caleb1633

27 minutes ago, shabby said:

730000 dead isn't deadly? The vaccine is not just about the one. It's about those the one could kill with the selfish decision to not get vaccinated.. I find it telling that those that refuse the vaccine are the very same one refusing to wear masks. And the vaccine process for this vaccine is not 1 year old. It began many years ago with the eRly Sars outbreak. 

78% of those deaths are people who were overweight. If we're going to mandate vaccines, let's also mandate diet and exercise routines.

18 hours ago, e808 said:

You do know that if u are on social media or made some type of purchase online that ur privacy has been compromised with all the data collecting and sharing.  
 

 

Yes and no. That depends on a lot of things. There's varying degrees of exposure and it depends on the platform, things like platform security, encryption, data exchange protocols, who has permissions to view your information, etc. You're correct that there is a massive amount of data we put out onto the internet though. It's just a matter of if someone can access it and use it in a way we wouldn't be okay with.

3 minutes ago, AUght2win said:

The privacy of personal medical history and records is supposed to be sacred. It's why HIPPA exists. 

It's disturbing how many authoritarian policies and philosophies are being accepted into the mainstream. People in this country don't know history, and have never had their freedoms revoked. Therefore, they don't have an appreciation for them. 

They have, and they just don't think about it. If someone sends an email on Gmail and it processes through a server in a foreign country, the government can collect on it under the provisions of the Patriot Act. This is another guise that will just surrender more of our privacy in the name of safety. "Privacy", btw, is something that the UN deemed an essential human right back in 1948. If you wouldn't be cool with someone on this board scrolling through the texts and pictures on your phone, then don't act like privacy and individual rights aren't something that's important to you.

1 minute ago, e808 said:

U can have an issue but it is what it is. I just see it as do I have the shot yes or no. Not like u being asked do u have a heart condition or cancer.

Will Smith in "Enemy of the State" said it best...

12 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Yeah! He could quit his job, I guess.

??

Only an arrogant psychopath would think they know better than anyone else what personal medical decisions someone should make.

Fire the WR coach again! My freaking God!

These refs remind me of someone from Tuscumbia whose name rhymes with Shmelen Weller.

Best play calling in the world is useless if the receivers drop every pass thrown to them.

I've fallen in love with Auburn Football all over again

1 minute ago, Weagle17 said:

What are y’all drinking?

A lot

Would love to see the first former assistant coach Saban loses to be Lane Kiffen.

I recall Bama losing to UL Monroe during Saban's first year. Bottom line: it is way too early to make any sort of judgment regarding Harsin's future legacy.

Tank has excellent field vision.

1 hour ago, Barnacle said:

I was told we would be...

Twas the classic fallback for why we should keep Malzahn. Kinda like saying, "My partner is an abusive ****, but what if I dump them and the next one is an abusive **** AND an alcoholic? I just can't take that risk!"

1 minute ago, tgrogan21 said:

2 straight games with 2 100 yard rushers! Have we ever had a true freshman rush for over 100 yards in their first two games?

Onterrio McCalebb in 2009

I think we're gonna make the spread

Tank seems to have solid vision

On 7/17/2021 at 1:51 PM, homersapien said:

First, I was not defending segregation, which is something I suspect I have a lot more experience with than you do.  Apartheid is no way to reconcile racism.

I was referring to things like historically black colleges which arguably offer some advantages to those who attend them.  I think it's also interesting to review instances of centers of black commerce - such as Tulsa - which was wiped out by white racism.  What are the implications of that?

Secondly, show me where CRT explicitly promotes segregation.  You keep making such comments without references.  In fact, I'd like to know exactly what documents you are using to define CRT. (Not speeches or comments made by supposed proponents, but original documents.) 

And it's not my fault that Republicans are so attracted to conspiracies. Hell, they now think government efforts to encourage vaccinations are some sort of government conspiracy. This is a classic example of irrational fear, an apparent specialty of Republicans.

I can fully appreciate and basically agree with the conclusion we are fundamentally a racist society. This is demonstrated by our history as well as modern statistics on wealth. And it's only natural to conclude that this racism is institutional as much as personal. It has been this way from the beginning. 

The question is whether or not we are capable of doing better.  I think we are, but it likely won't happen until there is a high degree of interracial marriage.

 

 

1) I'm not sure what Apartheid has to do with this.

2) There have been a litany of examples of racial segregation in some form that have occurred since CRT began taking root. See the Evergreen instance in 2016, see Columbia University graduations, see many of these corporate trainings where they divide people up by race, see universities where they have safe spaces where white people aren't allowed. It happens.

3) Historically black colleges still allow other racial groups in, so it isn't exactly an example of segregation on any level.

4) I have quoted the hell out of CRT's literature. Virtually every time you've asked me to do it, I have. That's where most of my opinions on this matter come from: the actual literature.

5) This is not a conspiracy theory. If anything, CRT is a conspiracy theory, believing that all of society is working to oppress everyone who's not a straight white cis male.

6) America is not fundamentally racist. We have a racist history, but the progress has been phenomenal since then. Many statistics can be cited to show this. For instance 7 of the 8 most successful ethic groups in the U.S. are considered minorities. Chinese Americans, Japanese Americans, Jewish Americans, Indian Americans, and Nigerian Americans are all more successful than white Americans.

