are you a racist??

First topic message reminder :

this test has been attempted before but the lefty mclunatic clan are too shit scared to answer honestly because it exposes the basic fact that all humans are inherently racist, however i raise this issue regularly as it amuses me to watch them squirm

walking along one day admiring the countryside and marveling at how wonderful multiculturalism and mass immigration is, you are suddenly jolted from your idealistic daydreams of a wonderful multicultural multiracial utopia living side by side, by cries for help.

"OH NO" you think as You begin to move quickly towards the cries for help, when you are suddenly comforted with a bizarre spectacle.

two men are hanging from the side of a cliff by their finger tips, you take a second to wonder what could have happened..................it must have been that naughty smellybandit who pushed them off         

drat and damnation!!!!!!!!!!!!!! how naughty smellybandit is and so racist too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!           

when you look back to the two men you quickly realize that you are in a position to save only one of these men

both men are disease free

both men are single

both men are 25 years of age

both men are working professionals

both men are english

both men are exactly 3m away from you

both men are holding onto a part of the cliff that is crumbling at exactly the same rate

both men are the same in every way you may inquire about EXCEPT FOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

EXCEPT FOR their race

one man is black

one man is white

both men will die if you do nothing

but you have time to save only one of them

black or white??

who do you save??

 ::sexbnan:  ::sexbnan:  ::sexbnan:  ::sexbnan:  ::sexbnan: 

You asked a stupid question Smelly, I already said that most people would save either...

Who ever they are nearest too

Whoever appeared weakest

Or would try to save both.


It's a bullshit question Smelly and now your trying to make liars out us ffs.

smelly_bandit wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Actually he called them racist Eds; it is right up there. By his twisted logic if you choose (ie: discriminate) in this case based on skin colour- you aren't racist; but if you wont answer you are. WTF?

And of course people care about being called racist- it is a harsh allegation and unfair to people who actually are concerned with equal rights and respect for others- thing smelly most definitely does not.

However; I am of a more easy going view on this. Am I 'a racist', as in openly hostile to those of different ethnicity and willing to discriminate against others different to me on a day to day basis- no I'm not.

But am I racist in that I would probably save the white guy in this unlikely scenario? Yes I am. And it IS racist Eds because you and I and others WOULD be choosing solely on that one factor- how is that not racist? It is instinctive; and goes back to base tribalism- and a word we use to define that is 'racist'. It doesn't mean we are racist by the common understanding though.

i wish i could thank you for this

"It is instinctive; and goes back to base tribalism"

you have just made the case for what i have been arguing all along elizel - that everyone is inherently "racist" but we are not,

it is as you have just made clear, instinctive tribalism to choose "one of our own"

that instinct is what didge and the rest are ashamed of, since they are indoctrinated to believe that it is racist when it is only natural and yet they cannot accept their own nature

and that is why i would not call you a racist for choosing  

The key here is in the meanings of 'racist' that I laid out. YOU want them to believe they are racist like you are racist; and that in being so they are just as bad as you.

Which clearly none of them are.

I don't presume to know the reasons people chose not to answer but my guess was it as much to rob you of any satisfaction as anything else- which clearly didn't work since you exploded like a 12 year old who just downed a can of coke after a packet of skittles  ::D:: 

Too late now but the results would have been far more interesting had the question been forwarded by someone else to begin with   

smelly_bandit wrote:this test has been attempted before but the lefty mclunatic clan are too shit scared to answer honestly because it exposes the basic fact that all humans are inherently racist, however i raise this issue regularly as it amuses me to watch them squirm

walking along one day admiring the countryside and marveling at how wonderful multiculturalism and mass immigration is, you are suddenly jolted from your idealistic daydreams of a wonderful multicultural multiracial utopia living side by side, by cries for help.

