Riots if Obama loses

#127
#127
KingNick865 said:
If you just take that comment with no context, then, yes, it would seem very hypocritical. However, there was a sense of "moral justice" about the verdict, due to what was perceived as a justice system that was incredibly biased towards the white majority.

Lest we not forget though, OJ did lose the civil suit, and lost millions upon millions of dollars.
Click to expand...

i didn't say "hypocritical," i said "unbelievable."

murder is wrong. it is incomprehensible to me that anyone can argue that it is somehow "justified" in one instance or another, because of skin color or religious belief.
 
#130
#130
volmaverick said:
They also burnt women/witches at the stake years ago...has nothing to do with present day!!!!
Click to expand...

Feel free to arbitrarily put limits on what counts as relevant. I can play the same game. Yesterday does not count. And, come tomorrow, today will not count. If today does not count tomorrow, then it is a necessary truth that today does not count; thus, today does not count. Nothing counts.
 
#131
#131
tm3 said:
i didn't say "hypocritical," i said "unbelievable."

murder is wrong. it is incomprehensible to me that anyone can argue that it is somehow "justified" in one instance or another, because of skin color or religious belief.
Click to expand...

You are not going to get an argument from me that murdering someone is "justified". It is wrong. However, in this case, there were circumstances outside the murder trial that made the verdict justifiable, even if the crime itself was reprehensible.
 
#132
#132
therealUT said:
Feel free to arbitrarily put limits on what counts as relevant. I can play the same game. Yesterday does not count. And, come tomorrow, today will not count. If today does not count tomorrow, then it is a necessary truth that today does not count; thus, today does not count. Nothing counts.
Click to expand...

now you are sounding like a UF fan ... :)
 
#133
#133
KingNick865 said:
You are not going to get an argument from me that murdering someone is "justified". It is wrong. However, in this case, there were circumstances outside the murder trial that made the verdict justifiable, even if the crime itself was reprehensible.
Click to expand...



unbelievable
 
#135
#135
lawgator1 said:
The racist far right trying to goad folks into the race war they have always wanted.
Click to expand...


Let's look at a few Farrakhan quotes shall we?

To begin, the highly controversial Farrakhan accused Republicans of having “overt” racist motives in their opposition to Obama, the country’s first black president. He attacked a political process that he says is controlled by monied interests and wants “to keep America white.”
Click to expand...

He said he thinks Obama and his advisers worried about the president appearing like “an angry black man.” The reasoning: “You can’t go out there and beat up on a white man. You’re going to lose the white vote.”

He then turned his comments back to the president.

“You aren’t going to win any more white votes by being kind and gracious,” he said. “Be a little black.”
Click to expand...

He also addressed an audience largely absent from the event: white America.

“What have I done that you could hate me so?” he said.

He then answered his own question with harsh words that had the arena on its feet: “You can’t buy me, and you can’t make me into your n-----.”
Click to expand...

And the kicker

Farrakhan did nothing to dissuade that support, accusing the Republicans of using a strategy to defeat Obama “so overtly hateful and racist in nature that it has polarized America on the basis of race.”
Click to expand...

sure, it's others that are polarizing America on the basis of race
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#136
#136
KingNick865 said:
You are not going to get an argument from me that murdering someone is "justified". It is wrong. However, in this case, there were circumstances outside the murder trial that made the verdict justifiable, even if the crime itself was reprehensible.
Click to expand...



in this case, there were circumstances outside the murder trial that made the verdict justifiable




My God!!!!!!! I cant believe what I am seeing here

You agree that a killer be set free because of things that happen outside the court room!!!
 
#137
#137
Just to go back to the original topic, am I correct in saying that you guys are getting your panties in a wad over something that some guy said might happen as a result of something else that hasn't happened yet?

Just want to make sure we're all on the same page.
 
#140
#140
i'll stand by my previous statement that murder is wrong, and that it is incomprehensible to argue that it is justified based on skin color or religious belief or whatever.

but, just to play along with "circumstances ..."

the OJ verdict was justified, because of circumstances and perceived injustices prior.

lynchings were justified, because of circumstances and perceived injustices prior.

the rodney king beating was justified, because of circumstances not illustrated in the video.

the holocaust was justified, because of circumstances and perceived injustices prior.

the 9/11 attack was justified, because of circumstances and perceived injustices prior.
 
#141
#141
volmaverick said:
in this case, there were circumstances outside the murder trial that made the verdict justifiable




My God!!!!!!! I cant believe what I am seeing here

You agree that a killer be set free because of things that happen outside the court room!!!
Click to expand...

I am just quoting this to track it later. Don't mind me.
 
#142
#142
tm3 said:
unbelievable
Click to expand...

In an absolute world, probably. The act of murdering someone is wrong; that's pretty much an incontrovertible fact. However, if one is to feel that your people have been unfairly treated in the justice system, including the exoneration of many people who have been caught red handed murdering and persecuting a group simply because of one's race or religion, a new perspective might emerge. Now, for the record, I am not a fan of this style of "make-up justice", as the very definition of what the word "justice" actually means is being perverted and distorted in this case. However, it would not take a great leap of faith or logic to say that what OJ did was wrong and should be punished, but the various injustices done by the legal system over the years made the decision just and fair.

That being said, I don't think the actual jury in this trial had race on their minds in the decision, rather, OJ's legal team did a really good job proving reasonable doubt.
 
