May I see your papers, citizen?

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

Thomas, did you make a similar argument against the divestment movement to end Apartheid in South Africa?

Yes. I think the boycott against South Africa was counterproductive and immoral. The same goes for America's 45-year boycott against Cuba.

1 Reply

@Thomas,

Quote:

I'm sorry, but personal buying boycotts against Jews are immoral. And so are personal boycotts against Arizonans.

everybody gets to make up their own mind what their morals are, all you are allowed is the opportunity to convince, if others care to listen to you. In any case, all boycotts other than of such things at taxes and military service, are with-in the rights of the individual.

2 Replies

@dyslexia,

dyslexia wrote:

Lady Diane is originally from Tucson but since Tucson is suing the state of Ariz to repeal the new statute she's decided not to take any legal action at this point in time.

Dys, I think you should take a stand against Arizona and divorce your Arizonan wife. Sure, it's unfortunate that an innocent woman like Diane should suffer because of politics. But there are greater issues involved here, so I think you should take one for the team.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
I'm sorry, but personal buying boycotts against Jews are immoral. And so are personal boycotts against Arizonans.

everybody gets to make up their own mind what their morals are, all you are allowed is the opportunity to convince, if others care to listen to you. In any case, all boycotts other than of such things at taxes and military service, are with-in the rights of the individual.

I never said that non-Arizonan people who boycott Arizonan people don't have the right to. I said they are bigots. Sure, they are legally entitled to be bigots, but that doesn't make it right.

2 Replies

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
I'm sorry, but personal buying boycotts against Jews are immoral. And so are personal boycotts against Arizonans.

everybody gets to make up their own mind what their morals are, all you are allowed is the opportunity to convince, if others care to listen to you. In any case, all boycotts other than of such things at taxes and military service, are with-in the rights of the individual.

I never said that non-Arizonan people who boycott Arizonan people don't have the right to. I said they are bigots. Sure, they are legally entitled to be bigots, but that doesn't make it right.

I don't think 'bigot' describes what you are talking about.

Quote:

Main Entry: big·ot
Pronunciation: \ˈbi-gət\
Function: noun
Etymology: French, hypocrite, bigot
Date: 1660

: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

Not buying things from AZ is not due to their inherent biological or ethnic status, but instead the choices of governance their state made. There's nothing wrong with that at all. If someone doesn't want to do business with someone else based on non-intrinsic factors and decisions they've made, that isn't bigotry.

AZ suffered a similar fate when they refused to recognize MLK day, and their economy paid heavily for it. Were those who boycotted AZ for their stance wrong to do so? I say not in the slightest.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Thomas,

Quote:

big·ot /ˈbɪgət/ Show Spelled[big-uht] Show IPA
"noun
a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bigot

taking a position that harms other individuals or groups does not equate to intolerance. You have expanded the definition of intolerance so far that it no longer has any meaning. A considered, measured response is not intolerance, even when people and groups get hurt by the response.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

AZ suffered a similar fate when they refused to recognize MLK day, and their economy paid heavily for it. Were those who boycotted AZ for their stance wrong to do so? I say not in the slightest.

Yes, they were wrong. And what's more, I actually agree with Arizona about Martin Luther King day. I don't think Martin Luther King deserves a national holiday any more than Abraham Lincoln, Susan B. Anthony, and Albert Einstein do. And neither of the other three has one, either. Declining to acknowledge Martin Luther King day certainly doesn't merit a boycott.

2 Replies

@Thomas,

Quote:

Declining Martin Luther King day certainly doesn't merit a boycott.

then don't boycott, but you dont get to tell other people what to do, and you should refrain from telling other people that you know better then them what they should do....as it makes you look like a creep.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

I think the definition fits. Your conduct is intolerant of Arizonans simply because you don't like the actions of their government.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
Declining Martin Luther King day certainly doesn't merit a boycott.
then don't boycott, but you dont get to tell other people what to do, and you should refrain from telling other people that you know better then them what they should do....as it makes you look like a creep.

You're wrong. Under freedom of speech, I do get to tell other people what to do. Conversely, if you don't like what I tell you, you get to not listen to me.

0 Replies

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
AZ suffered a similar fate when they refused to recognize MLK day, and their economy paid heavily for it. Were those who boycotted AZ for their stance wrong to do so? I say not in the slightest.

Yes, they were wrong. And what's more, I actually agree with Arizona about Martin Luther King day. I don't think Martin Luther King deserves a national holiday any more than Abraham Lincoln, Susan B. Anthony, and Albert Einstein do. And neither of the other three has one, either. Declining Martin Luther King day certainly doesn't merit a boycott.

Okay, I accept you feel that way. But I maintain that it is wrong to accuse those who participate in boycotts of being 'bigots' when the reasons for those boycotts have nothing to do with inherent characteristics of the people being boycotted. You may disdain it, but it's not the correct term.

President's Day in America, though technically observed on Washington's birthday, is meant to honor both Washington and Lincoln, who were born very close together.

Susan B. Anthony Day is February 15th.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

I think the definition fits. Your conduct is intolerant of Arizonans simply because you don't like the actions of their government.

As they control their government they are responsible for the decisions it makes. I am not attacking them based on inherent issues or unchangeable factors, which is the real test of bigotry.

Besides, since when is choosing whether or not to engage in voluntary spending of my private dollars considered intolerance? It seems that you are re-defining that word as well.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Susan B. Anthony day is a federal holiday? That's news to me.

1 Reply

San Francisco's mayor banned city workers from traveling to Arizona on official business. I guess they could still go as private citizens. (Just don't let him find out LOL).

0 Replies

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

Susan B. Anthony day is a federal holiday? That's news to me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_B._Anthony_Day

It's on the rolls, but I don't know how widely it is observed.

I would also suggest that over time, we won't observe MLK day as much either. It's a temporally localized cultural holiday.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

I am against discrimination, unless the class of people discriminated against are illegal aliens. They continue to flood into the country causing massive damage.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

As they control their government they are responsible for the decisions it makes.

No, "they" don't. Each of the individuals whose business you are boycotting has a negligible amount of control over their government. Chances are almost half of them have voted against it. And yet you punish these dissenters just the same, simply because of the group they belong to. By your own definition, that's bigotry.

Quote:

Besides, since when is choosing whether or not to engage in voluntary spending of my private dollars considered intolerance?

Since Americans have outlawed motel owners who chose not to engage in voluntary renting of rooms to Blacks. The analogy between the two cases is exact.

1 Reply

@Thomas,

You seem to be losing it with your silly anolgies. Discriminating against illegal aliens is not comparable to Nazi discrimination against citizen Jews. Also, you made a ridiculous stretch in saying that mandamus has nothing to do with forcing government to carry out its law.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

MLK day is a Federal holiday. There's no mail delivery that day, either.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

According to the Wikipedia article you cite, Susan B Anthony is a "commemorative holiday". It is not a federal holiday. In other words, it's on the same level as "Mother's day", or "Earth day", or "Valentine's day", etc..

1 Reply

May I see your papers, citizen?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know