re: #374 wheat-dogg, raker of forests, master of steam

So apparently my opinion is not worthy, but yours is. Thanks for making that clear.

I am done discussing this with you. Drop the debate. You’re not convincing me. I am not convincing you.

I’m fine with dropping the debate. I don’t consider shielding racists from their actions in the public square,. which they proudly recorded, a worthy position.

If that is the position you’re taking, then you also don’t consider my position (backed with evidence from journalists, newspapers which report juvenile names in crimes [which this is not], or law [which doesn’t prohibit reporting juvenile names, as I also backed up] as unworthy.

So we can drop it, with the understanding we disagree, but we don’t agree.

re: #371 HappyWarrior

Listen I’m just saying. We don’t need to know their names to condemn them. Some things you just don’t need to do. I agree wholeheartedly in the criticism being made here but what good does it do you to know their names.

Generic condemnation of racist acts, but don’t condemn the racists. Got it.

As I noted above, if even one of the people involved had stepped in and said “this isn’t cool,” that person would be all over the press (by name).

Your argument is it’s okay to name people when they do good things, but they should be shielded when they do bad things.

Apparently my upbringing, ethics, or something, prohibits me from seeing that as logical or reasonable.

So good-night y’all. I need a break from this place when racism is defended as “we shouldn’t out racists.”