"OH NO" you think as You begin to move quickly towards the cries for help, when you are suddenly comforted with a bizarre spectacle.

two men are hanging from the side of a cliff by their finger tips, you take a second to wonder what could have happened..................it must have been that naughty smellybandit who pushed them off         

drat and damnation!!!!!!!!!!!!!! how naughty smellybandit is and so racist too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!           

when you look back to the two men you quickly realize that you are in a position to save only one of these men

both men are disease free

both men are single

both men are 25 years of age

both men are working professionals

both men are english

both men are exactly 3m away from you

both men are holding onto a part of the cliff that is crumbling at exactly the same rate

both men are the same in every way you may inquire about EXCEPT FOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

EXCEPT FOR their race

one man is black

one man is white

both men will die if you do nothing

but you have time to save only one of them

black or white??

who do you save??

 ::sexbnan:  ::sexbnan:  ::sexbnan:  ::sexbnan:  ::sexbnan: 

..and the odds of all the above coming into play as far greater than winning the jackpot on the lottery.

..same boxer shorts too?..same skid mark patterns over them?  

Joy Division wrote:You asked a stupid question Smelly, I already said that most people would save either...

Who ever they are nearest too

Whoever appeared weakest

Or would try to save both.


It's a bullshit question Smelly and now your trying to make liars out us ffs.

In fairness to smelly (and be aware I DO NOT like being fair to smelly haha); the question is clearly a one or the other question- imagine they are both as near or far, both as weak and the moment you save one the other dies   

Eilzel wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

i wish i could thank you for this

"It is instinctive; and goes back to base tribalism"

you have just made the case for what i have been arguing all along elizel - that everyone is inherently "racist" but we are not,

it is as you have just made clear, instinctive tribalism to choose "one of our own"

that instinct is what didge and the rest are ashamed of, since they are indoctrinated to believe that it is racist when it is only natural and yet they cannot accept their own nature

and that is why i would not call you a racist for choosing  

The key here is in the meanings of 'racist' that I laid out. YOU want them to believe they are racist like you are racist; and that in being so they are just as bad as you.

Which clearly none of them are.

I don't presume to know the reasons people chose not to answer but my guess was it as much to rob you of any satisfaction as anything else- which clearly didn't work since you exploded like a 12 year old who just downed a can of coke after a packet of skittles  ::D:: 

Too late now but the results would have been far more interesting had the question been forwarded by someone else  to begin with   

you don't have the authority to lay out the meaning of racism for humanity, but you have correctly identified that the choosing has nothing to do with racism and everything to do with instinctive tribalism

and that is EXACTLY what i was trying to get people to accept

read the first line of my OP what do i say??

i say that all humans are inherently racist

they are not, they are however instinctively tribal which society has come to incorrectly identify as racism, thus people perceive their own nature to be racist

which brings me back to my point - that didge sassy ben and the rest all immediately and INSTINCTIVELY answered the question in their own minds, and then were immediately racked with guilt and shame due to their social indoctrination which led them to see themselves as racist

they couldn't accept that and couldn't understand that its only natural and therefore made a great spectacle of themselves as they avoided answering

you can choose to believe whatever you want, but i put this scenario together with specific objectives and goals in mind and those objectives have been achieved

believe it or not YOU are the only person to tick the box about how instinctive tribalism destroys the idea that a white person saving the white man is not racism at all, and the best part is you came to that conclusion without any prompting from me  ::alahoo:: 

i think we have done this to death now  ::dedhrs:: 

Joy Division wrote:You asked a stupid question Smelly, I already said that most people would save either...

Who ever they are nearest too

Whoever appeared weakest

Or would try to save both.


It's a bullshit question Smelly and now your trying to make liars out us ffs.

dont take your guilt out on me

smelly_bandit wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

The key here is in the meanings of 'racist' that I laid out. YOU want them to believe they are racist like you are racist; and that in being so they are just as bad as you.

Which clearly none of them are.

