Just out of curiosity, what if someone makes it a point to become knowledgable and informed about Group X and ends up hating Group X anyway?

You are right in saying that we can't stop it if they aren't hurting others but it doesn't mean that I have to accept it. I do think my view that everyone is created equal is superior to those that are racists. From my experience racists are usually really inept in other areas as well. And yes you should have to desegregate your neighboorhood. If you want to be allowed to feel and say whatever you want then you have to accept that others are entitled to live wherever they want, within reason.

I think there are plenty of groups that a lot of people don't like, but in relation to things such as race I can't see any blanket reason that someone could say that allows them to hate them.

However in your hypothetical situation then fine they can hate you they want, However that's not what I was arguing in the first place. No one can stop anyone else from hating people, but what I was rejecting the idea that I should somehow be okay with it.

It's been a while since I logged on, but isn't this the same person who posted a story (that was deleted) where they stereotyped Italians and gypsies?

Fucking irony......er........or hypocrisy.

You're right. People can and should be allowed to be ignorant and hate others for no reason. Because if we start imposing rules on what someone can think or say, then, as another poster pointed out, you run the risk of an extremist getting up and flipping it around and banning your speech and thought.

As for neighborhoods, I don't mean to desegregate in a legal sense, but that if I and a group of people buy a plot of land and build houses so we can live together and form a commune like area, we shouldn't be forced to have a lottery and force someone out of the home in order to create ethnic diversity in the neighborhood. Ultimately I think a lot of opposition to getting rid of racism (aside from ignorance) is the feeling of it being forced upon people rather than it happening organically. When the gov't imposes a decree, there's natural resentment. As a society becomes wealthier and people no longer by and large have to toil from 4am till 10pm in fields to eek out a living to support a large agrarian family, it is my belief that people will on their own accord become more tolerant and inclusive.

You mean like being knowledgeable and informed about bigots, and hating them anyway ? Like that ?

Well, it depends on what you mean by racism. If you're talking about simple name-calling, then I don't really agree that it's neccesarilly true-blue racism, because, overall, the most damaging form of racism in the US is institutional. Somebody could say all the insensitive derogatory names toward another on an idividual level (based on race) that they want. But if there is no race-based domination or racial disadvantage involved, then it's not racism; it's petty bigotry between individuals - and they're just spouting off like dumb-fucks. Words have got nothing on the history of collective racism (action) in this country.

If by racism, you're talking about "hate-speech," then yes, they should be allowed to say it because it is a free country, and it is protected. And whom is going to disallow racists to be racist? It's impossible to govern somebody else's thought processes. You can't make a racist not racist, they've got to do it themselves.

What you're describing isn't a neighborhood though, it's private land. Of course you can't force people to let others live on their property. But you said neighborhood, and you really can't decide who can and can't live in the neighborhood you live in.

I am all for free speech. I'm the first one to defend almost everyone's right to protest, though I do think sometimes people take it too far and some limitations should be put up, but that's another discussion. I just don't think anyone should be told they should be okay with it. I can agree that someone should be allowed to say what they want to say, without thinking that they should be saying it. Something being allowed and approving of something are completely different.

You should that we should be tolerant of it. I'm not tolerant of ignorance. It's hurtful. I understand that you said you didn't agree with it, but I don't agree with being tolerant of other's ignorance past the point of letting it happen. I'm all for letting them have their stupid protests but it doesn't mean I can't think and say that they're horrible for it. About once every two months I have to see these stupid antigay protesters at my school. They are completely uniformed and have signs with things about how homosex is a threat to nation security. I understand that it's stupid but as a bisexual person it does hurt. I'm the first to argue with someone how says they shouldn't be allowed to do it, but it doesn't mean that I will just stand there and say "oh well it's okay. it's not my place to argue and condemn them for their actions."

That got really long winded so I'll end it now.

As I said, what I found absurd was the idea that I should somehow tolerate it and flag it as okay because "ehy it's what they think"
Let them protest all they want but you can't expect people to not get offended and write articles about how stupid it is.

The Mosaic > The Melting Pot

You're right. I think I misspoke. I didn't mean tolerance as in accepting it but rather what you said, that we can despise the ignorance but allow someone, at least in a legal sense, to have their stupid opinion. It's a slippery slope banning or limiting speech. People are dumb and should be educated, but by forcing change, I think more harm is caused than good. Educate people and those who don't want to learn, then I'll just feel sorry for them.

I do believe we agree.

Finally, someone has proven how scientifically accurate Do The Right Thing is.

Most of what's called "racism" now-a-days isn't really anything to do with race so much as culture. I know plenty of people who are scared of people from a certain culture, but don't give a damn about what colour their skin is. Like, being unphased by someone of middle eastern decent, but wary of someone who grew up in the middle east. For example, I know a gay man who is pretty prejudice towards most immigrants because they tend to be socially conservative.

I can't get on board with this because it's still far too general. It's like saying all men like sports. I hate sports, so I hate that generalization. At the same time, I can't really deny its truth...

If I hate Group Y because they hate Group X, is my hate more justified than Group Y's hate? Or is hate still just as ugly as it originally was?