I disagree with your interpretation of riverman's initial post. I think it is possible to make reference to an individual's religion--even in a derogatory fashion--without that reference being derogatory to the entire religion or all adherent's thereto. For example, if someone suggested that a "Christian" neo-nazi domestic terrorist should be tattooed with a star of David and a "666" before being executed, I wouldn't take that as a referendum on all Christians, but as a desire for that particular person to suffer a fate that he would consider an ultimate indignity. I viewed riverman's post in the same light.
That's not remotely the same thing. He stereotypically referred to the Muslim as one who didn't want to smell like pork on the way to heaven. Not sure how that can be construed any other way.
I don't know the Quran, so I don't know if there's any accuracy in riverman's statement. Do you know whether or not there's any indication in Islam as to how exposure to "unclean" animals immediately before death would impact ones afterlife? If so, wouldn't his statement, though "stereotypical", actually be truthful?
Again, if the terrorist was black would he not want to smell like chicken and watermelon on his way to heaven?
This is a massive false equivalency: I don't believe there's any edict present in black culture that consuming chicken or watermelon would prevent entrance into heaven, which is what riverman was saying about the muslim terrorist encountering pork prior to heading into the afterlife. Again, his statement suggested a desire for him to endure a punishment that would (presumably) deny him the very fate he sought to attain. It wasn't solely steeped in racial stereotype; it was based in religious practice and disciplinary irony (which was also the basis of my "mark of the beast on a Christian's forehead" corollary example). I'm sorry that you don't see the difference, but I certainly do.
Add grape soda and menthols and we have a deal. I'm with you on this topic, by the way. It seems that people can get real racist after an event. It's like a light switch.
I would also dispute the notion of racism in riverman's statement. If the terrorist had been white, the post would have been no less applicable to the situation. Religion and race are two very different things.
If the terrorist had been white we would have talked about his mental health and then posted conspiracies that there was a 2nd truck and driver.
Yeah no. We'll certainly disagree here. And I never called it racist. I called it stereotypical which is akin to racism. Grouping a demographic together and attributing something to them is just that.
As a society, that's probably true. But I'm talking about riverman individually, not America collectively. I wouldn't attribute that tendency to him.
Yayayayayayayayayaya. It worked. Haven't posted in at least a week but KNEW I could get Dviss mad just by liking posts. Talk about a snowflake. Haha
Just because I post in opposition to you, or call you out on something, doesn't mean I'm mad. Assume much?
This. If a killer is white, the narrative is always about mental health. Did he have Aspergers, Autism? Was the government secretly helping him? When it's a black man, they are already dead. They get shot for being black in a car. For playing with toy guns. For having hoodies on. For anything. When the killer is a Muslim the narrative turns to dark shit. I hope he's raped with a pork dick while he dies. And people applaud that.
