TRAGEDY! Ruth Bader Ginsburg Died!

[_Themis]

You're not allowed to like Romney now. He's going to vote to confirm the next supreme court justice. It'll probably be the last conservative appointed to the court.

I don't hate him, but I do realize he does play politics. He had enough integrity to vote to impeach. He will be a hypocrite if he argued or supported the republican argument in 2016 that a president should not be allowed to pick a supreme justice in an election year, and then votes for Trump's pick this year.

[_Some Schmo]

Dear God the sight of Trump and Melania wearing black masks and standing behind the casket of Ruth Bader Ginsburg at the Supreme Court with the crowd booing, chanting "vote him out" and "honor her wish"...I don't have words to describe that. It's just one of the most awful things I've ever seen.

I'm horrified.

And that was Trump wearing a mask. It could have been worse.

[_Gunnar]

Subgenius;

I don't agree that attempts to preserve, share and celebrate unique cultural traditions is inherently racist. Nor do I deny that establishing enclaves like Harlems and Chinatowns and other ghettos were, initially, at least, in large part a result of bigotry and intolerance. So what? That doesn't stop the current residents of these communities from working together to turn them into positive places in which to experience, preserve, celebrate and showcase the best of their unique cultural contributions to society. It still remains true, though, that there is something inherently immoral about systemic racism and segregation.

Do you really have a problem with all that?

Why do you seem so eager to categorize everyone who disagrees with you on anything as racists or bigots? Projection perhaps?

Or are you, perhaps, just trying to play the roll of a "Devils advocate?"

Gunnar,
You seem to understand, so allow me to elaborate.
I believe in freedom of speech and thought. The higher offense associated with "Hate" speech and "Hate" crime are the biggest assaults on liberty in our modern times. With the former being a direct assault on the Constitution and the latter just being a shameful devaluation of crime (eg tell a white woman that her being raped wasn't so bad since the rapist didn't do it for the color of her skin or for her religious affiliation).
Racism seems to be a term of political convenience these days , and is used only to persecute those who refuse, for whatever reason, to celebrate all differences in all people. This seems to be the sole basis for the "morality" you invoke above. This can only be reasoned by a belief that God created all men and women as equal - correct? (careful, this moral argument starts and ends with the divine).
So, i am not sure that there is something "inherently immoral" about recognizing and forming opinions about a person and/or people based upon their skin color / culture. The "immorality" seems to be imposed by whims and winds. It boils down to the idea that our nation's morality should be based upon personal liberty. Do I have the liberty to believe that Chinese people can congregate and manipulate the built environment in such a way as to perpetuate their culture ? And am i also free to believe that Black people can freely impose their culture on that same environment? Then how do we resolve a dispute when these interests overlap and become in conflict?
Do we find resolve by forsaking the culture of both and require that they melt into one big homogenized pot ? Or do we arbitrarily assign one with a greater value over the other as measured by the political wind du jour?
For me, it comes down to the only morality that should exist, and that is personal liberty.

How much personal liberty do you think there would be if Trump gets his fondest wish and succeeds in emulating the tyranny of people like Putin, Erdogan, Kim Jong Un, etc. for whom he has openly expressed admiration?

What kind of morality would it be if everyone demanded absolute personal liberty for oneself alone, without accepting any responsibility for duly considering the rights and well being of anyone who differs from oneself in race or in religious, cultural, political or gender preferences?

It sounds to me that you trying to defend the personal liberty to hate and discriminate against others merely for being different from oneself as a moral right! There is nothing moral about personal liberty that does not include the responsibility to respect the personal liberty of anyone else who merely differs from oneself in some way. In short, you seem to be trying to argue that there is nothing inherently immoral about hatred or racism. I totally reject that premise!

Personal liberty alone is not synonymous with morality and can even be and has been used to justify the very opposite of morality.

[_subgenius]

How much personal liberty do you think there would be if Trump gets his fondest wish and succeeds in emulating the tyranny of people like Putin, Erdogan, Kim Jong Un, etc. for whom he has openly expressed admiration?[/ quote]

It's like me asking you "Have you always enjoyed beating your wife?".

What kind of morality would it be if everyone demanded absolute personal liberty for oneself alone, without accepting any responsibility for duly considering the rights and well being of anyone who differs from oneself in race or in religious, cultural, political or gender preferences?

Sez the poster who aligns with those who condemn Christians, Republicans, traditional family, and pro-lifers.

It sounds to me that you trying to defend the personal liberty to hate and discriminate against others merely for being different from oneself as a moral right!

It is a moral right. You are free to hate Christians, Republicans, traditional family, and pro-lifers.

There is nothing moral about personal liberty that does not include the responsibility to respect the personal liberty of anyone else who merely differs from oneself in some way. In short, you seem to be trying to argue that there is nothing inherently immoral about hatred or racism.

Nope. The only responsibility in liberty is in actions. Thoughts and speech are ultimately moral only inasmuch as they are free. Racism isn't inherently immoral.

I totally reject that premise!

As you can freely do.

Personal liberty alone is not synonymous with morality and can even be and has been used to justify the very opposite of morality.

Oh, well if you just it is so then it must be... no argument or reasoning necessary.