| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"J Young" |
| Date: |
22 Nov 2005 02:42:47 AM |
| Object: |
racist or not? |
I suggested to someone recently that when shopping at the food market, and
one of the items has different brands from which to choose, always get the
product with the colored guy or girl on the box, jar, or bottle ( if the
choice exists ). I was told this was a racist comment, I replied it is not
racist if the comment is a compliment. Anyone?
.
|
|
| User: "Elf M. Sternberg" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
22 Nov 2005 03:15:15 AM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> writes:
I suggested to someone recently that when shopping at the food market, and
one of the items has different brands from which to choose, always get the
product with the colored guy or girl on the box, jar, or bottle ( if the
choice exists ). I was told this was a racist comment, I replied it is not
racist if the comment is a compliment.
I don't understand the issue. Is the brand you're advocating in
general better, and that those brands of higher quality generally have a
non-white person on the cover? (For that matter, what products have
*anyone* on the cover these days? Aside from cereal, that is, and what
ethnicity is Tony The Tiger, anyway?)
Elf
--
Elf M. Sternberg, Immanentizing the Eschaton since 1988
http://www.drizzle.com/~elf
"You know how some people treat their body like a temple?
I treat mine like issa amusement park!" - Kei
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
22 Nov 2005 03:01:53 AM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote
Anyone?
If you fell off a tall building & landed on a rat, I'd
feel sorry for the rat.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Peacenik" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
22 Nov 2005 02:30:08 PM |
|
|
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in message
news:zYqdnYMvEsa3Gx_eRVn-uQ@giganews.com...
I suggested to someone recently that when shopping at the food market, and
one of the items has different brands from which to choose, always get the
product with the colored guy or girl on the box, jar, or bottle ( if the
choice exists ). I was told this was a racist comment, I replied it is not
racist if the comment is a compliment. Anyone?
Did you use the word "colored"? That's racist.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory Gadow" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
22 Nov 2005 02:38:55 PM |
|
|
In Africa, it is very common to label canned goods with the picture of what is
inside; with the huge variety of languages, the fact that many languages have
no written script and the very low literacy rate among speakers of languages
that do have a written script, text just isn't a very good marketing decision.
When Gerber starting selling in African markets, with their trademark label of
a smiling Caucasian baby, it caused quite a stir.
There you are, Mr. Young. A story about labels that is just as pointless as
yours. But at least I can entertain.
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"[W]e have never held that moral disapproval, without any other asserted
state interest, is a sufficient rationale under the Equal Protection
Clause to justify a law that discriminates among groups of persons."
- Sandra Day O`Conner, _Lawrence v Texas_
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=000&invol=02-102
.
|
|
|
| User: "LC" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
22 Nov 2005 02:53:34 PM |
|
|
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:43832D7F.76A8F58B@serv.net...
In Africa, it is very common to label canned goods with the picture of
what is inside; with the huge variety of languages, the fact that many
languages have no written script and the very low literacy rate among
speakers of languages that do have a written script, text just isn't a
very good marketing decision.
When Gerber starting selling in African markets, with their trademark
label of a smiling Caucasian baby, it caused quite a stir.
There you are, Mr. Young. A story about labels that is just as pointless
as yours. But at least I can entertain.
Perhaps "educate" might have been more apropo.
"J Young" is plenty entertaining.
In the same way an ape throwing his feces around his cage is 'entertaining'.
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"[W]e have never held that moral disapproval, without any other asserted
state interest, is a sufficient rationale under the Equal Protection
Clause to justify a law that discriminates among groups of persons."
- Sandra Day O`Conner, _Lawrence v Texas_
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=000&invol=02-102
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bonnie Bitch" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
23 Nov 2005 11:23:40 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 06:38:55 -0800, the faaaaabulous supreme deity
Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli, Ruler of the heavens and host of fab parties,
opened the heavens and shone his light upon the wisdom of Gregory
Gadow <techbear@serv.net>
In Africa, it is very common to label canned goods with the picture of what is
inside; with the huge variety of languages, the fact that many languages have
no written script and the very low literacy rate among speakers of languages
that do have a written script, text just isn't a very good marketing decision.
When Gerber starting selling in African markets, with their trademark label of
a smiling Caucasian baby, it caused quite a stir.
