E wins because one man wasn't arabic who bombed? The fact that you think this single piece of evidence is strong enough proves that you all also believe that most terrorist attacks are by men of arabic background.
Hello ... this isn't a win/lose proposition. In open dDiscussion conducted in a civil and considered way, everybody "wins". Few are ever totally "right" in their perceptions. Open discussion is an opportunity for each of us to share our ideas and opinions. If we present our point of view in a clear, persuasive manner, perhaps whatever there is of value in our thinking will be of assistence to others. Our errors, even when we don't acknowledge them, can only be corrected when someone points them out to us. If we are too rigid, too close-minded to listen then we may go to the grave believing the most foolish nonsense.
The issue was not terrorism and if it is done by arabs, it was racial profiling, let's not stray too far off track here.
People of many nationalities or countries or states or tribes or religions or some combo thereof get into aggression from time to time. Who of us cannot say that someone in our heritage didn't? and an offshoot of that is gangs of various sorts.
Some gangs, those in my old neighborhood being the sholine crips and v13, have some kind of stand alone presence, but are basically sad groups.
As to profiling, a huge amount of it is out of fear. What is that they say about fear, fear attacks? Too damn much fear going around causing all sorts of aggression as a result. Trouble is, finding the first fear monger.
Some of the horror of our decried enemies are fear-based, fear from us.
Grabbng all these sentences into a clutch, racial profiling is, to me, fear based. Always, always, I look at my job in real life and around me in the everyday... for performance criteria... how do people perform, not what do they look like.
I hate it when I see the world bodies getting into gang behavior...
Even if it is "fear-based", that doesn't mean it shouldn't occur. Sometimes there is a good reason to be afraid of something. Imagine going into a part of town you haven't visited before. It is supposed to be the "bad part", but you decide to visit just to check it out. While youre drving through you get your car hi-jacked and your personal belongings are stolen. Will you be afraid of this place? yes. Will you likely return to this place if at all possible? no.
My point is that fear may be a good way to judge if some things should be taken special note of.
Yes, some fears are more closely based on some kind of evolutionary survival instinct that we probably have. But the strength of a group's fear such as the fear that you could get carjacked in a certain part of town does not rely on each member of the group having been carjacked in that part of town, it just sort of passes by word of mouth, which isn't very useful because it means irrational fears can easily spread, like the fear that a big black man will rape your wife, or something like that. Personal fears based on personal experience can be useful for personal survival, but that's got little to do with racial profiling.
But anyway, I still can't believe you said, "sometimes moral isn't what's best for the american public."
