Black woman doctor on flight dismissed as passenger chokes

Scroll to see replies

Reply 60

Cremated_Spatula

Original post by dropoutbear

I like how you shut up about M.L King. It's good to know when you're beaten.

That would only work if I did.

I just had no new material to work with. :u:

Reply 61

999tigger

Original post by squish562

If they don't like it they can move back to africa

So racism is accpetable and something people should have to put up with?

Reply 62

dropoutbear

Original post by Cremated_Spatula

That would only work if I did.

I just had no new material to work with. :u:

You only had out of context material anyway :u:

Reply 63

Cremated_Spatula

Original post by dropoutbear

You only had out of context material anyway :u:

How is it out of context?

Spoiler

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 64

dropoutbear

Original post by Cremated_Spatula

How is it out of context?

Spoiler

It isnt in the context of a riot, where MLK clearly has a change of opinion

So once again, i rest my case.

Reply 65

squish562

Original post by 999tigger

So racism is accpetable and something people should have to put up with?

there won't be any racism in their home nations which are black and where white people would be eaten alive. They are treated very well here by us in comparison.

Reply 66

Cremated_Spatula

Original post by dropoutbear

It isnt in the context of a riot, where MLK clearly has a change of opinion

So once again, i rest my case.

Read your own quote, at least try to understand it. He doesn't contradict himself or change his mind.

Have a taste of added context.

"And I would be the first to say that I am still committed to militant, powerful, massive, non-violence as the most potent weapon in grappling with the problem from a direct action point of view. I'm absolutely convinced that a riot merely intensifies the fears of the white community while relieving the guilt. And I feel that we must always work with an effective, powerful weapon and method that brings about tangible results. But it is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society. These conditions are the things that cause individuals to feel that they have no other alternative than to engage in violent rebellions to get attention. And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard."

He's saying that riots are an inevitability when plights are ignored and he therefore can't condemn the people that do riot because it is in response to the systematic and wide-spread oppression and abuse they faced, but he still did not condone violence.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 67

MildredMalone

Original post by yudothis

You are right. A single incidence does not show something is pervasive.

How many "single" incidents would it take, though, to show something is pervasive?

How many single incidents are there?

Reply 68

dropoutbear

Original post by Cremated_Spatula

So let's get back to what you originally said:

Original post by Cremated_Spatula

M.L King would be disgusted with the men and women rioting in that video.

MLK would not be disgusted.

Nice try with that straw man though.

Reply 69

Cremated_Spatula

Original post by dropoutbear

So let's get back to what you originally said:

MLK would not be disgusted.

Nice try with that straw man though.

Yeah, I think he would have been. Considering the nature of these attacks, the motivations behind these riots and the contextual difference of our time periods.

How did I use a straw-man? You don't even understand the concept of a straw-man fallacy.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 70

dropoutbear

Original post by Cremated_Spatula

Yeah, I think he would have been. Considering the motivations behind these riots and the contextual difference of our time periods.

How did I use a straw-man? You don't even understand the concept of a straw-man fallacy.

"He's saying that riots are an inevitability when plights are ignored and he therefore can't condemn the people that do riot because it is in response to the systematic and wide-spread oppression and abuse they faced"

Your own words, i dont see how it could be so extreme for him to be "disgusted", even disapproved would be far fetched considering, as you said, he wont be able to condemn rioters.

It must hurt to see yourself getting beaten by your own words

Reply 71

Cremated_Spatula

Original post by dropoutbear

Being 'disgusted with' doesn't equate to condemning someone.
I may be disgusted by (or disappointed with) someone but it doesn't mean I hate them and can't see where they're coming from.
To put it this way, given the facts of the situation would he be closer to disgusted or pleased with their actions?

Plus it's not as if I'm going to research every word that came out of his mouth before I make a post like that, just to prove that I'm using the correct description.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 72

dropoutbear

Original post by Cremated_Spatula

Being 'disgusted with' doesn't equate to condemning someone.
I may be disgusted by someone but it doesn't mean I hate them and can't see where they're coming from.
To put it this way, given the facts of the situation would he be closer to disgusted or pleased with their actions?

Plus it's not as if I'm going to research every word that came out of his mouth before I make a post like that, just to prove that I'm using the correct description.

I rest my case, this reply has hardly countered what ive said.

Original post by Cremated_Spatula

Being 'disgusted with' doesn't equate to condemning someone.

But if you condemn something, you could be disgusted by it, it doesnt work the other way around. point proven.

Reply 73

Cremated_Spatula

Original post by dropoutbear

I rest my case, this reply has hardly countered what ive said.

But if you condemn something, you could be disgusted by it, it doesnt work the other way around. point proven.

And with that comment, your stupidity is more evident now than it ever was. Please, for the love of all that is h0ly, do not use the phrase 'I rest my case' again.

He's already stated he thinks violence should be considered as abhorrent as cannibalism. The quote you brought up does not contradict that.

I'd also like to point out that you can actually be disappointed or disgusted and 'not condemn' someone, like I'm disgusted with your lack of intelligence but I can't condemn you for it, considering the lack of decent education nowadays.

Reply 74

yudothis

Original post by MildredMalone

How many single incidents are there?

Far too many.

Reply 75

999tigger

Original post by squish562

there won't be any racism in their home nations which are black and where white people would be eaten alive. They are treated very well here by us in comparison.

You are a lot bonkers.

Reply 76

parsn1p

Original post by WoodyMKC

You can't use Americans to judge humanity, they're half-bred.

The likes of the BBC and the Daily Mail would love us to, though.

Reply 77

Abstract_Prism

That title could have been worded better... I thought the black doctor dismissed the choking passenger!

Reply 78

TooFocused

Original post by Cremated_Spatula

Lmao the guy is incredibly bigoted, you won't get a proper reply from him. He's always deflecting debate because he has baseless arguments (even if you prompt him enough times he'll rely on the "oooo state ur argumentz first" rather than substance to deflect things - and he won't accept absence of evidence as proof of why his world view is so poor). Just another new age regressive moron with more intolerant dogma to spew about.