There you are, Mr. Young. A story about labels that is just as pointless as
yours. But at least I can entertain.
My two faves are Ford marketing the Nova in Mexico. <hee hee>
<No va in Spanish means "it doesn't go.")
My other fave is lesser known, but even funnier.
Remember when Pepsi was using the "Come alive with Pepsi!" slogan?
They tried marketing that slogan in Germany, but the translation their
experts came up with was "Erstehen Sie mit Pepsi auf!"
Sadly, it wasn't until the ad campaign was underway before anyone
realized that the German slogan actually meant, "Come back from the
dead with Pepsi."
God, I love that one!
Although, Greg, your smiling Caucasian baby tale did make me smile.
<g>
May the Blessings of Gong Gong rain ubiquitously and reign supreme!
Rev. Bonnie *****, Universal Life Church
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mimi Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
23 Nov 2005 01:14:11 PM |
|
|
Bonnie ***** wrote:
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 06:38:55 -0800, the faaaaabulous supreme deity
Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli, Ruler of the heavens and host of fab parties,
opened the heavens and shone his light upon the wisdom of Gregory
Gadow <techbear@serv.net>
In Africa, it is very common to label canned goods with the picture of what is
inside; with the huge variety of languages, the fact that many languages have
no written script and the very low literacy rate among speakers of languages
that do have a written script, text just isn't a very good marketing decision.
When Gerber starting selling in African markets, with their trademark label of
a smiling Caucasian baby, it caused quite a stir.
There you are, Mr. Young. A story about labels that is just as pointless as
yours. But at least I can entertain.
My two faves are Ford marketing the Nova in Mexico. <hee hee>
<No va in Spanish means "it doesn't go.")
That would've been a lot funnier if you'd said Chevy Nova (Chevrolet
made the Nova)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bonnie Bitch" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
23 Nov 2005 04:43:36 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 05:14:11 -0800, the faaaaabulous supreme deity
Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli, Ruler of the heavens and host of fab parties,
opened the heavens and shone his light upon the wisdom of Mimi Cohen
<mimiNOSPAMgal@cox.net>
Bonnie ***** wrote:
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 06:38:55 -0800, the faaaaabulous supreme deity
Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli, Ruler of the heavens and host of fab parties,
opened the heavens and shone his light upon the wisdom of Gregory
Gadow <techbear@serv.net>
In Africa, it is very common to label canned goods with the picture of what is
inside; with the huge variety of languages, the fact that many languages have
no written script and the very low literacy rate among speakers of languages
that do have a written script, text just isn't a very good marketing decision.
When Gerber starting selling in African markets, with their trademark label of
a smiling Caucasian baby, it caused quite a stir.
There you are, Mr. Young. A story about labels that is just as pointless as
yours. But at least I can entertain.
My two faves are Ford marketing the Nova in Mexico. <hee hee>
<No va in Spanish means "it doesn't go.")
That would've been a lot funnier if you'd said Chevy Nova (Chevrolet
made the Nova)
Or if you actually had a sense of humor.
May the Blessings of Gong Gong rain ubiquitously and reign supreme!
Rev. Bonnie *****, Universal Life Church
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mimi Cohen" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
23 Nov 2005 05:50:28 PM |
|
|
Bonnie ***** wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 05:14:11 -0800, the faaaaabulous supreme deity
Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli, Ruler of the heavens and host of fab parties,
opened the heavens and shone his light upon the wisdom of Mimi Cohen
<mimiNOSPAMgal@cox.net>
Bonnie ***** wrote:
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 06:38:55 -0800, the faaaaabulous supreme deity
Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli, Ruler of the heavens and host of fab parties,
opened the heavens and shone his light upon the wisdom of Gregory
Gadow <techbear@serv.net>
In Africa, it is very common to label canned goods with the picture of what is
inside; with the huge variety of languages, the fact that many languages have
no written script and the very low literacy rate among speakers of languages
that do have a written script, text just isn't a very good marketing decision.
When Gerber starting selling in African markets, with their trademark label of
a smiling Caucasian baby, it caused quite a stir.
There you are, Mr. Young. A story about labels that is just as pointless as
yours. But at least I can entertain.
