Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Clearly, she isn't "woke".has anyone seen the youtube selfie?
a black woman sitting is a car and explaining
she doesn't see the disadvantage in being black
she doesn't feel oppressed
but neither is she sleep walkingClearly, she isn't "woke".
Sorry, but your position isn't clear to me. Do you think systematic racism against Black people factually exists, or not?Clearly, she isn't "woke".
Adding "systematic" changes the issue.Sorry, but your position isn't clear to me. Do you think systematic racism against Black people factually exists, or not?
well I don't think soSorry, but your position isn't clear to me. Do you think systematic racism against Black people factually exists, or not?
Yes, thank you.Perhaps you mean "systemic"?
So, you don't believe systemic racism exists, it's just a couple of bad individuals, and you also believe that Black people in the US are systematically advantaged.Racism against them exists, but it appears to originate from individuals, ie, not a system.
Moreover, the system even favors them with the vestiges of affirmative action.
You've completely changed my meaning.Yes, thank you.
So, you don't believe systemic racism exists, it's just a couple of bad individuals, and you also believe that Black people in the US are systematically advantaged.
Thank you for making your stance clear.
Now I know I do not need to waste my time discussing these issues with you.
You've completely changed my meaning.
About these recurring erroneous inferences."Racism against them exists, but it appears to originate from individuals, ie, not a system."
-> so, you don't believe systemic racism exists, it's just a couple of bad individuals
"Moreover, the system even favors them with the vestiges of affirmative action."
-> you also believe that Black people in the US are systematically advantaged
Would you mind point out where I have changed the meaning of your statements?
Yes, it's pretty clear to me that you are not interested in a debate here.About these recurring erroneous inferences.
It's not for me to determine whether tis language difficulties or intent.
But whichever, it's uninteresting to address your constructs instead
of what I actually posted.
You're correct about my not wanting a debate.Yes, it's pretty clear to me that you are not interested in a debate here.
Looks like my initial assessment was correct after all.
It is interesting that you are letting your assumptions run the dialogue. From my perspective, you are interested in winning, not discussing.Yes, it's pretty clear to me that you are not interested in a debate here.
Looks like my initial assessment was correct after all.
Don't worry, I'm leaving.It is interesting that you are letting your assumptions run the dialogue. From my perspective, you are interested in winning, not discussing.
That wasn't the point at all, stop playing the volunteer victim (cowards do that and I think you are better than that).Don't worry, I'm leaving.
Notice: Jordan Peterson is a polarizing figure. Please be respectful as this is meant as a prompt for genuine discussion. Thanks!
has anyone taken 8minutes to watch the video?