[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

What Did You See Today? - haresfur - Jul 13, 2020 - 11:01pm
 
What Makes You Laugh? - haresfur - Jul 13, 2020 - 10:46pm
 
Manbird's Stones - buddy - Jul 13, 2020 - 9:25pm
 
What Did You Do Today? - ScottFromWyoming - Jul 13, 2020 - 9:14pm
 
Those Lovable Policemen - R_P - Jul 13, 2020 - 7:31pm
 
Joe Biden - kurtster - Jul 13, 2020 - 6:59pm
 
Trump - kcar - Jul 13, 2020 - 6:54pm
 
Other Medical Stuff - haresfur - Jul 13, 2020 - 6:27pm
 
China - R_P - Jul 13, 2020 - 3:53pm
 
COVID-19 - R_P - Jul 13, 2020 - 2:12pm
 
Radio Paradise Comments - miamizsun - Jul 13, 2020 - 2:01pm
 
Excitable Boy: Zevon biography - buddy - Jul 13, 2020 - 12:32pm
 
Oh, The Stupidity - buddy - Jul 13, 2020 - 11:16am
 
• • • Clownstock • • •  - ScottFromWyoming - Jul 13, 2020 - 10:21am
 
Oh GOD, they're GAY! - Red_Dragon - Jul 13, 2020 - 9:37am
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - Alchemist - Jul 13, 2020 - 9:18am
 
Counting with Pictures - ndg - Jul 13, 2020 - 8:56am
 
2020 Elections - Red_Dragon - Jul 13, 2020 - 8:17am
 
YouTube: Music-Videos - norbertZ - Jul 13, 2020 - 7:05am
 
Sound clicks on announcements - billyrom - Jul 12, 2020 - 9:08pm
 
Are they married yet? YES THEY ARE! - kcar - Jul 12, 2020 - 8:22pm
 
Museum Of Bad Album Covers - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 12, 2020 - 2:40pm
 
Caretakers Of Our Parents - oldviolin - Jul 12, 2020 - 8:42am
 
Offset between Music and Song/Interpret Text, Silence... - nicolas65 - Jul 12, 2020 - 8:29am
 
Capitalism and Consumerism... now what? - Red_Dragon - Jul 12, 2020 - 8:09am
 
Gardeners Corner - Red_Dragon - Jul 12, 2020 - 7:49am
 
The Dragons' Roost - triskele - Jul 12, 2020 - 6:58am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Jul 12, 2020 - 6:46am
 
Name My Album - Antigone - Jul 12, 2020 - 5:01am
 
And the good news is.... - ScottFromWyoming - Jul 11, 2020 - 7:32pm
 
RightWingNutZ - R_P - Jul 11, 2020 - 6:25pm
 
Looting & vandalism isn't protest - R_P - Jul 11, 2020 - 3:10pm
 
Canada - R_P - Jul 11, 2020 - 1:10pm
 
New Doves album ‘The Universal Want’ coming in September - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 11, 2020 - 11:00am
 
Religion as Beer - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 11, 2020 - 10:58am
 
Things You Thought Today - sirdroseph - Jul 11, 2020 - 10:37am
 
Words that should be put on the substitutes bench for a year - Proclivities - Jul 11, 2020 - 10:23am
 
Environment - Red_Dragon - Jul 11, 2020 - 6:26am
 
RP streams in Opus - Romain98 - Jul 11, 2020 - 6:10am
 
Bad Poetry - sirdroseph - Jul 11, 2020 - 4:46am
 
AppleTV 4K and Radio Paradise stopping - edz - Jul 10, 2020 - 10:10pm
 
Fox Spews - buddy - Jul 10, 2020 - 5:44pm
 
Strips, cartoons, illustrations - edz - Jul 10, 2020 - 2:45pm
 
260,000 Posts in one thread? - oldviolin - Jul 10, 2020 - 2:29pm
 
Make Scott laugh - kcar - Jul 10, 2020 - 2:29pm
 
Economix - R_P - Jul 10, 2020 - 2:16pm
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - Red_Dragon - Jul 10, 2020 - 1:57pm
 