My two faves are Ford marketing the Nova in Mexico. <hee hee>
<No va in Spanish means "it doesn't go.")
That would've been a lot funnier if you'd said Chevy Nova (Chevrolet
made the Nova)
Or if you actually had a sense of humor.
I have a sense of humor it was slightly amusing, funny it was not. I'll
remember in the future that you don't appreciate helpful suggestions so
I'll never help you out again, you can continue to make an ***** of
yourself forever.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Jensen" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
24 Nov 2005 02:43:08 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 03:23:40 -0800, in alt.atheism
Bonnie ***** <bonnieb@fifispa.org> wrote in
<o0k8o1521e1tf48j020l1aoon7cdeo8cmp@4ax.com>:
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 06:38:55 -0800, the faaaaabulous supreme deity
Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli, Ruler of the heavens and host of fab parties,
opened the heavens and shone his light upon the wisdom of Gregory
Gadow <techbear@serv.net>
In Africa, it is very common to label canned goods with the picture of what is
inside; with the huge variety of languages, the fact that many languages have
no written script and the very low literacy rate among speakers of languages
that do have a written script, text just isn't a very good marketing decision.
When Gerber starting selling in African markets, with their trademark label of
a smiling Caucasian baby, it caused quite a stir.
There you are, Mr. Young. A story about labels that is just as pointless as
yours. But at least I can entertain.
My two faves are Ford marketing the Nova in Mexico. <hee hee>
<No va in Spanish means "it doesn't go.")
[Chevy] That is a lovely urban legend, but nova is also a word by itself
in Spanish.
My other fave is lesser known, but even funnier.
Remember when Pepsi was using the "Come alive with Pepsi!" slogan?
They tried marketing that slogan in Germany, but the translation their
experts came up with was "Erstehen Sie mit Pepsi auf!"
Sadly, it wasn't until the ad campaign was underway before anyone
realized that the German slogan actually meant, "Come back from the
dead with Pepsi."
When I heard that one it was alleged to have happened in China.
God, I love that one!
Although, Greg, your smiling Caucasian baby tale did make me smile.
<g>
May the Blessings of Gong Gong rain ubiquitously and reign supreme!
Rev. Bonnie *****, Universal Life Church
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Andrealphus" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
22 Nov 2005 03:23:52 AM |
|
|
In News zYqdnYMvEsa3Gx_eRVn-uQ@giganews.com,, J Young at
youngopinions@aol.com, typed this:
I suggested to someone recently that when shopping at the food
market, and one of the items has different brands from which to
choose, always get the product with the colored guy or girl on the
box, jar, or bottle ( if the choice exists ). I was told this was a
racist comment, I replied it is not racist if the comment is a
compliment. Anyone?
Have you found a case in which the ACLU supported bestiality yet?
--
Question with boldness even the existence of god; because if there be
one, he must more approve the homage of reason than that of blindfolded
fear. Thomas Jefferson
.
|
|
|
| User: "J Young" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
22 Nov 2005 05:31:22 AM |
|
|
"Andrealphus" <NOREALEMAIL10@THISADDRESS.FOAD> wrote in message
news:cbwgf.1948$aA2.792@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Have you found a case in which the ACLU supported bestiality yet?
http://www.aclu.org/LesbianGayRights/LesbianGayRights.cfm?ID=13031&c=41
the ACLU filed a brief in " Lawrence, et al v. Texas " [ link provided, as
usual ]. Whether or not you agree, bestiality was one of the provisions of
Texas' sodomy laws. The ACLU fought to have this overturned.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrealphus" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
22 Nov 2005 10:58:54 AM |
|
|
In News T7udnUYg5eA2MB_enZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@giganews.com,, J Young at
youngopinions@aol.com, typed this:
"Andrealphus" <NOREALEMAIL10@THISADDRESS.FOAD> wrote in message
news:cbwgf.1948$aA2.792@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Have you found a case in which the ACLU supported bestiality yet?
http://www.aclu.org/LesbianGayRights/LesbianGayRights.cfm?ID=13031&c=41
the ACLU filed a brief in " Lawrence, et al v. Texas " [ link
provided, as usual ]. Whether or not you agree, bestiality was one of
the provisions of Texas' sodomy laws. The ACLU fought to have this
overturned.