I don't presume to know the reasons people chose not to answer but my guess was it as much to rob you of any satisfaction as anything else- which clearly didn't work since you exploded like a 12 year old who just downed a can of coke after a packet of skittles  ::D:: 

Too late now but the results would have been far more interesting had the question been forwarded by someone else  to begin with   

you don't have the authority to lay out the meaning of racism for humanity, but you have correctly identified that the choosing has nothing to do with racism and everything to do with instinctive tribalism

and that  is EXACTLY what i was trying to get people to accept  

read the first line of my OP what do i say??

i say that all humans are inherently racist

they are not, they are however instinctively tribal which society has come to incorrectly identify as racism, thus people perceive their own nature to be racist

which brings me back to my point - that didge sassy ben and the rest all immediately and INSTINCTIVELY answered the question in their own minds, and then were immediately racked with guilt and shame due to their social indoctrination which led them to see themselves as racist  

they couldn't accept that and couldn't understand that its only natural and therefore made a great spectacle of themselves as they avoided answering  

you can choose to believe whatever you want, but i put this scenario together with specific objectives and goals in mind and those objectives have been achieved

believe it or not YOU are the only person to tick the box about how instinctive tribalism destroys the idea that a white person saving the white man is not racism at all, and the best part is you came to that conclusion without any prompting from me  ::alahoo:: 

i think we have done this to death now  ::dedhrs:: 




 

I think so too.

But there is still a gulf of difference between tribal instincts (defined as a kind of racism)- and the discriminative; abusive; hateful racism that comes from you- and people wanting to distance themselves from people like you, is the most natural thing in the world   

Haven't you had enough smelly of trying to make out that everybody is racist so that you feel better. Well I don't play games. You are racist so get used it!

Sorry Eddie, no I am not ashamed of anything because I am a realist, being forced into answering a question, does not mean I am ashamed of anything, my natural instinct would not dictate colour, it might for you and Eilzel, but why would it for others. It is nothing tribal or even instinctive to think many people actually would think in that comprehension.

Again a hypothetical question has to be realistic to answer, in this case it was not, being the points I raised that to be confronted with two people hanging on for their lives knowing in a split second you could only save on is utterly flawed, because nobody could know that in the time it took you to consider such a notion as both would end up dead.

You may want to falsely believe you would have to make such a choice off colour but again lets be realistic, the only person placing you into such a situation is a racist themselves. Even Eilzel claiming to say he would act on instinct of what he views as people seeing their own kind is bullshit, why, because his answer is in hindsight and not knowing how he would actually react. He is predicting how he might react and accepting it could be racial, that does not mean he would, which I know he would understand.

The fact is face with difficulties in life people make many decisions, and yes this is hypothetical, but so are the answers hypothetical, which means you do not have to provide an answer to the creator of that to make his hypothesis work. By this you mean to make his hypothesis work, when many do not, when you try to make it work you are claiming it is fact, when clearly, it is not a fact how people would react, hence why people are utterly clueless on giving an honest real answer to a hypothesis, because when everything is based on conjecture, it is always false

Eilzel wrote:

eddie wrote:Les, I agree with you. Smelly would probably have said "Racist!" if didge and the others had said the white guy.

But don't you see? They cared about being called racist! That was his point.

That's his entire point!
I didn't because I am safe in the belief that I am not.

I got it. I'm not sure why no one else did.

Actually he called them racist Eds; it is right up there. By his twisted logic if you choose (ie: discriminate) in this case based on skin colour- you aren't racist; but if you wont answer you are. WTF?

And of course people care about being called racist- it is a harsh allegation and unfair to people who actually are concerned with equal rights and respect for others- thing smelly most definitely does not.

However; I am of a more easy going view on this. Am I 'a racist', as in openly hostile to those of different ethnicity and willing to discriminate against others different to me on a day to day basis- no I'm not.

But am I racist in that I would probably save the white guy in this unlikely scenario? Yes I am. And it IS racist Eds because you and I and others WOULD be choosing solely on that one factor- how is that not racist? It is instinctive; and goes back to base tribalism- and a word we use to define that is 'racist'. It doesn't mean we are racist by the common understanding though.

Yep. And your last paragraph was known, and understood, by everyone.
They failed to answer hence why he called them a closet racist because they didn't have to guts to answer.

