing is, even Christian Jews were sent to the camps. The Nazis didn't care if you were Christian or not. Not entirely sure what the point of this is beyond simply invoking Godwin's Law. I've read extensively about Nazi Germany. Sure, I don't know everything and it is possible that this is just a detail I have missed/forgotten, but you'll have to excuse me if I don't simply take your word for it. Besides, that "prayer" isn't even a prayer in every Christian church. A lot of Christians don't know it by memory. You must be thinking about Catholics there.

now let's see if you can tell us how someone who's black could so easily pull off a similar survival strategyand your choice to make a big deal out of it & use a false analogy is not my problem either.

I'm not sure how the ability to escape persecution or the tactics used in doing so or being detected by the persecutor makes one form of bigotry more acceptable than another...As I have said, my analogy was to describe "The ends don't justify the means". The ends being locking doors, the ends being using racist argument. Do you want me to use another one? It wouldn't change the illustration at all. I could use nationality instead. But no other form of bigotry can yield results similar to those of religious bigotry other than religion....maybe political?

between one course of action which involves a means of communication that might result in someone carrying out a violent act against those who choose to adopt a certain set of beliefs (for reminders : I'm not responsible for how others choose to interpret something) and lack of said action which will definitely involve a blatant violation of people's rights by depriving them of the right to choose (for reminder² : those who pass laws restricting people's rights, are responsible for restrictions of said rights. duh) I say one of those 2 evils is definitely greater. at least from a purely libertarian point of view

All of this is just a distraction from my argument....I'll give you this, you are good with goal post moving.

btw you said counter-propaganda using Bin Laden's mug would be ok but using your logic do you realize this could still encourage islamophobia? that'd be another viable method

This makes no sense.

cept it wouldn't work on lot of Prolifers since they support the bombings ("those heathen baby-killers had it coming! insh'Allah Deus vult!")

Do you have any evidence to back up this wild claim? Like statistics, surveys, data, facts? Or are these just broad generalizations?

using the extremes endorsed by an extremist group to make said group change their minds, not the best idea
besides your media already talk about these bombings

Are you telling me that you shouldn't use extremists to change an extremist's mind? Doesn't that defeat your entire "Let's put 'em scary Muslims on the pamphlets" thing? Let's be honest, you weren't thinking of normal devout Muslims who bother no one as they practice their religion in peace.

that's like calling Trump an islamophobe if you haven't noticed it only results in him gaining more votes than he loses. people like AOC or Omar are just too dumb to understand that (even after 2016)and of course when the Right makes heavy use of religion to curtail said rights you don't see the connection '_' go enquire on the abysmal human rights situation in Salvador & how the church itself encourages it then come back & say what you think of it

So because some use religion badly religion and those who practice it are bad? Do I really have to go into detail of how whacked up this "reasoning" is? All the while ignoring 1 child policy atheist China implemented...talk about reproductive rights, eh? And that's just one example...one out of others.

I do wonder what your actual motivation is. If I were to guess as you do, I'd say this has a lot more to do with your hate for reproductive rights than your concerns about certain religions (and TY Microsoft for copy-paste)

My motivation is a strong distaste for religious bigotry. I am also adverse to bad arguments even when they are done by people I agree with on topics I agree with. As for the bolded part...I too can copy and paste. Read below.

Let me get this straight. You made wild assumptions about me, I called you out and modeled your wild assumptions. Then you modeled my modeling of your wild assumptions to teach me about making wild assumptions? I can't find a word to describe this, the closest I can think of is hypocrisy...but the kind where you don't even recognize what you are doing.

[Chaka-Z0]

The thing is, I set the hypothetical with the parameters that the campaign is racist. Therefore no, there is no area of 80% black people in the inner city, because the campaign is being racist they are making up racist crap.

Annoyed needs to realize his entire perspective is (sadly) set by hypothetical parameters. What if there's a horde. What if there's a bad guy with a gun. What if there's 80% black in a town and no more TV's for miles.

He won 1k at a casino and when he saw The One we must NOT name running for Prez his subconscious inner self tainted by hypothetical parameters instantly converted him to MAGA.