Nope, that does not prove your claim.
Have you found a case in which the ACLU supported bestiality yet?
--
Question with boldness even the existence of god; because if there be
one, he must more approve the homage of reason than that of blindfolded
fear. Thomas Jefferson
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jenn" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
22 Nov 2005 05:38:12 AM |
|
|
In article <T7udnUYg5eA2MB_enZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
"Andrealphus" <NOREALEMAIL10@THISADDRESS.FOAD> wrote in message
news:cbwgf.1948$aA2.792@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Have you found a case in which the ACLU supported bestiality yet?
http://www.aclu.org/LesbianGayRights/LesbianGayRights.cfm?ID=13031&c=41
the ACLU filed a brief in " Lawrence, et al v. Texas " [ link provided, as
usual ]. Whether or not you agree, bestiality was one of the provisions of
Texas' sodomy laws.
Yet another lie.
The ACLU fought to have this overturned.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "BYTE ME!" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
22 Nov 2005 05:48:47 AM |
|
|
J Young wrote:
"Andrealphus" <NOREALEMAIL10@THISADDRESS.FOAD> wrote in message
news:cbwgf.1948$aA2.792@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
=20
Have you found a case in which the ACLU supported bestiality yet?
=20
=20
http://www.aclu.org/LesbianGayRights/LesbianGayRights.cfm?ID=3D13031&c=3D=
41
=20
=20
the ACLU filed a brief in " Lawrence, et al v. Texas " [ link provided,=
as
usual ]. Whether or not you agree, bestiality was one of the provisions=
of
Texas' sodomy laws. The ACLU fought to have this overturned.
=20
=20
Good try, but no cigar. They did not argue for bestiality in that case. =
Conclusion, you are a desperate liar.
--=20
Of all the systems of religion that ever were invented, there is none=20
more derogatory to the Almighty, more unedifying to man, more repugnant=20
to reason, and more contradictory in itself, than this thing called=20
Christianity. Too absurd for belief, too impossible to convince, and too =
inconsistent for practice, it renders the heart torpid, or produces only =
atheists and fanatics. As an engine of power, it serves the purpose of=20
despotism; and as a means of wealth, the avarice of priests; but so far=20
as respects the good of man in general, it leads to nothing here or=20
hereafter. =96Thomas Paine
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "BYTE ME!" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
22 Nov 2005 05:53:44 AM |
|
|
J Young wrote:
"Andrealphus" <NOREALEMAIL10@THISADDRESS.FOAD> wrote in message
news:cbwgf.1948$aA2.792@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
=20
Have you found a case in which the ACLU supported bestiality yet?
=20
=20
http://www.aclu.org/LesbianGayRights/LesbianGayRights.cfm?ID=3D13031&c=3D=
41
=20
=20
the ACLU filed a brief in " Lawrence, et al v. Texas " [ link provided,=
as
usual ]. Whether or not you agree, bestiality was one of the provisions=
of
Texas' sodomy laws. The ACLU fought to have this overturned.
=20
=20
Here is Texas Penal code 21.06. Can you point out bestiality in it for=20
me? I am missing seeing it.
=A7 21.06. HOMOSEXUAL CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an
offense if he engages in deviate sexual intercourse with another
individual of the same sex.
(b) An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor.
--=20
Of all the systems of religion that ever were invented, there is none=20
more derogatory to the Almighty, more unedifying to man, more repugnant=20
to reason, and more contradictory in itself, than this thing called=20
Christianity. Too absurd for belief, too impossible to convince, and too =
inconsistent for practice, it renders the heart torpid, or produces only =
atheists and fanatics. As an engine of power, it serves the purpose of=20
despotism; and as a means of wealth, the avarice of priests; but so far=20
as respects the good of man in general, it leads to nothing here or=20
hereafter. =96Thomas Paine
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Jensen" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
23 Nov 2005 02:38:32 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 00:31:22 -0500, in alt.atheism
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in
<T7udnUYg5eA2MB_enZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@giganews.com>:
"Andrealphus" <NOREALEMAIL10@THISADDRESS.FOAD> wrote in message
news:cbwgf.1948$aA2.792@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Have you found a case in which the ACLU supported bestiality yet?
http://www.aclu.org/LesbianGayRights/LesbianGayRights.cfm?ID=13031&c=41
the ACLU filed a brief in " Lawrence, et al v. Texas " [ link provided, as
usual ]. Whether or not you agree, bestiality was one of the provisions of
Texas' sodomy laws. The ACLU fought to have this overturned.