I'm not saying I care what he thinks, I'm not saying the scenario wasn't set up or even stupidly unbelievable.
But what I did see is that people refused to answer. And that, les, is a fact.


Who cares if someone on a forum calls you a racist? If you know you truly are not, then what's the problem?

That's all I am saying.

Again I will stress, a hypothetical answer is never an honest answer, if you think it is, you need to look to see why it is not


Think about it

Didge wrote:Sorry Eddie, no I am not ashamed of anything because I am a realist, being forced into answering a question, does not mean I am ashamed of anything, my natural instinct would not dictate colour, it might for you and Eilzel, but why would it for others. It is nothing tribal or even instinctive to think many people actually would think in that comprehension.

Again a hypothetical question has to be realistic to answer, in this case it was not, being the points I raised that to be confronted with two people hanging on for their lives knowing in a split second you could only save on is utterly flawed, because nobody could know that in the time it took you to consider such a notion as both would end up dead.

You may want to falsely believe you would have to make such a choice off colour but again lets be realistic, the only person placing you into such a situation is a racist themselves. Even Eilzel claiming to say he would act on instinct of what he views as people seeing their own kind is bullshit, why, because his answer is in hindsight and not knowing how he would actually react. He is predicting how he might react and accepting it could be racial, that does not mean he would, which I know he would understand.

The fact is face with difficulties in life people make many decisions, and yes this is hypothetical, but so are the answers hypothetical, which means you do not have to provide an answer to the creator of that to make his hypothesis work. By this you mean to make his hypothesis work, when many do not, when you try to make it work you are claiming it is fact, when clearly, it is not a fact how people would react, hence why people are utterly clueless on giving an honest real answer to a hypothesis, because when everything is based on conjecture, it is always false    

Didge, be a darling?
Stop telling other people what they think.
And do try to stop telling people what their own answers mean.

Or I'll make you kiss my beautiful arse.  

eddie wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Actually he called them racist Eds; it is right up there. By his twisted logic if you choose (ie: discriminate) in this case based on skin colour- you aren't racist; but if you wont answer you are. WTF?

And of course people care about being called racist- it is a harsh allegation and unfair to people who actually are concerned with equal rights and respect for others- thing smelly most definitely does not.

However; I am of a more easy going view on this. Am I 'a racist', as in openly hostile to those of different ethnicity and willing to discriminate against others different to me on a day to day basis- no I'm not.

But am I racist in that I would probably save the white guy in this unlikely scenario? Yes I am. And it IS racist Eds because you and I and others WOULD be choosing solely on that one factor- how is that not racist? It is instinctive; and goes back to base tribalism- and a word we use to define that is 'racist'. It doesn't mean we are racist by the common understanding though.

Yep. And your last paragraph was known, and understood, by everyone.
They failed to answer hence why he called them a closet racist because they didn't have to guts to answer.

I'm not saying I care what he thinks, I'm not saying the scenario wasn't set up or even stupidly unbelievable.
But what I did see is that people refused to answer. And that, les, is a fact.


Who cares if someone on a forum calls you a racist? If you know you truly are not, then what's the problem?

That's all I am saying.

Absurd, he asked a no win scenario, that could have other possibilities, you claim this cannot happen when it is hypothetical, which means so can the answers be.
The fact is no answer is in what ever way truthful, it is nothing more than a guess and made not ever confronting such a situation. If you are utterly daft to fall for that to think people are being dishonest, when every answer is dishonest, then you need to understand what a hypothesis is.

It needs to be proven, why are all this way, as he claims, all closet racists.

Maybe when you understand how you were led, will allow you to understand, it is the people that bought into something false, that they thought it had to be answered based on colour.

eddie wrote:

Didge wrote:Sorry Eddie, no I am not ashamed of anything because I am a realist, being forced into answering a question, does not mean I am ashamed of anything, my natural instinct would not dictate colour, it might for you and Eilzel, but why would it for others. It is nothing tribal or even instinctive to think many people actually would think in that comprehension.

