Mortai Gravesend said:
BaronUberstein said:
Mortai Gravesend said:
BaronUberstein said:
Mortai Gravesend said:
ToTaL LoLiGe said:
Mortai Gravesend said:
ToTaL LoLiGe said:
Mortai Gravesend said:
ToTaL LoLiGe said:
I do take offense to flag burning, It's like calling a black man "a dirty ******" or a brown person "a paki bastard" except you're saying it to an entire country. I'm from the UK, I also object to the burning of anything that represents a culture so koran burning, bible burning, poppy burning is offensive. I'm not personally offended by bible or koran burning because I'm not a muslim or christian but it is disrespectful.
What? No it isn't. Those are other terms are discriminatory and have baggage behind them. Burning a flag protests what the nation is doing. Burning a Koran or Bible protests the ideas they stand for.
I didn't say flag burning was the same as burning religious texts.
Okay. Drop the religious part and that still leaves my issue with saying it's the same as a racial slur.
I
personally feel that flag burning is as offensive as a racial slur.
Alright, I personally feel that makes as much sense as wearing a shoe on your head. Presumably there should be some logic behind it, but apparently not.
Well, race is an artificial construct based on different traits in the same species. Nations are artificial constructs as well, based either on group ideology or cultural uniformity. So...they're pretty much the same. National pride has a bit more to stand on than say, racial pride though, because a nation is actually a group of people working together verses say, the amount of melanin in one's skin.
Yeah, that's bullshit. One artificial construct is not equivalent to another. For example, the first refers to actual people. The second doesn't have to refer to the people of the nation. Humans are walking pieces of flesh with 2 arms and 2 legs. So are a chimps. Do you think they're pretty much the same thing? I can play stupid and narrowly select certain characteristics of two things to try and make a comparison too, doesn't make it a good comparison.
I'm just saying, the concept of "race" is silly to me. We're humans, there is nothing that prevents any of the 'races' from having children with each other.
Which does not make insulting a nation the same as insulting a race. A race, however flimsy the reason for the classification, still refers to people. So throwing racial slurs insults a whole lot of people. An attack on a nation though is not necessarily an attack on the people who live in the country.
And we are very similar to chimps, we share a large amount of DNA, we're both mammals, and there's a reason chimps were used for space flights and are still used for some medical testing. Now, perhaps I'm focusing too much on your example, it's 5:30 am and I'm hardly at my peak mental state, heh.
We're still not chimps =|
But my overall point is; why is it so absurd to get angry over an insult at one's nation if it isn't absurd to get angry over a racial slur, if both things are merely caused by geological divides? What makes national pride wrong and racial pride "right"? Couldn't both be "wrong"?
I'd argue that at the very least, national pride has more backing too it in a democratic nation, because one has an investment in said nation via their vote. The government's actions are based on the collective votes, and thus an insult to the nation is in part an insult to every voter. Then again, maybe people have a mental investment in their skin color.
You seem to be confused by what a race refers to and why a racial slur is insulting. It isn't racial pride. If I call someone a ****** or something then I'm insulting them personally. Don't fling some stupid racial pride strawman out, pride has jack shit to do with it.
Also, no need to bring out the words like "bullshit", I'm just trying to discuss things in a friendly manner, and if I come across as rude at any point, just say so. As I said, I'm kind of tired. >__>
Then don't give me ridiculous comparisons =/
Well, we'll have to agree to disagree, because I see no reason why a racial slur should be insulting to somebody unless they have an investment in their race. It would be like somebody calling me a "rusted over robot", I'm not a robot, the insult makes no sense. I have nothing invested emotionally in the idea of myself as a robot. That's what I'm trying to say, that if one has no investment in something, there is no reason to be insulted over it. Thus, to be insulted by a racial slur, one has to have an emotional investment in the construct of race. They have to identify themselves by that concept. Thus, if one doesn't identify themselves by the concept of race but instead just think of themselves as human, I see no reason why racial slurs should rile them up, because it wouldn't apply to them. Of course, I could just be stupid and simply not understand how other people think.
I don't see the comparison as so ridiculous, but again, it seems we think differently on a basic level. I see insulting a group one has invested in as a personal insult, as one has put time and effort, as well as an emotional investment, into that group. If somebody said to me, "Your family is terrible", I would take offense to that because I am a member of my family. It's a category that includes myself. But if somebody said to me "your mother is terrible", I have no reason to be offended, as I am not under the category of 'my mother'. Of course, I can still argue with them that they are wrong, if I believe they are incorrect, but I don't see a reason to get upset over such a statement.