So, the ACLU has never supported bestiality, though its support for
overturning a more inclusive law happens to have the effect of
decriminalizing bestiality in states that lump this stuff all together.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrealphus" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
23 Nov 2005 02:45:58 AM |
|
|
In News 1el7o15dkp1deme6e83bebpl265iiq2b83@4ax.com,, David Jensen at
david@dajensen-family.com, typed this:
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 00:31:22 -0500, in alt.atheism
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in
<T7udnUYg5eA2MB_enZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@giganews.com>:
"Andrealphus" <NOREALEMAIL10@THISADDRESS.FOAD> wrote in message
news:cbwgf.1948$aA2.792@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Have you found a case in which the ACLU supported bestiality yet?
http://www.aclu.org/LesbianGayRights/LesbianGayRights.cfm?ID=13031&c=41
the ACLU filed a brief in " Lawrence, et al v. Texas " [ link
provided, as usual ]. Whether or not you agree, bestiality was one
of the provisions of Texas' sodomy laws. The ACLU fought to have
this overturned.
So, the ACLU has never supported bestiality, though its support for
overturning a more inclusive law happens to have the effect of
decriminalizing bestiality in states that lump this stuff all
together.
Actually, that's not even true. The Supreme Court's decision in Lawrence v.
Texas ONLY addressed the issue of the disparent treatment between
homosexuals and heterosexuals, AND the issue of sexual privacy between
humans. The law is still on the books in Texas with only the provisions
that concerned the court having been rendered unenforceable. The issue of
bestiality was not addressed by the courts in any way, and said law would
still be enforceable where bestiality is concerned.
--
Question with boldness even the existence of god; because if there be
one, he must more approve the homage of reason than that of blindfolded
fear. - Thomas Jefferson
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Jensen" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
23 Nov 2005 02:59:42 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 02:45:58 GMT, in alt.atheism
"Andrealphus" <NOREALEMAIL10@THISADDRESS.FOAD> wrote in
<GJQgf.2335$aA2.1@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>:
In News 1el7o15dkp1deme6e83bebpl265iiq2b83@4ax.com,, David Jensen at
david@dajensen-family.com, typed this:
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 00:31:22 -0500, in alt.atheism
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in
<T7udnUYg5eA2MB_enZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@giganews.com>:
"Andrealphus" <NOREALEMAIL10@THISADDRESS.FOAD> wrote in message
news:cbwgf.1948$aA2.792@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Have you found a case in which the ACLU supported bestiality yet?
http://www.aclu.org/LesbianGayRights/LesbianGayRights.cfm?ID=13031&c=41
the ACLU filed a brief in " Lawrence, et al v. Texas " [ link
provided, as usual ]. Whether or not you agree, bestiality was one
of the provisions of Texas' sodomy laws. The ACLU fought to have
this overturned.
So, the ACLU has never supported bestiality, though its support for
overturning a more inclusive law happens to have the effect of
decriminalizing bestiality in states that lump this stuff all
together.
Actually, that's not even true. The Supreme Court's decision in Lawrence v.
Texas ONLY addressed the issue of the disparent treatment between
homosexuals and heterosexuals, AND the issue of sexual privacy between
humans. The law is still on the books in Texas with only the provisions
that concerned the court having been rendered unenforceable. The issue of
bestiality was not addressed by the courts in any way, and said law would
still be enforceable where bestiality is concerned.
I mistakenly thought that J Young would not falsely represent what was
referred to. It never occurred to me that anyone would be so absurdly
dishonest and set himself up to be caught.
.
|
|
|
| User: "LC" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
23 Nov 2005 03:35:49 AM |
|
|
"David Jensen" <david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in message
news:3nm7o19g93krkfnobg6q7tehbdjtkdgmcm@4ax.com...
I mistakenly thought that J Young would not falsely represent what was
referred to. It never occurred to me that anyone would be so absurdly
dishonest and set himself up to be caught.