Again a hypothetical question has to be realistic to answer, in this case it was not, being the points I raised that to be confronted with two people hanging on for their lives knowing in a split second you could only save on is utterly flawed, because nobody could know that in the time it took you to consider such a notion as both would end up dead.

You may want to falsely believe you would have to make such a choice off colour but again lets be realistic, the only person placing you into such a situation is a racist themselves. Even Eilzel claiming to say he would act on instinct of what he views as people seeing their own kind is bullshit, why, because his answer is in hindsight and not knowing how he would actually react. He is predicting how he might react and accepting it could be racial, that does not mean he would, which I know he would understand.

The fact is face with difficulties in life people make many decisions, and yes this is hypothetical, but so are the answers hypothetical, which means you do not have to provide an answer to the creator of that to make his hypothesis work. By this you mean to make his hypothesis work, when many do not, when you try to make it work you are claiming it is fact, when clearly, it is not a fact how people would react, hence why people are utterly clueless on giving an honest real answer to a hypothesis, because when everything is based on conjecture, it is always false    

Didge, be a darling?
Stop telling other people what they think.
And do try to stop telling people what their own answers mean.

Or I'll make you kiss my beautiful arse.  

I know what people seem to think, that they think a hypothetical answer is being honest, when never faced with such a situation, if they think they are being honest, they are utterly lying.

So tell me how exactly you know you would act choosing how you claim you would, again never being faced with this situation?
So is your answer a guess?
Then ask yourself is it an honest guess, based on whether the question asked was realistic?

Take your time sweetcheeks

  

It's a guess, based upon the options I am given.


If, however, it were a Monday, and I had a headache, and the white guy spoke to me and sounded like you....I'd be real tempted to save the black guy and shove you off with my boot in your head.

If however, it were a Tuesday, and I was feeling young and free and frisky, I'd pull you up over the cliff edge and shag your arse off so that you may shut the hell up, with my boots, over your head.


Which scenario would you like, hypothetically?   

Eddie, Smelly can say what he wants, I absolutely know that I could never chose because of colour. If there was no way I could save both, and I would definitely try, it would have to be the one nearest my right arm as that is the strongest because I'm right handed, and that would be the only instinct that would cut in.

eddie wrote:It's a guess, based upon the options I am given.


If, however, it were a Monday, and I had a headache, and the white guy spoke to me and sounded like you....I'd be real tempted to save the black guy and shove you off with my boot in your head.

If however, it were a Tuesday, and I was feeling young and free and frisky, I'd pull you up over the cliff edge and shag your arse off so that you may shut the hell up, with my boots, over your head.


Which scenario would you like, hypothetically?   

You still do not grasp it, what anyone is to guess is nothing more than a guess, again not based on any reality, so how could you possibly know how you would react, let alone answer, yet you are stubborn to think you could.
If you believe that you know every action you will take in the future is predestined and you know it everything you will do, then you would lie, because you do not. You can predict how you may think you will act and yet still be wrong, even when the problem you face is realistic.
You think you gave an honest answer, you never did, nobody did, because they were faced with an unrealistic situation, one where they were faced with two men who could fall to their deaths, as if ever faced with the capability of wanting to save people and enacting this, you would claim to think you would instinctively thong to choose on colour to who to reach out to first?
A person that cares and really cares to save life, does not make distinction on who's life they are trying to save, they thus look at all life as sacred and not see it as a choice to who they should save, but to save any life

Didge wrote:

eddie wrote:It's a guess, based upon the options I am given.


If, however, it were a Monday, and I had a headache, and the white guy spoke to me and sounded like you....I'd be real tempted to save the black guy and shove you off with my boot in your head.

If however, it were a Tuesday, and I was feeling young and free and frisky, I'd pull you up over the cliff edge and shag your arse off so that you may shut the hell up, with my boots, over your head.


Which scenario would you like, hypothetically?   

