What will you do with me (and others like me?)

[Sac Arrow]

I have no issues with vegans, or trans-gendered people (and I don't associate the two in the same class.) While I have issues with discrimination in general, I am not going to be a pioneer for a specific special interest group's 'rights' either.

 

[ChrisK]

I'd make you buy ne a beer.

 

[SkyDog58]

I am very upsetting to people:

I am very pro First AND Second Amendment.

I am a vegan, but I respect hunters.

I am a full-throated supporter of LGBTQ rights, gay marriage, and legalization of marijuana; but -completely- against abortion, and think every American should own any gun they want.

I am a nature lover, will not kill even a mosquito, and literally have tree-hugged on several occasions, but think climate change needs more research and shouldn't be sold as a religion.

I am a rabid peacenik, but support our military and veterans like they are my brothers (one is).

Finally (throwing us all a bone): I am an annoyingly cheap conservationist, and can't stand if even one unneeded light is on in the house, but if I had the money, I'd buy and fly the biggest, most gas-guzzling jet I could, and fly it all day long.

I think many if not most of us on POA and in this already and continuing great country are similar to you in that depending on what subject is being discussed, others might characterize us as either a conservative or a liberal. At least I believe that of the people who are thoughtful and make up their own minds rather than letting some groups doctrine dictate their thoughts. I too tend to **** off people sometimes, especially those who are more doctrinaire and are wholly far out in either left or right field. I refuse to call myslef a moderate though because many of my views are not moderate. Again depending on the topic, I could be considered either far left or far right though other topics might place me more in a moderate camp. It just depends. I do beleive that most Americans are this way but that a large percentage reluctantly go along with the party line of whichever part best fits their personal needs.

As to your own beliefs that you outlined above, I agree with many but not all of them. I will not get into specific details as that is not the purpose of my reply and would take too long to do. The fact that you do not toe a party line makes me respect you more than those who not only toe a line but will swallow it hook, line and sinker.

 

[denverpilot]

While I think it's silly how some are offended by everything these days, but I also don't like how some go out of their way to be as non-PC as possible. Maybe it's because I did the same thing back when I was younger, and consider the habit a sign of immaturity. Also kinda embarrassed that I engaged in that activity.

Define "PC". You can't because it's an ever-moving goal-post, driven by whatever someone decides they're going to wake up and be "offended" about today.

It's not even "PC" to point to a written moral code (especially religious ones) to attempt to use them as an objective measuring stick on whether or not someone has done something truly harmful to someone else.

Many rely on "the law" as a measuring stick to avoid being called "anti-PC" but legal systems are rarely truly moral or anywhere close to equally just, when you get right down to it. It's only "PC" to say so, in regard to race, however.

Say "the law" treats minorities badly? You're PC.

Say "the law" treats those with money better than those without? Mildly not PC.

Say "the law" treats those politically connected and political leaders completely differently than those who aren't? Getting close to being anti-PC.

Say that's completely normal and politicians and friends buy their way out of having to be law-abiding and investigate themselves and find no wrongdoing? Whoa, now. We were all taught in school that our system of Justice is wonderful. You get back in line, you crazy anarchist/conspiracy theorist!

There's better examples, but "PC" is a joke, because it's not measured by any consistent objective measure. It's measure by popularity. Which ironically, really is anarchy to a degree. Perfect democracy is nothing other than a popularity contest and a horrible way to set policy.

But then, Republic is just a nice way of saying Oligarchy, too.

 

[Sac Arrow]

Define "PC". You can't because it's an ever-moving goal-post, driven by whatever someone decides they're going to wake up and be "offended" about today.

It's not even "PC" to point to a written moral code (especially religious ones) to attempt to use them as an objective measuring stick on whether or not someone has done something truly harmful to someone else.

Many rely on "the law" as a measuring stick to avoid being called "anti-PC" but legal systems are rarely truly moral or anywhere close to equally just, when you get right down to it. It's only "PC" to say so, in regard to race, however.