#143
#143
KingNick865 said:
In an absolute world, probably. The act of murdering someone is wrong; that's pretty much an incontrovertible fact. However, if one is to feel that your people have been unfairly treated in the justice system, including the exoneration of many people who have been caught red handed murdering and persecuting a group simply because of one's race or religion, a new perspective might emerge. Now, for the record, I am not a fan of this style of "make-up justice", as the very definition of what the word "justice" actually means is being perverted and distorted in this case. However, it would not take a great leap of faith or logic to say that what OJ did was wrong and should be punished, but the various injustices done by the legal system over the years made the decision just and fair.

That being said, I don't think the actual jury in this trial had race on their minds in the decision, rather, OJ's legal team did a really good job proving reasonable doubt.
Click to expand...




but the various injustices done by the legal system over the years made the decision just and fair.





MY GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!..you people agree with his logic?

So every black should be found not guilty because of ..injustices done by the legal system over the years JUST to be fair


LOL...
 
Last edited:
#144
#144
volmaverick said:
So u agree a KILLER should have been set free because of what happened outside the court room?
Click to expand...

What I think is this thread is going nowhere good. If it continues in the direction it is going, it will only lead to ill feelings.
 
#145
#145
1. I disagree with KingNick on why the OJ ruling was justified; however, I agree with Nick that it was justified under the US system of justice.

2. In any system of justice, it is unavoidable that either innocent individuals are going to be convicted or guilty individuals will walk. The only way to avoid the first problem is to let everyone walk; the only way to avoid the second problem is to convict everyone.

3. In our system, we put the favor in balance of innocence, because we think it is worse for innocent individuals to be punished than for guilty individuals to be set free. Thus, during a trial, the onus is on the prosecution to convince all twelve jurors, beyond a reasonable doubt, the the defendant is guilty. The defense only has to count on one juror having reasonable doubt.

The decision made by the jury was made. That is the best that can be asked for under the current system of justice. Sure, individuals like OJ and Casey Anthony will walk every now and again. It is the trade-off that is made to secure most against wrongful conviction.

Whether or not our justice system deters/corrects/punishes crime in the most efficient manner is certainly debatable.
 
#146
#146
realUT, i don't have a problem with anyone who says they believe that OJ is innocent based on the evidence. i don't agree, but we can agree to disagree.

i have a very big problem with the argument that murder is somehow "justified" because of skin color or religion or "perceived injustices in the past." imo, those who champion OJ on this basis are no different from the defenders of lynchings, terrorist acts, etc.
 
#147
#147
volinbham said:
Let's look at a few Farrakhan quotes shall we?







And the kicker



sure, it's others that are polarizing America on the basis of race
Click to expand...

But hasn't Farrakhan always done this? We all know he is a racist, anti-Semitic bigot who continues to propagate vast conspiracy theories without any justification for it. Nobody considers him a relevant person in any political sphere that most common people would consider sane and decent.
 
#148
#148
KingNick865 said:
In an absolute world, probably. The act of murdering someone is wrong; that's pretty much an incontrovertible fact. However, if one is to feel that your people have been unfairly treated in the justice system, including the exoneration of many people who have been caught red handed murdering and persecuting a group simply because of one's race or religion, a new perspective might emerge. Now, for the record, I am not a fan of this style of "make-up justice", as the very definition of what the word "justice" actually means is being perverted and distorted in this case. However, it would not take a great leap of faith or logic to say that what OJ did was wrong and should be punished, but the various injustices done by the legal system over the years made the decision just and fair.

That being said, I don't think the actual jury in this trial had race on their minds in the decision, rather, OJ's legal team did a really good job proving reasonable doubt.
Click to expand...

you keep saying "not a fan" when you should probably say "vehemently opposed." Justifying any outcome on anything other than the facts provided is ridiculous

also OJ's defense wasn't the reason in that case. It was the prosecution that was horrible
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#149
#149
tm3 said:
realUT, i don't have a problem with anyone who says they believe that OJ is innocent based on the evidence. i don't agree, but we can agree to disagree.

i have a very big problem with the argument that murder is somehow "justified" because of skin color or religion or "perceived injustices in the past." imo, those who champion OJ on this basis are no different from the defenders of lynchings, terrorist acts, etc.
Click to expand...

To boil the argument down to it's most basic terms; the murder wasn't justified, the verdict was.

I don't disagree with you, actually. I don't like people getting off based off of skin color or any other determining factor besides the evidence in the case. What I am putting forward is that someone could reasonably see the OJ verdict as a "make-up", and not actually support the murder or the murderer.

utvolpj said:
you keep saying "not a fan" when you should probably say "vehemently opposed." Justifying any outcome on anything other than the facts provided is ridiculous

also OJ's defense wasn't the reason in that case. It was the prosecution that was horrible
Click to expand...

As with the top post, I don't disagree with that at all.
 
#150
#150
tm3 said:
realUT, i don't have a problem with anyone who says they believe that OJ is innocent based on the evidence. i don't agree, but we can agree to disagree.

i have a very big problem with the argument that murder is somehow "justified" because of skin color or religion or "perceived injustices in the past." imo, those who champion OJ on this basis are no different from the defenders of lynchings, terrorist acts, etc.
Click to expand...

Agreed.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top