24 minutes ago, pixelaoffy said:

Black whole

???? freudian Slip?

7.     No true Scotsman – Stating that the arguer is wrong because they don’t not represent the argument e.g. You don’t live there or in Thailand)

50 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Do you agree with the list or not , or does the list just apply to other people ?

   Yes, some racist people do make statements from the list , but also non racist people make statements from the list , meaning that the list doesn't prove a person is racist 

I don’t agree with that particular list.

Again, for the forth time:

 

Do you agree there are statements and ‘go to arguments’ that are characteristic of racists?

 

Or is it your contention that nobody can conclude another person is a racist on the basis of the statements and arguments they put forward?

25 minutes ago, kwilco said:

12.     It’s a religion, so that’s not racist, is it?

As I said, I don't regard Buddhism as a religion, more a set of ethical and moral principles.

3 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

As I said, I don't regard Buddhism as a religion, more a set of ethical and moral principles.

But you judge others on the basis of their non-Buddhist religion beliefs.

 

Did the significance of that escape you?!

 

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

But you judge others on the basis of their non-Buddhist religion beliefs.

 

Did the significance of that escape you?!

 

If you can explain to me the rationality of believing in some entity that cannot be seen, heard, or felt, I'm all ears.

The only significance of religion to me is how much misery it has caused, and continues to do so. Perhaps you are not aware both Trump and Putin have persuaded religious groups to support them. While I am not surprised by the cynicism of that, the naivety is astounding.

30 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

As I said, I don't regard Buddhism as a religion, more a set of ethical and moral principles.

so a creed then?

12 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

If you can explain to me the rationality of believing in some entity that cannot be seen, heard, or felt, I'm all ears.

The only significance of religion to me is how much misery it has caused, and continues to do so. Perhaps you are not aware both Trump and Putin have persuaded religious groups to support them. While I am not surprised by the cynicism of that, the naivety is astounding.

You should open a thread on the topic.

 

This isn’t it.

13 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You should open a thread on the topic.

 

This isn’t it.

I understand part of the title of this thread is the topic of religious discrimination.

IIRC, a poster called Ivor Bigun has already had a thread going for quite some time, entitled " Do you believe in God and why." I see no need to duplicate it.

I also don't take dictates from other posters on what I should or should not post. Do you?

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I don’t agree with that particular list.

Again, for the forth time:

 

 

Do you agree there are statements and ‘go to arguments’ that are characteristic of racists?

 

Or is it your contention that nobody can conclude another person is a racist on the basis of the statements and arguments they put forward?

I did previously answer .

2 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

No it's not and despite how much you don't want to see it, racism is a cancer that eats away at a society.

 

Oh, and I am far more to the left than liberals...

"No true Irishman would support England in a World Cup final if they were playing against Scotland "

 

   Do you regard that as a true statement or a racist statement ?

11 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

"No true Irishman would support England in a World Cup final if they were playing against Scotland "

 

   Do you regard that as a true statement or a racist statement ?

I regard it as a deflection post on your part after your previous sweeping generalisation about the Irish. 

8 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

I regard it as a deflection post on your part after your previous sweeping generalisation about the Irish. 

Great excuse NOT to answer .

Agreeing with my statement will show that you are a racist, disagreeing with my statement will show that you aren't being honest,  so your only only option is to not answer 

Just now, Mac Mickmanus said:

Great excuse NOT to answer .

Agreeing with my statement will show that you are a racist, disagreeing with my statement will show that you aren't being honest,  so your only only option is to not answer 

Rubbish. 

28 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

I did previously answer .

You dodged it.

7 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You dodged it.

I replied, three hours ago 

10 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Rubbish. 

Fair enough , so you would support England if they were playing against Argentina in a Football World Cup final .

   Nice to have your support 

Just now, Mac Mickmanus said:

Fair enough , so you would support England if they were playing against Argentina in a Football World Cup final .

   Nice to have your support 

Blah blah blah…just more deflection from you. 

37 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

"No true Irishman would support England in a World Cup final if they were playing against Scotland "

 

   Do you regard that as a true statement or a racist statement ?

I’d call that the kind of simplistic reductionism that is a foundation of racism.

 

That aside, why do you ask?

5 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

I replied, three hours ago 

Link your reply please, so I can check if you actually replied to the question. 
 

 

3 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Do you agree with the list or not , or does the list just apply to other people ?

   Yes, some racist people do make statements from the list , but also non racist people make statements from the list , meaning that the list doesn't prove a person is racist 

I answered it here . 

59 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Great excuse NOT to answer .

Agreeing with my statement will show that you are a racist, disagreeing with my statement will show that you aren't being honest,  so your only only option is to not answer 

now a false dichotomy!

47 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Fair enough , so you would support England if they were playing against Argentina in a Football World Cup final .

   Nice to have your support 

You do realise the meaning of  "7.No true Scotsman – Stating that the arguer is wrong because they don’t not represent the argument e.g. You don’t live there or in Thailand)"?

3 hours ago, Lacessit said:

If you can explain to me the rationality of believing in some entity that cannot be seen, heard, or felt, I'm all ears.

The only significance of religion to me is how much misery it has caused, and continues to do so. Perhaps you are not aware both Trump and Putin have persuaded religious groups to support them. While I am not surprised by the cynicism of that, the naivety is astounding.

SWOT

2 hours ago, kwilco said:

You do realise the meaning of  "7.No true Scotsman – Stating that the arguer is wrong because they don’t not represent the argument e.g. You don’t live there or in Thailand)"?

That is correct , I don't live in Scotland or Thailand 

Off-topic post removed.

 

1 hour ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

That is correct , I don't live in Scotland or Thailand 

Your literal and largely incorrect interpretation of so many posts makes me wonder if you actually understand even the basics of the topic and many of the subsequent opinions voiced.

Whilst arguing against so many of the posts, you are in actual fact reinforcing the impression that racism xenophobia religious discrimination are very much alive and well in the UK and give an excellent example of how in manifests itself. I think we can safely say regarding your  posts "quod eat demonstrandum"

6 hours ago, kwilco said:

You do realise the meaning of  "7.No true Scotsman – Stating that the arguer is wrong because they don’t not represent the argument e.g. You don’t live there or in Thailand)"?

No , it doesn't mean that .

It means that a person needs to be a certain way to belong to that group and that's considered to be discriminatory  because you don't have to be a certain way to belong to that group.

   You don't even know the meaning of the things that you post 

20 hours ago, Lacessit said:

As I said, I don't regard Buddhism as a religion, more a set of ethical and moral principles.

Good comment. In fact it is even much more than that, some say it is more like the science of the mind. In any case it is not a "religion" believing in a creator god. Ethical and moral principles do play a different role in different Buddhist Traditions of Mahayana and Theravada (of which there are many).

11 minutes ago, moogradod said:

In fact it is even much more than that, some say it is more like the science of the mind. In any case it is not a "religion" believing in a creator god.

In Thailand it's a religion.

2 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

In Thailand it's a religion.

You may call it religion if you like. Does not change a thing. But a common misunderstanding arises when you do not realize that this is a non-theistic religion which distinguishes it from for example Christianity and which is at the core of many discussions I have read here (believing in something invisible etc.). Both are valid attempts to find a solution to make people ultimately happy though even their view on a "creator god" is totally different.