Say "the law" treats minorities badly? You're PC.

Say "the law" treats those with money better than those without? Mildly not PC.

Say "the law" treats those politically connected and political leaders completely differently than those who aren't? Getting close to being anti-PC.

Say that's completely normal and politicians and friends buy their way out of having to be law-abiding and investigate themselves and find no wrongdoing? Whoa, now. We were all taught in school that our system of Justice is wonderful. You get back in line, you crazy anarchist/conspiracy theorist!

There's better examples, but "PC" is a joke, because it's not measured by any consistent objective measure. It's measure by popularity. Which ironically, really is anarchy to a degree. Perfect democracy is nothing other than a popularity contest and a horrible way to set policy.

But then, Republic is just a nice way of saying Oligarchy, too.

Agree completely. Funny thing is, we can talk about this stuff here. I am on one writer's forum where we cannot. Meaning, if someone uses the phrase 'tard' they are offending some protected group. If I talk about my character not being 'normal' I am called out by the admins for similarly offending a protected class, e.g. all those considered 'abnormal.'

**** makes me crazy.

 

[Clark1961]

Agree completely. Funny thing is, we can talk about this stuff here. I am on one writer's forum where we cannot. Meaning, if someone uses the phrase 'tard' they are offending some protected group. If I talk about my character not being 'normal' I am called out by the admins for similarly offending a protected class, e.g. all those considered 'abnormal.'

**** makes me crazy.

If you weren't such an abnormal tard you'd know that the movie idiocracy is a future-documentary and we must start protecting all segments of society in preparation. Did I nail it or what?

 

[GlennAB1]

I am very upsetting to people:

I am very pro First AND Second Amendment.

I am a vegan, but I respect hunters.

I am a full-throated supporter of LGBTQ rights, gay marriage, and legalization of marijuana; but -completely- against abortion, and think every American should own any gun they want.

I am a nature lover, will not kill even a mosquito, and literally have tree-hugged on several occasions, but think climate change needs more research and shouldn't be sold as a religion.

I am a rabid peacenik, but support our military and veterans like they are my brothers (one is).

Finally (throwing us all a bone): I am an annoyingly cheap conservationist, and can't stand if even one unneeded light is on in the house, but if I had the money, I'd buy and fly the biggest, most gas-guzzling jet I could, and fly it all day long.

Interesting.

I dont like paying for wasted electricity either, but, if your electrical provider is producing more power than is being drawn, is that also wasteful or necessary?

I kill every damn mosquito I see.

"Full-throated LGBTQ suporter" Interesting choice of wording. On one hand they say it's nobody's business, then they make it everybody's business. I don't care. Keep it to yourselves.

 

[Sac Arrow]

If you weren't such an abnormal tard you'd know that the movie idiocracy is a future-documentary and we must start protecting all segments of society in preparation. Did I nail it or what?

Nicely played.

 

[Cooter]

Agree completely. Funny thing is, we can talk about this stuff here. I am on one writer's forum where we cannot. Meaning, if someone uses the phrase 'tard' they are offending some protected group. If I talk about my character not being 'normal' I am called out by the admins for similarly offending a protected class, e.g. all those considered 'abnormal.'

**** makes me crazy.

Sounds like a fun crowd.

 

[denverpilot]

Agree completely. Funny thing is, we can talk about this stuff here. I am on one writer's forum where we cannot. Meaning, if someone uses the phrase 'tard' they are offending some protected group. If I talk about my character not being 'normal' I am called out by the admins for similarly offending a protected class, e.g. all those considered 'abnormal.'

**** makes me crazy.

The liberal arts folk do seem to be much more susceptible to the sorts of lying that is required to keep stuff like that going. As a general rule anyway. A few are more rational.

The "tard" / "normal" thing, anyone who gets all freaked out by specific words always have to ignore any context in which the words are spoken, or written, which is something you'd THINK writers would be excellent at... anyone who can craft a decent story can think in full paragraphs, not sentences or individual words.