You still do not grasp it, what anyone is to guess is nothing more than a guess, again not based on any reality, so how could you possibly know how you would react, let alone answer, yet you are stubborn to think you could.
If you believe that you know every action you will take in the future is predestined and you know it everything you will do, then you would lie, because you do not. You can predict how you may think you will act and yet still be wrong, even when the problem you face is realistic.
You think you gave an honest answer, you never did, nobody did, because they were faced with an unrealistic situation, one where they were faced with two men who could fall to their deaths, as if ever faced with the capability of wanting to save people and enacting this, you would claim to think you would instinctively thong to choose on colour to who to reach out to first?
A person that cares and really cares to save life, does not make distinction on who's life they are trying to save, they thus look at all life as sacred and not see it as a choice to who they should save, but to save any life  

Did you miss the joke in that post I just made????  


::dunno:: 

NO Eddie, I missed nothing and I will prove my point as to ask something unrealistic.

Say for example ( no offense here either) someone developed a medicine to stop people being homosexual, even though we know people are born homosexual.
The question asked is if there is something to change people from birth from being homosexual, to heterosexual, being that the law is now religious an they will be executed for being homosexual and would accept the medicine and stop being who you are and be someone different just to stay alive?
Is it a realistic question to ask?
They have a choice, stay being homosexual and die and or take medicine?
What would you answer to that?
No, I have stacked the deck in my favour, to make people choose between life or homosexuality, is that fair Eddie?

P.S. If you think you can answer not actually being gay, you would be lying, because you would not know what it is like to be gay.

Is it sinking in yet?

 

I made the joke cos I'm bored of discussing it.

I think you're alone now hunny bunch

Didge wrote:P.S. If you think you can answer not actually being gay, you would be lying, because you would not know what it is like to be gay.

Is it sinking in yet?

P.S guess what? I'm so sorry, I didn't read it!   

eddie wrote:

Didge wrote:P.S. If you think you can answer not actually being gay, you would be lying, because you would not know what it is like to be gay.

Is it sinking in yet?

P.S guess what? I'm so sorry, I didn't read it!   

Not suprised hun    


I just gave a choice of being who you are not to being who you are and dying, we could never answer that question, because it is unrealistic, based on the parameters I set.


DOH

eddie wrote: 

I made the joke cos I'm bored of discussing it.

I think you're alone now hunny bunch

Am I alone on this or actually people cannot answer my point on this?


DOH

Sassy wrote:Eddie, Smelly can say what he wants, I absolutely know that I could never chose because of colour.   If there was no way I could save both, and I would definitely try, it would have to be the one nearest my right arm as that is the strongest because I'm right handed, and that would be the only instinct that would cut in.

you already did


in your head you chose

in public you didn't

All I am asking you to do Eddie is think, looking back at my last few posts, would you really think about choosing who to save based off skin colour, being how you might act in a realistic real life situation, knowing the person you are?, someone who I know cares?

Get real your answer would be a lie, if you say you would think of skin colour, because, I know you are not racist and would ever think that way.
You were led into a poor argument, and you fell for

Eilzel wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

you don't have the authority to lay out the meaning of racism for humanity, but you have correctly identified that the choosing has nothing to do with racism and everything to do with instinctive tribalism

and that  is EXACTLY what i was trying to get people to accept  

read the first line of my OP what do i say??

i say that all humans are inherently racist

they are not, they are however instinctively tribal which society has come to incorrectly identify as racism, thus people perceive their own nature to be racist

which brings me back to my point - that didge sassy ben and the rest all immediately and INSTINCTIVELY answered the question in their own minds, and then were immediately racked with guilt and shame due to their social indoctrination which led them to see themselves as racist  

they couldn't accept that and couldn't understand that its only natural and therefore made a great spectacle of themselves as they avoided answering  

you can choose to believe whatever you want, but i put this scenario together with specific objectives and goals in mind and those objectives have been achieved

believe it or not YOU are the only person to tick the box about how instinctive tribalism destroys the idea that a white person saving the white man is not racism at all, and the best part is you came to that conclusion without any prompting from me  ::alahoo:: 

i think we have done this to death now  ::dedhrs:: 




 

I think so too.