Country Up The Bumpkin - ptooey - Jul 10, 2020 - 1:00pm
 
South Korea - islander - Jul 10, 2020 - 12:32pm
 
New Music - miamizsun - Jul 10, 2020 - 12:18pm
 
In My Room - miamizsun - Jul 10, 2020 - 11:58am
 
What the hell OV? - miamizsun - Jul 10, 2020 - 11:54am
 
Cool Stuff I Really Want - Proclivities - Jul 10, 2020 - 10:43am
 
True Confessions - buddy - Jul 10, 2020 - 9:30am
 
Name My Band - oldviolin - Jul 10, 2020 - 9:13am
 
TV shows you watch - ScottN - Jul 10, 2020 - 8:22am
 
Constitution - Red_Dragon - Jul 10, 2020 - 7:05am
 
Race in America - sirdroseph - Jul 10, 2020 - 2:57am
 
Removing rated songs - Cache personalization - BillG - Jul 9, 2020 - 8:36pm
 
Mixtape Culture Club - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jul 9, 2020 - 3:40pm
 
Social Networking - R_P - Jul 9, 2020 - 12:54pm
 
Tech & Science - R_P - Jul 9, 2020 - 12:03pm
 
One Reason I Don't Trust the Police - miamizsun - Jul 9, 2020 - 11:19am
 
RP Daily Trivia Challenge - ScottFromWyoming - Jul 9, 2020 - 10:32am
 
• • • BRING OUT YOUR DEAD • • •  - oldviolin - Jul 9, 2020 - 8:53am
 
Ask the Libertarian - Lazy8 - Jul 9, 2020 - 7:40am
 
Dog - kcar - Jul 8, 2020 - 11:13pm
 
Questions. - oldviolin - Jul 8, 2020 - 6:49pm
 
Sunrise, Sunset - oldviolin - Jul 8, 2020 - 4:01pm
 
what the hell, miamizsun? - oldviolin - Jul 8, 2020 - 4:00pm
 
Iran - R_P - Jul 8, 2020 - 1:31pm
 
Happy Birthdy, Ringo Starr - norbertZ - Jul 8, 2020 - 4:07am
 
The Obituary Page - haresfur - Jul 7, 2020 - 8:16pm
 
Trump Lies - ScottN - Jul 7, 2020 - 8:00pm
 
Graphs, Charts & Maps - R_P - Jul 7, 2020 - 3:18pm
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » We need to be aware of what just happened in Indiana Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Post to this Topic
haresfur

haresfur Avatar

Location: The Golden Triangle
Gender: Male


Posted: Nov 15, 2019 - 1:35am

3 Indiana Judges Suspended After White Castle Brawl That Left 2 Of Them Wounded 

This could have been avoided if the strip clubs were open later
R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Apr 13, 2015 - 8:21pm

PRopaganda will fix this...
Indiana Hires PR Firm To Rebuild Image After 'Religious Freedom' Fiasco

The state of Indiana has hired a public relations firms to strengthen its image as “a welcoming place to live, visit and do business.” The ‘damage control’ is occurring just weeks after a national outcry over its discriminatory religious freedom bill.

National criticism descended upon Indiana after its Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) – before it was revised – was understood to have allowed businesses to discriminate against gay, lesbian and transgender customers on religious grounds. The bill incurred national condemnation, with state governors in Connecticut and New York, as well as the mayor of Washington, DC, banning state-funded travel barring revisions to the law.

The New York firm Porter Novelli was retained by the Indiana Economic Development Corporation (IEDC) to support ongoing public relations initiatives to continue strengthening Indiana’s global brand reputation. (...)


oldviolin

oldviolin Avatar

Location: esse quam videri
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 7, 2015 - 7:01pm

 kurtster wrote:

 Far from the South where one must assume this picture was taken.

 
The picture was taken in 1960 in Greensboro, North Carolina.

R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Apr 7, 2015 - 6:41pm

This might help our resident sinistrophobic denier(s) gain some understanding*... {#Mrgreen}

Homophobia encompasses a range of negative attitudes and feelings toward homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT).<1><2><3> It can be expressed as antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion, or hatred, may be based on irrational fear, and is sometimes related to religious beliefs.<4>

Homophobia is observable in critical and hostile behavior such as discrimination and violence on the basis of sexual orientations that are non-heterosexual.<1><2> According to the 2010 Hate Crimes Statistics released by the FBI National Press Office, 19.3 percent of hate crimes across the United States "were motivated by a sexual orientation bias."<5> Moreover, in a Southern Poverty Law Center 2010 Intelligence Report extrapolating data from fourteen years (1995–2008), which had complete data available at the time, of the FBI's national hate crime statistics found that LGBT people were "far more likely than any other minority group in the United States to be victimized by violent hate crime."<6> (...)