That said, I suppose a writing forum attracts some pretty awful / unsuccessful writers who should be writing and practicing, not arguing about PC words in a forum.

 

[Everskyward]

Define "PC".

To me, PC means being courteous and not deliberately trying to make people feel uncomfortable. Unfortunately, some have stretched the definition to make it an insult in itself.

 

[denverpilot]

To me, PC means being courteous and not deliberately trying to make people feel uncomfortable. Unfortunately, some have stretched the definition to make it an insult in itself.

Mmm. I don't think that's what most folks would call "PC" these days. But it's a good example of how the term itself isn't definable, nor are the "rules" of it. And usually those who think PC is more important than it is, tend to be the ones the most willing to do things that are very non-PC to others to prove they can out-PC anyone. Guilt trips, censorship, demanding anyone they disagree with is "contentious" or needs to be controlled... all because they can't handle hearing certain words or ideas.

 

[Clark1961]

To me, PC means being courteous and not deliberately trying to make people feel uncomfortable. Unfortunately, some have stretched the definition to make it an insult in itself.

I'd say the definition has been stretched to mean not even making others feel uncomfortable period. Of course it is impossible to know what might make others uncomfortable so PC has become a mode of social coercion.

 

[Everskyward]

I'd say the definition has been stretched to mean not even making others feel uncomfortable period. Of course it is impossible to know what might make others uncomfortable so PC has become a mode of social coercion.

People who don't like being criticized for being non-PC sometimes seem just as sensitive to criticism as the ones they are criticizing.

 

[Clark1961]

People who don't like being criticized for being non-PC sometimes seem just as sensitive to criticism as the ones they are criticizing.

Sensitivity to criticism <> rejecting criticism.

 

[Everskyward]

Sensitivity to criticism <> rejecting criticism.

Sometimes, but not always.

 

[Clark1961]

Sometimes, but not always.

Okay, I'll rephrase.
Rejecting criticism <> sensitivity to criticism

 

[Vance Breese]

I am very upsetting to people:

I am very pro First AND Second Amendment.

I am a vegan, but I respect hunters.

I am a full-throated supporter of LGBTQ rights, gay marriage, and legalization of marijuana; but -completely- against abortion, and think every American should own any gun they want.

I am a nature lover, will not kill even a mosquito, and literally have tree-hugged on several occasions, but think climate change needs more research and shouldn't be sold as a religion.

I am a rabid peacenik, but support our military and veterans like they are my brothers (one is).

Finally (throwing us all a bone): I am an annoyingly cheap conservationist, and can't stand if even one unneeded light is on in the house, but if I had the money, I'd buy and fly the biggest, most gas-guzzling jet I could, and fly it all day long.

I can't imagine why you think any of this has anything to do with Pilots of America.

I come to read about aviation and learn and hope that most do also.

I cannot imagine getting upset over anything you posted about your personal perspective.

It is unrelated to aviation and in my opinion belongs somewhere else.

 

[3393RP]

Of course it is impossible to know what might make others uncomfortable so PC has become a mode of social coercion.

It's not coercion any more. More like militant demands. From "all sides".

Yet it seems the "all sides" description has brought forth radical, hostile, and physically threatening actions from one party more than the other. It appears to have become acceptable to use violence and the threats of violence to stifle protected speech.

Governmental bodies have moved against free speech, and are doing so without any consideration for First Amendment rights.

The minority leader of the House of Representatives of the United States is openly calling for suppression of free speech. A Missouri state representative has publicly encouraged the assassination of the President of the United States.

It appears one "side" is increasingly advocating violence and bloodshed. Where this has been pointed out, the participants claim their cause is pure and that the end justifies the means.

It seems that if one disagrees with this, they could become a target of their disapprobation.

 

[3393RP]

I can't imagine why you think any of this has anything to do with Pilots of America.

I come to read about aviation and learn and hope that most do also.

