NPR Axes Juan Williams for Muslim comment

#126
#126
volinbham said:
He stated an honest feeling he gets then went on to say what the initial reaction is unfounded and shouldn't be used to take discriminatory actions.

For that he was canned and labeled a bigot. I see a lot wrong with that most particularly the unwillingness of many to even discuss issues they deem too sensitive. Instead, a power accusation (bigot) is used to stifle discussion.
Click to expand...

What issue is there to discuss? Hmm perhaps muslims are all terrorists and we should be scared of them. It isn't deemed too sensitive it's deemed too stupid. "Stifle the discussion" Good now you're starting to come around to the point. NPR doesn't want to foster or give credence to such a ridiculous discussion. If he said Nazi's weren't all bad then his voice should be stifled.
 
#127
#127
Ed12111 said:
What issue is there to discuss? Hmm perhaps muslims are all terrorists and we should be scared of them. It isn't deemed too sensitive it's deemed too stupid. "Stifle the discussion" Good now you're starting to come around to the point. NPR doesn't want to foster or give credence to such a ridiculous discussion. If he said Nazi's weren't all bad then his voice should be stifled.
Click to expand...

How about a discussion about political correctness?

How about a discussion on why some perceived intolerance (e.g. Muslim) is treated so differently than other perceived intolerance (e.g. Christian or Jewish, geographic, political views, etc.)

How about a discussion that acknowledges there is intolerance of many forms?

How about a discussion of why offending someone (only in a particular way) is considered a firing offense but other forms of offense are perfectly acceptable?

How about a discussion of what tolerance really means?

Nah, easier to label a good man as a bigot, fire him, publicly suggest he might be crazy or money hungry.
 
#129
#129
volinbham said:
How about a discussion about political correctness?

How about a discussion on why some perceived intolerance (e.g. Muslim) is treated so differently than other perceived intolerance (e.g. Christian or Jewish, geographic, political views, etc.)

How about a discussion that acknowledges there is intolerance of many forms?

How about a discussion of why offending someone (only in a particular way) is considered a firing offense but other forms of offense are perfectly acceptable?

How about a discussion of what tolerance really means?

Nah, easier to label a good man as a bigot, fire him, publicly suggest he might be crazy or money hungry.
Click to expand...

Why do you continue to bring up all sorts of hypothetical "discussions" and continue to ignore the bigoted statement JW made?

Why don't we have a discussion about not getting your panties in a wad when someone gets canned for saying something on the radio that their employer rightfully believes is a fire-able offense?
 
#130
#130
VolBurgers said:
Why do you continue to bring up all sorts of hypothetical "discussions" and continue to ignore the bigoted statement JW made?

Why don't we have a discussion about not getting your panties in a wad when someone gets canned for saying something on the radio that their employer rightfully believes is a fire-able offense?
Click to expand...

1) I don't think it was bigoted.

2) My panties are no more in a wad than yours are on this issue - I'm stating an opinion and clarifying when necessary. Seems you are too.

The fact people are divided (beyond just on this board) on whether or not this was bigoted suggests it's worthy of debate.
 
#137
#137
But come on guys let's not be so "politically correct". Let's have an honest non bigoted discussion on whether Christians are stupid.
 
#140
#140
Ed12111 said:
I think you're missing the point. Probably a Christian.
Click to expand...

I didn't miss the point. You were dead wrong and tried to call me wrong for saying your comment was idiotic. My religion has nothing to do with absurd crap. You're likely the kid a a looney left professorial type who wouldn't know the real world from an apple, but that's immaterial to your incorrect point.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#141
#141
BigPapaVol said:
I didn't miss the point. You were dead wrong and tried to call me wrong for saying your comment was idiotic. My religion has nothing to do with absurd crap. You're likely the kid a a looney left professorial type who wouldn't know the real world from an apple, but that's immaterial to your incorrect point.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Oh my, getting so defensive. Come on let's have an honest discussion lol.

BTW you're still missing the point.
 
#142
#142
Ed12111 said:
Oh my, getting so defensive. Come on let's have an honest discussion lol.

BTW you're still missing the point.
Click to expand...

Clearly the point went way over my head. Must be all those degrees I'm missing. My double major was probably weak, as was the sheepskin issuer. I'll survive.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#146
#146
Ed12111 said:
I think you're missing the point. Probably a Christian.
Click to expand...

Then if not for BPV's benefit then perhaps for the edification of the rest of us you could cite a reputable source for the claim made? It's not like what you stated was ambiguous. The question now is you can support it or you can't.
 
#147
#147
Did I miss the First Amendment caveat that fails to protect freedom of speech if some deem it offensive?

Atypical plug-n-play liberal argment:

When it's something to which they agree, their freedom of speech is absolutely assured.

When someone says something to which they don't agree, that person should not be allowed to say it, as it is "undoubtedly" bigotted, racist, sexist, elitist, etc.

As this thread further attests, if only minutely, outside of rare exception(s), there are few groups who are more intolerant of philosophical and political diversity, are more overt in their hatred of all religious faith, have a greater fear of engaging in a true exchange of ideas in a constructive dialogue, are most likely to obfuscate the merits of oppositional argument(s) with an unending array baseless accusations and personal attacks and who will categorically refuse any opportunity to have their beliefs placed (however respectfully) beneath even the slightest modicum of scrutiny, than the liberal.

They are political operatives, insurgents, snipers, if you will - too proud to admit their many fallacies, and too afraid of being destroyed in head-to-head combat.
 
#148
#148
droski said:
on average christians are more highly educated than non christians in this country.
Click to expand...

my guess is that either position, regarding intelligence, is indefensible. Distribution of intelligence is likely statistically even. Education level is a different matter, but likely very similar as well.
 
#149
#149
Putting Chrisitianity aside for right now, if I had to chose between the Tooth Fairy and the idea that the government redistribution of wealth will somehow bring humanistic utopia to earth... I'm taking the Tooth Fairy all day. Where does that put me on the IQ scale?
 
#150
#150
Lexvol said:
Putting Chrisitianity aside for right now, if I had to chose between the Tooth Fairy and the idea that the government redistribution of wealth will somehow bring humanistic utopia to earth... I'm taking the Tooth Fairy all day. Where does that put me on the IQ scale?
Click to expand...

My money is on the Easter Bunny.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top