But there is still a gulf of difference between tribal instincts (defined as a kind of racism)- and the discriminative; abusive; hateful racism that comes from you- and people wanting to distance themselves from people like you, is the most natural thing in the world   

 ::smthg:: ::smthg:: 

I am still laughing at smelly also, thinking he was being smart, yet as seen very dumb

smelly_bandit wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

I think so too.

But there is still a gulf of difference between tribal instincts (defined as a kind of racism)- and the discriminative; abusive; hateful racism that comes from you- and people wanting to distance themselves from people like you, is the most natural thing in the world   

 ::smthg:: ::smthg:: 

Great response, I'm done   

smelly_bandit wrote:

Sassy wrote:Eddie, Smelly can say what he wants, I absolutely know that I could never chose because of colour.   If there was no way I could save both, and I would definitely try, it would have to be the one nearest my right arm as that is the strongest because I'm right handed, and that would be the only instinct that would cut in.

you already did


in your head you chose

in public you didn't

Okay lets turn the question on its head, you are left with choosing between your two children on the edge of a cliff, so who do you save, your son or daughter?

Now if we go by Eddie's logic, noby would have the honesty to answer which child they would save.


Is that right Eddie?


Or is it unrealistic of me to ask?

Now is Eddie going to be realistic and tell me she would only save one of her children, or try even dying to save both?

Funny how a question turned to something they may actually be realistic, makes people think twice before answering.

Now Eddie you might see my point

I mean surely the master smelly can answer this question who he would chose out of his kin?

No, afraid to answer smelly as I leave you with little choice?

Astounding how you can change perceptions, by changing the people involved in a scenario

Oh my god shut up didge!!
The reason I want going to answer is because you're very draining!
In all honestly? You do waffle on a bit! Sorry, cos I do like you for some unknown reason?? But your hair-spitting unfailing and unswerving attitude that you're opinion is the only one that's right, and your lack of humour!!! God it's really draining.
I can't always read all of your posts.

Now, if I answer this a scenario you're going to go on and on and on and on.....
If I don't answer you'll think I can't answer.

See my predicament?


Here's what I'd do. Save the youngest and most vulnerable. Which is my daughter.

Oh and she's white.


Now, can we leave it there? I really really am bored to death of this now.
I very rarely get past three pages of debate.
My attention span is not great.

So you let the other die?


Bullshit, you would never make such a decision faced with it hence why I knew you would come back with an utter bullshit answer.


You see why would you choose you the youngest, when the oldest is your favorite?


You see when you play with fire you get burnt and again you give a bullshit answer.


Sorry you have no credibility left Eddie, it was only made in hindsight and you again failed to see the point I was teaching you, how you would ever make such a decision over who to save.


Sorry I value even less what you say now Eddie, as that was a truly bullshit answer, as if you would decide over your kin on age, when never faced with such a reality.

Spare me the bullshit

Eh???? I am answering your question???
Again, you said I could only save one!!!!!

Of course, everyone would try and save both??? Are you nuts???

Yes you are nuts!

You said I could only save one??? I answered your scenario.

Am I missing something here?

eddie wrote:Eh???? I am answering your question???
Again, you said I could only save one!!!!!

Of course, everyone would try and save both??? Are you nuts???

Yes you are nuts!

You said I could only save one???  I answered your scenario.

Am I missing something here?

Er you are answering bullshit Eddie, you are saying to me you would not even try to save both, even though you could not?

Take your time on that one love.

You see I know bullshit when I see it, because people never faced with a reality will say any crap to think they look smart or clever, but the reality is you would not even contemplate not trying to save them both.

Now tell me am I wrong?

Not by the hair of your chinny chin chin

Realistic?

Eddie you are not.

Didge i am saying this one last time.

You said I could save one.
I take the question literally or I am not answering it, am I?

eddie wrote:Didge i am saying this one last time.

You said I could save one.
I take the question literally or I am not answering it, am I?

No you do not, faced with it would you only save one or try to save both?


An honest answer please?