I cannot imagine getting upset over anything you posted about your personal perspective.

It is unrelated to aviation and in my opinion belongs somewhere else.

The Hangar Talk forum has been created for free discussion of a wide range of subjects and that includes non-aviation topics.

Within the boundaries of good taste and respect for other's opinions, this forum has always been used to discuss those varied topics.

My post above and another made earlier in the thread state my views, using the thread creator's post as a starting point for discussion. Using easily available independent news sources, every point I made can be verified as being accurate.

I made those posts respectfully and without being rude, and I think they, along with the other posts in the thread made by others, comply with the PoA Rules of Conduct.

 

[deonb]

The minority leader of the House of Representatives of the United States is openly calling for suppression of free speech.

She's really not - if the rally was planned in Alabama, I doubt she would care. But holding a White Supremacists rally in San Francisco is openly asking for trouble. And it's not like they're going to win hearts and minds over there - they were trying to hold it there for the express purpose of inciting a violent response.

 

[Clark1961]

She's really not - if the rally was planned in Alabama, I doubt she would care. But holding a White Supremacists rally in San Francisco is openly asking for trouble. And it's not like they're going to win hearts and minds over there - they were trying to hold it there for the express purpose of inciting a violent response.

Good point. I'm sure the founding fathers really meant that speech should be free when it was convenient and acceptable to the folks in the neighborhood. Or maybe San Francisco is a theater so saying anything potentially offensive there is the same as shouting 'fire' ...

 

[Everskyward]

Certain politicians may not have wanted the rally, but it was going ahead, until the group pulled out at the last minute. But not until the city spent a lot of time and money on precautions. Real-life trolling...

 

[Vance Breese]

The Hangar Talk forum has been created for free discussion of a wide range of subjects and that includes non-aviation topics.

Within the boundaries of good taste and respect for other's opinions, this forum has always been used to discuss those varied topics.

My post above and another made earlier in the thread state my views, using the thread creator's post as a starting point for discussion. Using easily available independent news sources, every point I made can be verified as being accurate.

I made those posts respectfully and without being rude, and I think they, along with the other posts in the thread made by others, comply with the PoA Rules of Conduct.

Note: Politics and religion and any other topic likely to become highly charged are not allowed, and threads may be deleted or closed if they start or trend, respectively, towards "spin" topics.

1. 1. 
      

 

[weilke]

Certain politicians may not have wanted the rally, but it was going ahead, until the group pulled out at the last minute. But not until the city spent a lot of time and money on precautions. Real-life trolling...

The threat of mob violence won. Not good.

The nutters are a lot less effective if they can have their rally and nobody comes. Does anyone even know what the nutters were talking about at the Boston event ?

 

[Everskyward]

The threat of mob violence won. Not good.

The nutters are a lot less effective if they can have their rally and nobody comes. Does anyone even know what the nutters were talking about at the Boston event ?

Yes, nobody showing up would be the best outcome, but that would as effective as asking people not to troll or respond to trolls here.

 

[deonb]

The nutters are a lot less effective if they can have their rally and nobody comes. Does anyone even know what the nutters were talking about at the Boston event ?

If they have their rallies and nobody protests, they will rapidly grow in size. There are a LOT people in this country who secretly feel like them. If it becomes mainstream ignored or accepted, you'll have a Nazi party running openly in 10 years. (Is it still Godwin'ing a thread when you're talking about actual self-proclaimed Nazi's?)

Just imagine what if the Charlottesville protesters instead of being White Supremacist, were Muslims protesting to get Sharia law enacted, with counter-protesters on the other side. Now imagine one of the Muslims runs over the counter-protesters, and the President came out and made a "both sides" speech. It would be the end of his Presidency right there. If people truly think that the White Supremacists are fringe nutcases, it would be treated the same way as if it were a Sharia rally. But it's not.