7) Yes we can do better, and we were. CRT is not the path the progress.

As passionate as I am about fighting this cancerous ideology, I have concluded that I will not have any success in doing so with you, no matter how compelling an argument I make. I can't continue hashing it out on here as I have more important things to do than spinning my wheels with someone online who absolutely will not be open to anything I have to say on this subject. I've made my points on CRT many times over throughout this thread. If you actually want answers to your questions on it, feel free to go back and read what I've already said.

22 minutes ago, homersapien said:

CRT doesn't have me - or anyone else, including the government - "reinstituting segregation". 

But the idea is perhaps worthy of learned discussion.  It's not taboo or forbidden as you seem to think.

 

Lol in defense of segregation? Really? And if CRT isn't what's behind recent instances of racial segregation, what is? Liberalism? Nah, it fought to end that. Conservativism? Nah, not that either. Perhaps the same ideology that criticized the Brown vs. Board of Education decision??? You seem to have this view of CRT that paints it as far more innocent than it is, and it's usually based on a wave top definition of it. I wish it was as innocent as you make it out to be, but  it's not. I have to wonder if you'd feel differently if it wasn't Republicans who were fighting against it.

25 minutes ago, homersapien said:

What exactly is "revisionist" about it?

I should correct myself. The 1619 Project is somewhere between Historical Revisionism and Historical Negationism. It presents a historically innacurate reinterpretation of American history to further the narrative that our country is fundamentally racist.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/605152/

Just now, homersapien said:

Please point out where I said the 1619 project was "revisionist". 

I didn't say you did. I was only agreeing that we need to teach actual history, not revisionist, and used The 1619 Project as one such example.

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

False premise.

I disagree. If the Civil Rights Movement fought to end segregation and judging someone based on immutable characteristics alloted to them by chance, and CRT has us reinstituting segregation and judging someone based on immutable characteristics alloted to them by no fault of their own, would those things not be the opposite of each other?

1 hour ago, homersapien said:

First, let me say that Delores Huerta was way out of line when she said "Republicans hate Latinos".  That's a legitimate cause for backlash.,

Having said that, I think Republicans are shooting themselves in the foot by trying to demonize such "minority pride" programs as "anti-American" for political reasons, at least in the long term.  It only reinforces the image that Republicans are for white nationalism.

I am also concerned that they may over-correct on this.

And our history is our history.  We cannot fulfill what is hopefully our destiny - which is to live up to our founding documents literally (instead of mythologizing them) - without acknowledging that history.

I agree. The 1619 Project is every bit as much of a revisionist history as white Jesus is lol.

P.S.:

This article contained a one sentence description of CRT which I found compelling:

"At its core, critical race theory is an academic concept that looks at history, law and political science through the lens of race; a main tenet is that disparate racial outcomes are the result of institutions, not merely individuals, perpetuating racism. "

I have no issue with this statement, unfortunately the analysis of those things is made through the cynicism of Marxism/Critical Theory and Post-Modernism, and with this nihilism one can easily conclude that our country is irredeemable when it comes to the subject of race. The monumental progress that occured post-Civil Rights Era tells another story that offers a greater hope for the future of race relations. Why abandon the vehicle of progress that has brought about so much success? Sure it isn't perfect, and sure there's still residual effects, all of which should be identified and addressed; however, anything Marxist will always exacerbate the ills of society rather than ameliorating them.

That sounds like a worthy thesis that is worthy of debate at the high school level and above.

I don't mind CRT being something that is discussed in academia, but with a couple of caveats:

 

1. Not at the High School level. College level, I'll agree to. Our public education should prioritize traditional theories over cynical philosophical concepts. Critical Race "Theory" should be considered merely a hypothesis. It does not deserve the title of "Theory" since it can't be falsified any more than creationism, witchcraft, or astrology—all of which I am against being taught in public schools. If a private school wants to teach CRT, alchemy, witchcraft, astrology, and Critical Election Theory (about the 2020 election lol) then that's fine by me. When Russians are learning Algebra and Chemistry in late elementary school/early middle school, and the Chinese are years ahead of us on many defense technologies, perhaps we need to refocus our efforts on some of the hard disciplines that have brought great success to virtually all who have chosen to utilize the tools they provide.

2. If CRT allowed dissent, I'd be more on board with it. Right now, if a white person refuses to "admit their racism", that's a sign that their "white fragility" won't allow them to "admit their racism." That's cult-like thinking. If Einstein's Theory of Relativity can be challenged, then so can any other academic topic. Right now the zealots of CRT approach anyone who disagrees with them like the church did Galileo when he questioned their scientific understandings.

 

^^Good discussion.

3 minutes ago, homersapien said:

The second article is even more provocative if you assume Afghanistan is a lost cause by definition.  There are a sizable number of people in Afghanistan who want something better than what the Taliban offer.

(Btw, Shay is a "he".)

I'll check it out! I don't know if I'd say it's a "lost cause" as I think it depends on how you define victory. He* made a good point about the Vietnam War largely being seen as a disaster, but it did still fulfill much of its original purposes. I hadn't considered that.

And damn, I originally had "he", then saw "Shay" and didn't want to look like a misogynist lol, so I edited it to "she."