*Not holding my breath.
ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 7, 2015 - 6:24pm

 kurtster wrote:

This is it.  I'll be done after this.  The lunch counter picture without a caption is a cop out, not an answer.  Pretend I was blind and couldn't see the picture, and then we can pretend that the answer is typed in Braille so I can "read" the actual words articulating what is.  No one is willing or able to articulate why the two situations are identical.  I have gone to great lengths to discuss the real merits and differences.  All I get back is well you know its wrong or should know its wrong.  Instead of it causes actual harm because ______.   No one has filled in the blank.
 
A picture is worth a thousand words, they say. I say the situations are remarkably similar in many ways. You state that no one really needs pizza or cake, so the customers aren't really being denied anything worth protesting about. I post a photo of the lunch counter. You can't make a connection, that's your own blinders. I'm not pretending: you are blind if you can't see it. The people in the lunch counter photo aren't there to get their electricity turned on or to pay their water bills. They're there to have a burger and a Coke. Nothing any of them really needed, yet it was a valid protest in your eyes. You say you have gone to great lengths to discuss "the real merits and differences." I say you're gyrating like a dervish to try to gin up some difference between the two.


kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 7, 2015 - 3:16pm

 islander wrote:
 
So your argument is that we should have laws that allow discrimination?  Or that policies that are discriminatory are okay if they are are encouraged by a law?  Or that it's okay to have discriminatory policies in some places as long as you operate one non-discriminatory outlet somewhere?

I really haven't been able to follow anything you've spouted in a couple of pages now.  But please keep it up, nothing like having you tear down your own silly arguments. 

 
This is it.  I'll be done after this.  The lunch counter picture without a caption is a cop out, not an answer.  Pretend I was blind and couldn't see the picture, and then we can pretend that the answer is typed in Braille so I can "read" the actual words articulating what is.  No one is willing or able to articulate why the two situations are identical.  I have gone to great lengths to discuss the real merits and differences.  All I get back is well you know its wrong or should know its wrong.  Instead of it causes actual harm because ______.   No one has filled in the blank.

I've offered the actual harm amounts to inconvenience.  I'll go even farther and say that it could also hurt feelings and hurt the self esteem of the rejected individual.  But do these pass the test of real harm sufficient for a legal remedy ?  

And on the bolded.  You're full of sh*t to even go there.  I said

kurtster wrote:

But the bus thing was not a policy.  It was the law.

The lunch counter situation was encouraged by the law. 

And i ate at a few Woolworth's lunch counters in California in the same time.  No black only areas there.

 The picture illustrates a situation in a specific time and place.  I said that I ate at a Woolworth's lunch counter at the same time in a different place.  Far from the South where one must assume this picture was taken.  I am old enough to have traveled through the South and actually see the "colored only" signs on restrooms at gas stations, water fountains and other places.  How you get that I approve of discrimination in the way you state is beyond me.  I never saw a colored only sign in California back in the 50's or 60's.  The local laws affected local policies is my point.  Because it happens one place does not make it universal.  Sorry you aren't able to figure that one out without help.

Have a nice day or I'll sue your sorry ass ... 


Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 7, 2015 - 1:32pm

 RichardPrins wrote:
 
RichardPrins wrote:
So you are (still) saying these ("religious freedom") laws are needed to specifically protect Christian bigots? {#Mrgreen}

 kurtster wrote:
Yes, because Islamic bigots get a free pass.
I guess I missed that exchange; I haven't been looking in here that regularly. Anyhow, carry on - don't make a mess and turn off the lights and the coffee-maker when you're leaving.
R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Apr 7, 2015 - 12:59pm

 Proclivities wrote:
I don't think Kurt was arguing those points - you may be wandering into a scarecrow field there.  I think he was trying to point out the differences between those policies and practices of refusing services fifty years ago and the ones of today.  I'm not saying I agree with his assessments, but I doubt he is condoning discriminatory laws or policies. 
RichardPrins wrote:
So you are (still) saying these ("religious freedom") laws are needed to specifically protect Christian bigots? {#Mrgreen}

 kurtster wrote:
Yes, because Islamic bigots get a free pass.

Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 7, 2015 - 12:40pm

 islander wrote:
 
So your argument is that we should have laws that allow discrimination?  Or that policies that are discriminatory are okay if they are are encouraged by a law?  Or that it's okay to have discriminatory policies in some places as long as you operate one non-discriminatory outlet somewhere?

I really haven't been able to follow anything you've spouted in a couple of pages now.  But please keep it up, nothing like having you tear down your own silly arguments. 

 
I don't think Kurt was arguing those points - you may be wandering into a scarecrow field there.  I think he was trying to point out the differences between those policies and practices of refusing services fifty years ago and the ones of today.  I'm not saying I agree with his assessments, but I doubt he is condoning discriminatory laws or policies.
R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Apr 7, 2015 - 12:31pm

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:
The lunch counter segregation was just Woolworth's store policy.
 
So the picture was taken on Feb. 1, 1960.

Wikipedia says:
De jure segregation, sanctioned or enforced by force of law, was stopped in the United States by federal enforcement of a series of Supreme Court decisions after Brown v. Board of Education in 1954.
Of course de facto bigots unfortunately continue to exist.
islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 7, 2015 - 12:30pm

 Red_Dragon wrote:

{#Lol}

 
Socialist is in the F***ing name!. 
islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 7, 2015 - 12:29pm

 kurtster wrote:

But the bus thing was not a policy.  It was the law.

The lunch counter situation was encouraged by the law. 

And i ate at a few Woolworth's lunch counters in California in the same time.  No black only areas there.

  
So your argument is that we should have laws that allow discrimination?  Or that policies that are discriminatory are okay if they are are encouraged by a law?  Or that it's okay to have discriminatory policies in some places as long as you operate one non-discriminatory outlet somewhere?

I really haven't been able to follow anything you've spouted in a couple of pages now.  But please keep it up, nothing like having you tear down your own silly arguments. 
aflanigan

aflanigan Avatar

Location: At Sea
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 7, 2015 - 12:23pm


kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: drifting
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 7, 2015 - 12:17pm

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:

The lunch counter segregation was just Woolworth's store policy.

 
But the bus thing was not a policy.  It was the law.

The lunch counter situation was encouraged by the law. 

And i ate at a few Woolworth's lunch counters in California in the same time.  No black only areas there.
ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 7, 2015 - 12:02pm

 kurtster wrote:

There were laws on the books that required these situations to exist.  This is not the same, not even close.

 
The lunch counter segregation was just Woolworth's store policy.
meower

meower Avatar

Location: i believe, i believe, it's silly, but I believe
Gender: Female


Posted: Apr 7, 2015 - 11:57am

 RichardPrins wrote:

You mean like the laws that have been enacted to prohibit same-sex marriage and now "religious freedom restoration" laws that allow bigots to sue if they feel someone has impinged on their religious conscience?

It's rather amusing to see a Teabagger defend government laws for the religious.

 

exactly. thank goodness for you and Scott. All i need to do is react to Hitler vids.
R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: Apr 7, 2015 - 11:55am

 kurtster wrote:
There were laws on the books that required these situations to exist. (...)
 
You mean like the laws that have been enacted to prohibit same-sex marriage and now "religious freedom restoration" laws that allow bigots to sue if they feel someone has impinged on their religious conscience?

It's rather amusing to see a Teabagger defend more government laws for the religious.
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Apr 7, 2015 - 11:55am

 meower wrote:
Shut down the thread!

 
{#Lol}
meower

meower Avatar

Location: i believe, i believe, it's silly, but I believe
Gender: Female


Posted: Apr 7, 2015 - 11:54am

Shut down the thread!
meower

meower Avatar

Location: i believe, i believe, it's silly, but I believe
Gender: Female


Posted: Apr 7, 2015 - 11:52am

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:

If anything, I see bigots and hypocrites trying to enact legislation that says they can continue to behave badly, only they've doubled down on the gambit that by calling that bad behavior essential to their "religion," they will get a pass.

 



Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next