I grew up under a White Supremacist regime. I "get" the allure. Believe me I get it - I might have even supported it until I was old enough to know better. It's a much easier life. It's a privileged life. Even earning orders of magnitude more than I did in my youth, I can't afford that lifestyle that you get almost for free when you have quasi-legalized slavery. But in THIS country we put a stake in the ground and said that we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.

So when organizations are formed that threaten this, people really are compelled to counter-protest it in order to keep that organization from becoming mainstream. Because even though the organization is fringe, the sentiment is not.

 

[Tarheelpilot]

If they have their rallies and nobody protests, they will rapidly grow in size. There are a LOT people in this country who secretly feel like them. If it becomes mainstream ignored or accepted, you'll have a Nazi party running openly in 10 years. (Is it still Godwin'ing a thread when you're talking about actual self-proclaimed Nazi's?)

Just imagine what if the Charlottesville protesters instead of being White Supremacist, were Muslims protesting to get Sharia law enacted, with counter-protesters on the other side. Now imagine one of the Muslims runs over the counter-protesters, and the President came out and made a "both sides" speech. It would be the end of his Presidency right there. If people truly think that the White Supremacists are fringe nutcases, it would be treated the same way as if it were a Sharia rally. But it's not.

I grew up under a White Supremacist regime. I "get" the allure. Believe me I get it - I might have even supported it until I was old enough to know better. It's a much easier life. It's a privileged life. Even earning orders of magnitude more than I did in my youth, I can't afford that lifestyle that you get almost for free when you have quasi-legalized slavery. But in THIS country we put a stake in the ground and said that we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.

So when organizations are formed that threaten this, people really are compelled to counter-protest it in order to keep that organization from becoming mainstream. Because even though the organization is fringe, the sentiment is not.

Couldn't agree more. Don't forget to protest at the antifa rally's. They need to be marginalized too.

 

[3393RP]

Certain politicians may not have wanted the rally, but it was going ahead, until the group pulled out at the last minute. But not until the city spent a lot of time and money on precautions. Real-life trolling...

Are you accusing me of trolling? My post is factually accurate. The mayor of San Francisco is indeed openly calling for the repression of free speech:

"If people want to have the stage in San Francisco, they better have a message that contributes to people's lives rather than find ways to hurt them," Lee said. "That's why certain voices found it very difficult to have their voices heard today."

This should alarm all citizens.

Note: Politics and religion and any other topic likely to become highly charged are not allowed, and threads may be deleted or closed if they start or trend, respectively, towards "spin" topics.

I'm capable of discussing this issue without it becoming "highly charged". It appears others are able as well.

 

[Everskyward]

Are you accusing me of trolling?

No... This is what I mean about people being over-sensitive.

 

[3393RP]

I merely asked a question.

 

[geneseib]

I am very upsetting to people:

I am very pro First AND Second Amendment.

I am a vegan, but I respect hunters.

I am a full-throated supporter of LGBTQ rights, gay marriage, and legalization of marijuana; but -completely- against abortion, and think every American should own any gun they want.

I am a nature lover, will not kill even a mosquito, and literally have tree-hugged on several occasions, but think climate change needs more research and shouldn't be sold as a religion.

I am a rabid peacenik, but support our military and veterans like they are my brothers (one is).

Finally (throwing us all a bone): I am an annoyingly cheap conservationist, and can't stand if even one unneeded light is on in the house, but if I had the money, I'd buy and fly the biggest, most gas-guzzling jet I could, and fly it all day long.

Agree with most of those.

 

[cowman]

They've got to start shutting these protests down- whoever it is the moment things get violent. The powers that be have been holding the troops back because they don't want to deal with the inevitable breakage but people can't be allowed to shut down a town, destroy property, and hurt people just because they have a cause. Peaceful protest and offensive speech are constitutionally protected, destruction of property and assault are not.

Someone somewhere in a position of power needs to set an example and send a message that this won't be tolerated anymore because right now we are tolerating it and I think it's feeding the fire.