<piggybacking>
Oh my. Schizo-troll "J Young" gets another cherry.<g>
Fwiw, David, it's a foregone conclusion that when "J" posts, "J" lies.
And don't even ask about his όber-sock "IBen Getiner"...
LC~ Knows first hand that "J" rarely-if ever-defends his 'young opinions'
successfully.
"Everyday a different computer, everyday a different Id (those may have
to be repeated after I run out of names and numbers with my free
accounts with hotmail and yahoo and volcanomail and msn ect...) which
will render a killfile absolutely useless."
From: "simon sez" <simonsez@volcanomail.com> aka "J Young", "IBen", etc.
Message-ID: <1124475530.860458.5110@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Andrealphus" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
23 Nov 2005 03:36:49 AM |
|
|
In News 3nm7o19g93krkfnobg6q7tehbdjtkdgmcm@4ax.com,, David Jensen at
david@dajensen-family.com, typed this:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 02:45:58 GMT, in alt.atheism
"Andrealphus" <NOREALEMAIL10@THISADDRESS.FOAD> wrote in
<GJQgf.2335$aA2.1@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>:
In News 1el7o15dkp1deme6e83bebpl265iiq2b83@4ax.com,, David Jensen at
david@dajensen-family.com, typed this:
On Tue, 22 Nov 2005 00:31:22 -0500, in alt.atheism
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote in
<T7udnUYg5eA2MB_enZ2dnUVZ_t2dnZ2d@giganews.com>:
"Andrealphus" <NOREALEMAIL10@THISADDRESS.FOAD> wrote in message
news:cbwgf.1948$aA2.792@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Have you found a case in which the ACLU supported bestiality yet?
http://www.aclu.org/LesbianGayRights/LesbianGayRights.cfm?ID=13031&c=41
the ACLU filed a brief in " Lawrence, et al v. Texas " [ link
provided, as usual ]. Whether or not you agree, bestiality was one
of the provisions of Texas' sodomy laws. The ACLU fought to have
this overturned.
So, the ACLU has never supported bestiality, though its support for
overturning a more inclusive law happens to have the effect of
decriminalizing bestiality in states that lump this stuff all
together.
Actually, that's not even true. The Supreme Court's decision in
Lawrence v. Texas ONLY addressed the issue of the disparent
treatment between homosexuals and heterosexuals, AND the issue of
sexual privacy between humans. The law is still on the books in
Texas with only the provisions that concerned the court having been
rendered unenforceable. The issue of bestiality was not addressed
by the courts in any way, and said law would still be enforceable
where bestiality is concerned.
I mistakenly thought that J Young would not falsely represent what was
referred to. It never occurred to me that anyone would be so absurdly
dishonest and set himself up to be caught.
J Young has been known to distort facts to fit his agenda. This is nothing
new for most of us.
--
Question with boldness even the existence of god; because if there be
one, he must more approve the homage of reason than that of blindfolded
fear. - Thomas Jefferson
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jenn" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
22 Nov 2005 02:57:23 AM |
|
|
In article <zYqdnYMvEsa3Gx_eRVn-uQ@giganews.com>,
"J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
I suggested to someone recently that when shopping at the food market, and
one of the items has different brands from which to choose, always get the
product with the colored guy or girl on the box, jar, or bottle ( if the
choice exists ). I was told this was a racist comment, I replied it is not
racist if the comment is a compliment. Anyone?
Hey J... Have you found a case of the ACLU supporting bestiality yet?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: " Ninure Saunders" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
22 Nov 2005 01:46:40 PM |
|
|
In article <zYqdnYMvEsa3Gx_eRVn-uQ@giganews.com>, "J Young"
<youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
-I suggested to someone recently that when shopping at the food market, and
-one of the items has different brands from which to choose, always get the
-product with the colored guy or girl on the box, jar, or bottle ( if the
-choice exists ). I was told this was a racist comment, I replied it is not
-racist if the comment is a compliment. Anyone?
Jnowung how you fell about "cplored" people, it can't be anything about racist.
