White woman who hit black man during argument about whether he could be on the beach is charged with a hate crime

[Rubee]

IMHO it is wrong to label anyone a racist.

Anyone? IMHO, it is only wrong to claim racism without good cause, as anything else. There’s nothing special around racism that makes it different from any other charge and makes it out of bounds.

Many people are racist, and no, it is not good and acting like it doesn’t exist won’t help it grow any less. The only problem I see is assuming that it automatically means one is evil if they have racist attitudes instead of seeing it as a problem that takes a while to be removed from a society. I assume that’s why many White Americans act like its a myth despite a lot of data; I assume that because the other explanations for the attitudes would impute bad motives like lying to these efforts which it does not make sense to me to impute.

 

[Motherwit]

Feanor2:

Well if she, and other racists didn’t spew their hatred openly they wouldn’t have these problems.

She did not spew.

She was asked one loaded (not open-ended) question, “Is it because I am black?” She said, “Yes.”

A person can’t really egg somone on to say racist things.

Why not?

The egging wasn’t “Is it because I am black”? The egging was “What do you want to do. Kill me?” That was insulting at best but considering that man had done nothing whatsoever to make her scared or distressed. He never mentioned race at all before the ‘do you want to kill me’ slight.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

Anyone?

no, it is not good and acting like it doesn’t exist won’t help it grow any less.

I am not saying it doesn’t exist.It is real. I am saying it is not our place to judge or look into another person’s heart and decide that person is a racist and that is why he or she said or did what they did. We, without them telling us, can not read another person’s motives.

 

[Rubee]

Yes, the story was just confusing.

She doesn’t say n- and then she does. . .

I’ve been angry at people who were black a few times in my life. I had a black roommate who stole my wedding ring. I was. . . . not happy at all. I didn’t call him n. though as I’m not racist so I don’t say racist things.

I was attacked another time by a black guy late at night. I did call him some unpleasant things but not n. as I’m not racist.

Yep! I’m all with you. If you didn’t already think those things were contemptuous, I dont think theyd easily pop up as a handy insult to use against others.

I was once ill-treated by a blind man and a rative of mine, quite angered, poked fun at his disability, and I remember feeling a visceral reaction to their statements that made me stop them right then from saying anything more. No matter how hurt I was, it didnt make me see blindness as something to use as an insult.

I’ve also worked quite a bit around some awful people of different races because of the nature of my old job and do not recall once thinking to say racist things in anger. I was mo tempted to say rude and brutally honest things about their flaws.

People who go to racist and similar insults do so because they already perceive those qualities as some sort of flaw or lesser thing on some level, even if they normally have enough sense and control not to say it.

 

[Rubee]

I am saying it is not our place to judge or look into another person’s heart and decide that person is a racist and that is why he or she said or did what they did. We, without them telling us, can not read another person’s motives

Racism is an attitude and belief system. One needs not read hearts to detect it. You infer it the same way you do criminal intent: from behaviors and patterns. Otherwise, good luck trying to say anyone is a murderer who did not make a blatant confession.

Again, what you cannot do is tell whether someone is knowingly intending evil: thats what the caution againt heart-reading is about. It’s not to act like we can’t infer attitudes, perspectives, world-views, and belief systems from people’s own words and actions. We absolutely can and do: Every single day.

In fact, members of this board are quite fond of it when it comes to those big bad leftists and their nefarious plans.

 

[gam197]

Yep! I’m all with you. If you didn’t already think those things were contemptuous, I dont think theyd easily pop up as a handy insult to use against others.

People who go to racist and similar insults do so because they already perceive those qualities as some sort of flaw or lesser thing on some level, even if they normally have enough sense and control not to say it.

The woman in question Sacramento Karen was angered because the woman accused of saying a word and she said over and over she never said it. She kept repeating to her “I said excuse me”

They are about 15 feet apart. The Black Woman initially walked by her and the white woman mumbled something about her Black husband according to the Black Woman but she accused of calling her a name. The white woman denies it.

After a much-heated dialogue, the Black woman got closer, threw something at her, came up to her, got in her face as the white woman backed away, and dared her to say it.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

Racism is an attitude and belief system.

Agree

One needs not read hearts to detect it.

One can suspect it. One can suspect that it is someone’s motive but watching a two minute video clip of a partial situation in no way gives another human the right to read another person’s motives or hearts.

Otherwise, good luck trying to say anyone is a murderer who did not make a blatant confession.

Deciding if someone is a murderer or not is based on evidence of actions and the crime scene and eye witnessed accounts that they committed that murder. Confessions can be thrown out. Also once deciding if someone committed that murder doesn’t mean the judge and jury know the heart and mind of the murderer.