Now, in regards to white supremacist groups I have a good idea why they seem to suddenly be back again when a few years ago they were nearly gone. One of the big fear mongering tactics these groups use to recruit people is the idea that there are forces out there trying to destroy the white race and their way of life. Not too many years ago if someone had said that I could have simply replied with "come on, don't be stupid nobody is doing that". Unfortunately a small but vocal minority of people on the extreme left have been working overtime to prove all these racist groups right by promoting bigotry against straight white men. There are a number of reasons they justify it that I don't really want to get into but I wish the more moderate left would take note of what a great recruiting tool this is for the white supremacists. Of course now those of us on the right now get to contend with the new "proof" these nazis have provided that conservatives are all racists.

Violence begets violence and extremism begets extremism. We're always going to have disagreement between groups but it's about time someone started throwing the proverbial bucket of water on this fire instead of adding more gasoline. I don't have a great deal of hope for that happening before something REALLY nasty happens but hey that's one reason I live out in the middle of nowhere. Y'all can just go tear each other apart I'll be sitting here in the woods watching it on TV in peace.

 

[redtail]

If they have their rallies and nobody protests, they will rapidly grow in size. There are a LOT people in this country who secretly feel like them. If it becomes mainstream ignored or accepted, you'll have a Nazi party running openly in 10 years. (Is it still Godwin'ing a thread when you're talking about actual self-proclaimed Nazi's?)

Just imagine what if the Charlottesville protesters instead of being White Supremacist, were Muslims protesting to get Sharia law enacted, with counter-protesters on the other side. Now imagine one of the Muslims runs over the counter-protesters, and the President came out and made a "both sides" speech. It would be the end of his Presidency right there. If people truly think that the White Supremacists are fringe nutcases, it would be treated the same way as if it were a Sharia rally. But it's not.

I grew up under a White Supremacist regime. I "get" the allure. Believe me I get it - I might have even supported it until I was old enough to know better. It's a much easier life. It's a privileged life. Even earning orders of magnitude more than I did in my youth, I can't afford that lifestyle that you get almost for free when you have quasi-legalized slavery. But in THIS country we put a stake in the ground and said that we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.

So when organizations are formed that threaten this, people really are compelled to counter-protest it in order to keep that organization from becoming mainstream. Because even though the organization is fringe, the sentiment is not.

I wasn't going to comment, but you make some very good points. So I'll just leave this here. A little excerpt from a wise man who worked for 23 years (the entire length of his ministry) to eradicate slavery and racism from among the hearts of his own people. (White Arabs).
Peace be upon him.

Prophet Muhammad's Last Sermon
Date delivered: 632 A.D.

"All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over a black nor a black has any superiority over white except by piety and good action."

 

[Timbeck2]

How fitting. I just picked up this shirt this morning. Imagine me wearing it now. I say "imagine" because I'm not wearing it; in fact, I don't wear anything until I wash all the Indonesian child sweat off it first.

 

[3393RP]

If they have their rallies and nobody protests, they will rapidly grow in size. There are a LOT people in this country who secretly feel like them. If it becomes mainstream ignored or accepted, you'll have a Nazi party running openly in 10 years. (Is it still Godwin'ing a thread when you're talking about actual self-proclaimed Nazi's?)

I think ignoring the brainless louts will cause them to go away, but you are certainly entitled to your opinion. You may be giving them too much credit by stating there are "a lot" of them.

These groups certainly illustrate their ignorance by claiming adherence to the ideals of the National Socialist Workers Party of the 30s and 40s. I doubt one in fifty of them has any idea whatsoever what the the Nazi Party's ideals and goals were.

 

[Cooter]

There are a LOT people in this country who secretly feel like them.

What's your basis for saying that? And feel like them how exactly?

 

[denverpilot]

I'd say the definition has been stretched to mean not even making others feel uncomfortable period. Of course it is impossible to know what might make others uncomfortable so PC has become a mode of social coercion.