I am actually bored now, because Eddie if you say you would only try to save one, you would be lying, knowing how much you care for your children, this is what you fail to even comprehend about being faced with such a difficult situation, that you would have no possible idea how you would react here, being as you love your children, shows you do not full grasp the whole point about what is realistic

Didge wrote:

eddie wrote:Didge i am saying this one last time.

You said I could save one.
I take the question literally or I am not answering it, am I?

No you do not, faced with it would you only save one or try to save both?


An honest answer please?  

Omg!! We have already been over this!!! Everyone knows that what people actually do to what they think they do, can be different on any given day.

But didge, I can't keep,on saying the same things over and over; if the question says you can only save one, that is how one is supposed to answer!!!!

Now, if it were my two children, of course I'd try to save both. But if I could only feasibly go for one, it would be the most vulnerable which is the youngest.

If it were the white or back guy, I'd probably go for the white guy as he is nearer to how my family looks.

Now I really am done.
Honestly.

Night and goodbye forever to this thread   

eddie wrote:

Didge wrote:


No you do not, faced with it would you only save one or try to save both?


An honest answer please?  

Omg!! We have already been over this!!! Everyone knows that what people actually do to what they think they do, can be different on any given day.

But didge, I can't keep,on saying the same things over and over; if the question says you can only save one, that is how one is supposed to answer!!!!

Now, if it were my two children, of course I'd try to save both. But if I could only feasibly go for one, it would be the most vulnerable which is the youngest.

If it were the white or back guy, I'd probably go for the white guy as he is nearer to how my family looks.

She answered for me, owning up to the fact she would not know as highlighted above, yet claiming to be honest in her answer yet admitting she would not know..


Busted

So you would try to save both, you admit you would try to but to you this seemed absurd for those when faced with saying a white or black person, even when we could not.


Thank you.

You just proved my point.


Questions are set to make people fall, does not mean the question was even fair or realistic, the point you utterly miss at every turn, I do not know how to further explain this till you finally grasp the situation you are even trying to argue, because you have just made your own argument absurd by your answers


Night and thank you, for proving my point, even worse you guess again off an unrealistic response you would never know to choose, the point you utterly miss

Eilzel wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

 ::smthg:: ::smthg:: 

Great response, I'm done   

Indeed you are

You knocked this out the park mate

In all honesty in blown away by the fact that you of all people made the case for me

I thought it would be stardesk but elizel the dark horse takes it

You have gone up in my estimation

Didge wrote:

eddie wrote:Didge i am saying this one last time.

You said I could save one.
I take the question literally or I am not answering it, am I?

No you do not, faced with it would you only save one or try to save both?


An honest answer please?  

An attempt to save both will kill both

Knowing this would you try to save both or save one??

And which one??

smelly_bandit wrote:

Sassy wrote:Eddie, Smelly can say what he wants, I absolutely know that I could never chose because of colour.   If there was no way I could save both, and I would definitely try, it would have to be the one nearest my right arm as that is the strongest because I'm right handed, and that would be the only instinct that would cut in.

you already did


in your head you chose

in public you didn't

You can say it till you are blue in the face, and preferably you will stay blue, but that won't make it true. So, be my guest, keep on and on and go blue.

Sassy wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

you already did


in your head you chose

in public you didn't

You can say it till you are blue in the face, and preferably you will stay blue, but that won't make it true.   So, be my guest, keep on and on and go blue.

And you can keep denying it here

But I know human nature and I know that in that part of your mind,the part that thinks truth but it comes out the mouth as a porky because it might be hurtful to the other person otherwise or incriminating??

In that secret part of your mind you answered the question in a way that made you ashamed and guilty of your own perception of racism

You must understand that I am not judging you, I'm simply pointing out some truths and you are judging you.

That is why you refuse to answer the scenario within the parameters of the scenario, that is why you need to alter the rules and give yourself the option of saving both

It's all self induced pressure

Elizel is the only one who has truly figured it out

So, basically,people who don't answer the question are racists, and people who do answer the question are racists. Smelly I can't help but notice the Ghost of Confirmation Bias peering over your shoulder.