Plus murder is not an attitude or belief system. It is an action.

In the same way, we can judge whether or not a person’s action was a racist action or not, but not the motive at the time or if said action was done because they are filled with racism.

what you cannot do is tell whether someone is knowingly intending evil: thats what the caution againt heart-reading is about.

Exactly. We cannot tell whether someone is knowing intending the evil of racism. We can not say from watching them what is going on in their heart at the time. It’s just not possible.

It’s not to act like we can’t infer attitudes, perspectives, world-views, and belief systems from people’s own words and actions. We absolutely can and do: Every single day.

Exactly, from people’s own words and actions we can infer but we can not not know for a fact what is going on inside their heart and mind, especially not enough to label someone from a 2 minute video clip and ruin their life.

If someone is clearly speaking out hate against another race, exposing their heart and mind, and living a life of separating from that race or harming that race, then I would agree we can conclude that they are racist, but even then we would not be able to read their heart and mind and know how they came to be that way.

A good thing to do would be to pray for that person.

 

[Theo520]

Kafka still rules!

Bist du auch ein Ubermensch?

 

[Rubee]

Plus murder is not an attitude or belief system. It is an action.

Nope. To be guilty of murder, the state has to prove both the action (killing) and intent. It’s called actus reus (action) and mens rea (the mental element) and without the latter, you cannit establisg murder and lots of crimes that are not crafted in terms of strict liability.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

The courts can show without knowing the motive that one person killed another person, yes, but in order to show motive and intent the person who did the killing must be questioned and examined along with the situation and history of relationship and so much more evidence in order to prove murder and intent beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Courts do not know a person’s heart, mind and motive with a two minute cell phone clip.

 

[Motherwit]

Strike a member of a sacred class and your charges get upgraded. So was he more injured by a little old lady because of the alleged motive?

Dude starts livestreaming and calling the lady a “dumb ****” before anything happens. I have little sympathy for him and the slight infringement upon his person.

A question about the term ‘sacred class’. This seems to me to be an extremely derogatory way to talk about black people. It struck me that way when I first read it. Am I mistaken?

 

[Sarcelle]

gam197:

They were egging her and put the words in her mouth.

I really hate it when people of color use mind tricks to get me to say racist things

You gotta be careful. Some these people of color are Jedi knights.
They could force you to say racist things, even if we all know racism no longer exists in these enlightened times.

 

[Sarcelle]

I think he meant in the oppression caste system, black men > white women which is ridiculous.

We all know that it’s white men who are the most oppressed.

 

[Sarcelle]

The red pillers are another breed.

They hate people of color, LGBTQ, and women of all races.

One wonders, isn’t there anything they don’t hate?

 

[Sarcelle]

You’re right.

It starts with self hate and then it just radiates outward.

 

[WingedHussar]

Leftists speak of their undefined concept of “hate” as if it is the greatest sin ever. However the Bible speaks quite frequently of God hating and we are told to be like God. A fascinating juxtaposition if I do say so myself.

 

[Regular_Atheist]

The Bible also speaks of God loving though. Most people love and hate, so I guess we’re all like God in that sense.

 

[Motherwit]

What is so derogatory about stating that a particular demographic has been given unearned privileges by society? According to some of the posters on this board, one would think that such actions are praiseworthy and part of Catholic morality.

Do you called the disabled a ‘sacred class’? Do you call babies and children a ‘sacred class’?

 

[WingedHussar]

Do you called the disabled a ‘sacred class’? Do you call babies and children a ‘sacred class’?

I would argue that the law should treat both groups somewhat differently since babies cannot take care of themselves and that certain reasonable accommodations should be made for disabled individuals so that they can vote, receive a public education, etc. In that sense, I would consider those groups protected classes since they receive legal protections above and beyond what the average, able-bodied adult receives.

 

[Motherwit]

I would argue that the law should treat both groups somewhat differently since babies cannot take care of themselves and that certain reasonable accommodations should be made for disabled individuals so that they can vote, receive a public education, etc. In that sense, I would consider those groups protected classes since they receive legal protections above and beyond what the average, able-bodied adult receives.

Ok as you redefine the parameters, I’ll adjust my questions. 17th century anti Catholic America. A law was enacted in Maryland called the Act of Toleration which stated that addressing Catholics with “blasphemy and the calling of opprobrious religious names” became punishable offenses. These Catholics were normal able bodied citizens. Is that an unearned privilege that makes them a derogatory ‘sacred class’?