People who don't like being criticized for being non-PC sometimes seem just as sensitive to criticism as the ones they are criticizing.

The "you don't like the criticism" is often used as a form of attempting to discredit the actual criticism, so nobody bothers to check if the criticism is valid.

Which is what @Clark1961 is saying about coercion.

Masses of dumb people who never had a critical thinking class in school or a logic course of study (remember those?) now think critical commentary is the problem -- and ignore that the criticism itself about whatever the PC topic at hand happens to be, is valid.

In other words, they make calling dumb things dumb, the inappropriate behavior -- so they don't have to hear that the dumb thing is dumb or address the criticism rationally.

Or is that ... retarded? (As in retarded thinking, regressive thinking, destructive thinking, immoral thinking... you know? Retarded!)

Those being criticized will also claim anyone criticizing them is "contentious" as if that's a thoughtcrime in and of itself so the "contentious" person should be not only ignored but actively shunned. Or "controversial" when they're responding to stupid stuff.

Again, because "controversy" itself is being labeled as somehow bad. It allows the really dumb stuff to bypass any analysis of whether or not the "controversial contentious" person was actually right in the first place.

It's a technique to make whatever the "outraged" person says "right" by making the person who criticizes them, go away.

The formula goes like this:

- Radical people far away from center do something obviously silly or even destructive.
- People closer to the center on the bell curve critical of it, say something.
- Radicals label them "contentious, controversial, and mean" to garner emotional points.

Wash. Rinse. Repeat.

At some point the middle stops caring about radicals calling them "haters" and embraces the suck and says, "Yep. All haters here. That's us. And you're still a radical and still doing stupid crap."

 

[redtail]

I wasn't going to comment, but you make some very good points. So I'll just leave this here. A little excerpt from a wise man who worked for 23 years (the entire length of his ministry) to eradicate slavery and racism from among the hearts of his own people. (White Arabs).
Peace be upon him.

Prophet Muhammad's Last Sermon
Date delivered: 632 A.D.

"All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over a black nor a black has any superiority over white except by piety and good action."

49:13 "O mankind, surely We have created you from a male and a female, and made you tribes and families that you may know each other. Surely the noblest of you with Allah is the most dutiful of you. Surely Allah is Knowing, Aware."

Really makes you wonder why the most intelligent animals on the planet (man), are the only creatures with the affliction of racial hatred and a false idea of racial superiority! I certainly don't have the answer, but I do believe it WILL be eradicated eventually, BY THE POWER OF GOD.

 

[weilke]

If they have their rallies and nobody protests, they will rapidly grow in size. There are a LOT people in this country who secretly feel like them. If it becomes mainstream ignored or accepted, you'll have a Nazi party running openly in 10 years.

You are giving the counterprotestors too much credit. The clan had some popular support in the 1920s but it has been steadily eroding ever since. The Nazis have always been a fringe group. Both organizations have held events for decades but it didn't allow them to grow into a mainstream political force

Just imagine what if the Charlottesville protesters instead of being White Supremacist, were Muslims protesting to get Sharia law enacted, with counter-protesters on the other side. Now imagine one of the Muslims runs over the counter-protesters, and the President came out and made a "both sides" speech. It would be the end of his Presidency right there. If people truly think that the White Supremacists are fringe nutcases, it would be treated the same way as if it were a Sharia rally. But it's not.

The fact that one right wing violent extremist did that doesn't negate the fact that both sides committed acts of violence that day.

I grew up under a White Supremacist regime. I "get" the allure. Believe me I get it - I might have even supported it until I was old enough to know better. It's a much easier life......

Supporting the right of some nutters to hold a rally without being attacked does not equal being in favor of what the nutters have to say. It also doesn't mean one is in any way giving in to the allure of a white supremacist regime, whatever that may be. It just means a that one is in favor of free speech, however ill informed and offensive that speech may be. It is a sad day when we allow government officials like the mayor of SF to decide what speech is acceptable.