--
Pax Christi,
Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
Jesus is my Shepherd and He knows I'm Gay
http://Ninure-Saunders.tk
My Yahoo Group
http://Ninure.tk
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
http://www.MCCchurch.org
The Bible Site - help provide free scripture
http://www.thebiblesite.org
To send e-mail, remove nohate from address
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
22 Nov 2005 05:48:29 PM |
|
|
On 22-Nov-2005, ( Ninure Saunders) wrote:
In article <zYqdnYMvEsa3Gx_eRVn-uQ@giganews.com>, "J Young"
<youngopinions@aol.com> wrote:
-I suggested to someone recently that when shopping at the food market,
and
-one of the items has different brands from which to choose, always get
the
-product with the colored guy or girl on the box, jar, or bottle ( if the
-choice exists ). I was told this was a racist comment, I replied it is
not
-racist if the comment is a compliment. Anyone?
Jnowung how you fell about "cplored" people, it can't be anything about
racist.
As if the toilet brain didn't realize that he use of the word "colored"
is pejorative.
Susan
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
22 Nov 2005 05:56:32 PM |
|
|
wrote:
As if the toilet brain didn't realize that he use of the word "colored"
is pejorative.
Like you, toilet brain, not realizing that black people call themselves
"people of color" all the time. It's considered fashionable moron.
But of course, we know bigots like you just call him "toilet brain"
because you hate white Gentiles.
--
Cliff
.
|
|
|
| User: " Ninure Saunders" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
22 Nov 2005 08:15:49 PM |
|
|
In article <1132682192.835347.272400@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
clifffreeling@yahoo.com wrote:
-flav...@verizon.net wrote:
->
-> As if the toilet brain didn't realize that he use of the word "colored"
-> is pejorative.
-
-Like you, toilet brain, not realizing that black people call themselves
-"people of color" all the time.
False.
Black people kuje myself only use the term "People of Color" when speaking
of ourselvesd plus other non-White persons, i.e., as People who may ally
themselves for one or more comman goals.
-It's considered fashionable moron.
"colored" is fashionable among bigots who nornaly use terms such as
"*****" and "mud-people" when they aren't in reasonably polite society.
-But of course, we know bigots like you just call him "toilet brain"
Hesus would have called him "white-eashed tomb full of rotting bodies".
-because you hate white Gentiles.
A anti-semite as well as a racist!!
--
Pax Christi,
Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
Jesus is my Shepherd and He knows I'm Gay
http://Ninure-Saunders.tk
My Yahoo Group
http://Ninure.tk
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
http://www.MCCchurch.org
The Bible Site - help provide free scripture
http://www.thebiblesite.org
To send e-mail, remove nohate from address
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
22 Nov 2005 11:17:01 PM |
|
|
=B7 Ninure Saunders wrote:
-because you hate white Gentiles.
A anti-semite as well as a racist!!
Idiot. You're a shining beacon for gay
Christians everywhere. BTW, ask "Susan
Cohen" what she thinks of your Jesus.
--
Cliff
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
23 Nov 2005 07:00:37 AM |
|
|
On 22-Nov-2005, ( Ninure Saunders) wrote:
In article <1132682192.835347.272400@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
clifffreeling@yahoo.com wrote:
-flav...@verizon.net wrote:
->
-> As if the toilet brain didn't realize that he use of the word "colored"
-> is pejorative.
-
-Like you, toilet brain,
Can't even come up with his ow insults.
not realizing that black people call themselves
-"people of color" all the time.
False.
Black people kuje myself only use the term "People of Color" when speaking
of ourselvesd plus other non-White persons, i.e., as People who may ally
themselves for one or more comman goals.
And besides, it's not the same thing & he *knows* it.
Susan
-It's considered fashionable moron.
"colored" is fashionable among bigots who nornaly use terms such as
"*****" and "mud-people" when they aren't in reasonably polite society.
-But of course, we know bigots like you just call him "toilet brain"
Hesus would have called him "white-eashed tomb full of rotting bodies".
-because you hate white Gentiles.
A anti-semite as well as a racist!!
--
Pax Christi,
Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
Jesus is my Shepherd and He knows I'm Gay
http://Ninure-Saunders.tk
My Yahoo Group
http://Ninure.tk
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
http://www.MCCchurch.org
The Bible Site - help provide free scripture
http://www.thebiblesite.org
To send e-mail, remove nohate from address
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
23 Nov 2005 01:56:59 PM |
|
|
wrote:
And besides, it's not the same thing & he *knows* it.
