Stokes no longer a Gator

Yeah, if you want to have this discussion, don't start it with such a dishonest framing. Nobody has said there's no punishment too harsh. There clearly are.

 

Don't kid yourself, Joe hasn't changed, he was just told what his platform was supposed to be from a speechwriter on a teleprompter

 

I'm not being dishonest at all, it's a fair question.

Then where exactly do you draw the line? And if you draw the line somewhere, then don't you have something in common with the people talking about the double standards, here? You're just choosing to focus on one side of the equation.

 

Compare how the Eagles treated Riley Cooper after he used the n-word in a malicious way (stayed on the team, played, and received a lucrative contract extension after the season) to how NFL teams treated Colin Kaepernick. It blows the argument you're making about white victimhood to smithereens.

 

A person using the n-word without intent to harm? Losing their job or scholarship isn't unreasonable. Physically harming them or seeking to ruin their life is (beyond just losing an opportunity). A person using the n-word with intent to harm? Death is too far. (And in all cases, the government should stay out of it, if the person isn't employed by the government.)

 

One bad incident off the field is nowhere near comparable to repeated attention-seeking on-screen incidents.

Kaepernick voluntarily sabotaged himself moreso than people who literally raped dozens of women and others who possibly killed people.

 

Wow, you're really going out on a limb there.

Personally, I draw the line at life in prison without parole if somebody used the N-word in a prejudicial manner (sarcasm).

 

Yeah, go bother somebody else. I answered your question honestly after you started the conversation off with a disingenuous post, yet here you are again with bad faith and dishonesty. My post was quite clear that the government shouldn't be involved, which means no prison or fines period.

I was talking about personal consequences. You call a Black person the n-word in public, and I have zero issue with them punching you in the face. I draw the line at death.

It really says it all that protesting for racial justice is worse than a white player becoming angry and publicly shouting about how he was going to fight every n-word if he didn't get his way. Thank you for proving my point.

 

You draw the line at death for someone saying the n-word to a Black person. I think that's more than a little excessive.

This is our conversation in a nutshell:
715: So all social retribution is justified?
gator_lawyer: Stop being dishonest.
715: Okay, where do you draw the line?
gator_lawyer: I don't think people should kill people for using the N-Word.

For someone who whines about honesty, you have a way of deliberately ignoring my points. You're singling out Riley Cooper because he happens to be a convenient case. You didn't bring up Deshaun Watson, Michael Vick, or Ray Lewis despite also having second chances because they are excellent players and because their issues were off the field.

You can be one of the worst people in America and be in the NFL. You just can't polarize half the audience with shenanigans on-camera week after week on NFL time.

 

Deshaun Watson, Michael Vick, and Ray Lewis are not white. They are irrelevant to the claim you made before, which was that society is biased against white people and the way they're treated for saying the n-word is proof of that. I'm not going to defend the straw men arguments you create.

Thank you for proving my point again. The "audience" was far less bothered by a white man hurling the n-word at Black people doing their jobs than they were by Colin Kaepernick's protest.

 

They are entirely relevant, they offer a legitimate alternative explanation as to why Kaepernick was disciplined far more harshly than Riley Cooper. It's easier to get away with off-the-field incidents in the NFL, even if they result in prison time in years, than it is to get away with repeated antics on the field that alienate half the audience.

They were also less bothered by a man raping women, a man potentially killing someone, and a man serving prison time for dog-fighting... as I just demonstrated. And all of those examples happen to include Black players.

 

The lack of self awareness yall have is unfathomable.

 

Are you talking about the GOP led by Lincoln that ended slavery in this country. Actually you are right the GOP really has not changed it's stance throughout the years, decades and centuries in regards to racism.

 

No, that GOP died a long time ago. How do I know? Because when we talk about tearing down the monuments to the Confederacy, the current GOP tells us that those monuments are their "heritage."

The white "conservatives" in the South started flipping parties when liberals threw their support behind civil rights. That's how the South went from being dominated by the Democratic Party to being dominated by the Republican Party.

 

Disagree. White folk generally at some point in the last 10,000 years came from a continent. Black folk at some point in time in the last 10,000 years came from a continent. Some black folks’ ancestors were moved against their will, but so were some white folks’. Not equating numbers because I don’t have enough knowledge to compare the two sets of circumstances. Not ignoring impact from the ability or inability to assimilate. Just saying that black folk and white folk both have a basic understanding of their geography of origin. You seem to be saying otherwise. Your reasoning doesn’t seem to be a valid basis to give one group a higher level of recognition in the printed word.

 

I see what's going on here. Bye-bye, dude.

 

Lincoln didn’t tear down the monuments either. In fact, Lincoln allowed quite a few southern traditions to continue.

 

The GOP of today is much more like the old Southern Democrats commonly referred to as Dixiecrats than it is like the party of Lincoln. The overwhelming majority of Republicans in the House and Senate voted to enact both the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. In 2021 the overwhelming majority of Republicans opposed both the Freedom to Vote Act and the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, kind of like the way the Dixiecrats opposed the original Voting Rights Act in 1965.