Your Universal Remote Control Center
RemoteCentral.com
Custom Installers' Lounge Forum - View Post
Up level
Up level
The following page was printed from RemoteCentral.com:

Login:
Pass:
 
 

Original thread:
Post 162 made on Friday November 4, 2011 at 12:35
BigPapa
Super Member
Joined:
Posts:
October 2005
3,139
On November 4, 2011 at 11:26, avgenius1 said...
The term you are looking for concerning religion or political view would be xenophobe or bigot. He did not say that he would not teach Arabs. If you are a Christian Arab he would be willing to teach you the class. Since Jewish people aren't generally considered Arabs, and some may even be offended by being called Arab, it is a stretch to call him racist. That is my only point. We have words that describe what this guy is and yet the wrong termonology is still being used. That means people either don't know the correct definition of racist or bigot or xenophobe OR they are just being assholes and using racist because it is more controversial. I am not defending the position this man has taken by any means but if we are going to be on the correct side of the argument it is important to use our words correctly.

Actually the Jews were always considered Arab but this change is only within the last few decades. Read the history of 'Semitic peoples.' Whether Keller was talking about Jews or not, who knows. He is clearly being a bigot, and 'non-Christian Arab' is a racial/religious classification. There is a religious component, and a racial component.

If he said 'I'll teach non pants-hanging-too-low-rapper Negroes' would that be a racial classification? I removed the religious qualifier and put in a social qualifier.

The term 'Arab' is a racial classification. His description is 'non(religious)+racial=approved,' which mean the alternate '(religious)+racial' or 'racial' are not approved. 

I find it odd that you are taking such a stand on this specific clarification. Maybe it's because you have an issue with 'assholes using racist because it's more controversial.' This situation is controversial enough, no need to make it more controversial. The facts are pretty clear, we have a radio ad and the Civil Rights Act to review and it seems he is against the law in 1,2, or maybe even 3 ways. You disagree on #3, so be it. But I am not an asshole for throwing this in to sweeten the pot.

But I'm glad you don't like the misuse of terms such as racist. I can count on your response the next time somebody says the headscratcher 'people who cry racism are the real racists.'


Hosting Services by ipHouse