So, more of that bigoted mind at work: "It's not what's being
said, but **who** is saying it that counts."
Aren't liberals supposed to be against judging people according
to race or religion? Aren't words and actions supposed to
be what counts, like MLK said? Oh I forgot about the Thought
Police, and how they can read minds.
--
Cliff
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "L. Michael Roberts" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
22 Nov 2005 04:00:51 AM |
|
|
J Young wrote:
I suggested to someone recently that when shopping at the food market, and
one of the items has different brands from which to choose, always get the
product with the colored guy or girl on the box, jar, or bottle ( if the
choice exists ). I was told this was a racist comment, I replied it is not
racist if the comment is a compliment. Anyone?
Still waiting for you to post poof that the ACLU supports bestiality.
--
+==================== L. Michael Roberts ======================+
This represents my personal opinion and NOT Company policy
Goderich, Ont, Canada. To reply, post a request for my valid E-mail
"Life is a sexually transmitted, terminal, condition"
+================================================================+
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
22 Nov 2005 05:14:15 PM |
|
|
J Young wrote:
I suggested to someone recently that when shopping at the food market, and
one of the items has different brands from which to choose, always get the
product with the colored guy or girl on the box, jar, or bottle ( if the
choice exists ). I was told this was a racist comment, I replied it is not
racist if the comment is a compliment. Anyone?
As far as racist or not, it depends on the race of the customer.
If customer is black, it would not be considered racist; white, it
would
quite likely (if not certainly) be considered racist. Just another
example of whitey head-knockin' from leftist America.
--
Cliff
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
22 Nov 2005 04:56:35 PM |
|
|
J Young wrote:
I suggested to someone recently that when shopping at the food market, and
one of the items has different brands from which to choose, always get the
product with the colored guy or girl on the box, jar, or bottle ( if the
choice exists ). I was told this was a racist comment, I replied it is not
racist if the comment is a compliment. Anyone?
Companies like to use blacks in their ads. The Wall Street Journal
routinely has HUGE full-page ads from companies with HUGE black
faces peering back at the viewer. Considering that the VAST number
of these companies have nearly lily-white upper management (under-
standibly), I can only conclude that it is a ploy to cover for this
fact of life, and to help keep the whiners quiet. The professional
world routinely puts blacks in highly visible, but illusory, positions
like this.
--
Cliff
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "L.Roberts" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
24 Nov 2005 04:54:43 AM |
|
|
J Young wrote:
I suggested to someone recently that when shopping at the food market, and
one of the items has different brands from which to choose, always get the
product with the colored guy or girl on the box, jar, or bottle ( if the
choice exists ). I was told this was a racist comment, I replied it is not
racist if the comment is a compliment. Anyone?
I have, oftentimes (perhaps as much as ten times out of nine), found
the term 'colored', when used, used to denote Blacks, is that who you
meant, Blacks?
If so, why should someone follow your recommendation?
If by 'colored' you meant Black, how can your comment be seem as
complimentary to Blacks?
What color are you?
How old are you?
What is your I.Q.?
What is your level of education?
Have you lived a sheltered life?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "LC" |
|
| Title: Re: racist or not? |
22 Nov 2005 04:13:00 AM |
|
|
Moronic troll and admitted Klansman "J Young" <youngopinions@aol.com> wrote
in message news:zYqdnYMvEsa3Gx_eRVn-uQ@giganews.com...
I suggested to someone recently that when shopping at the food market, and
one of the items has different brands from which to choose, always get the
product with the colored guy or girl on the box, jar, or bottle ( if the
choice exists ). I was told this was a racist comment, I replied it is not
racist if the comment is a compliment. Anyone?
If a "colored guy" were to compliment you on how clean and bright your Klan
garb is-before pummeling you to dust-would you think he was racist?
LC~ "J's" trolls are rapidly growing even more lame.
"I'm no Grand Wizard. Although I did meet him and speak to him on several
occasions back during my first days with his ... organization. See,
azzhole... they all wear business suites now-days. Makes it so much easier
to watch the other's backs."~J "IBen" Young, KKKook.
Message-ID: <20040803050412.23098.00002844@mb-m07.aol.com>
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
