Paula Deen uses the N-Word - gets sued - right or worng?

reply to post by undo


So we should openly promote hate speech? under the guise of "freedom of speech?

That how things get started. Until another law allowed supremacist group emerges.


What does degrading someone else bring one person? why should it be allowed? can someone openly say they are a pedophile? a serial killer? hey those are just words.. right?

imagine, a movie actor goes on to say, "hey i was a closet pedophile". Why should he lose role in movies for that? its not like he committed anything.

From what I understand....Paula Deen is retired from several of her past TV shows. She has a net worth of several million...so she won't starve!

She has made some serious mistakes in the past...and I truly believe she is really sorry; and I also think that those mistakes she made in the past...she corrected herself... and has not participated for quite sometime in the past (inappropriate behaviors) that she did do at one time.

I believe in 2nd, 3rd, and 4th chances...especially when the person involved is contrite and no longer does the things they once did...people can change for the better...and I believe that Paul Deen has done just that.

I think that Paula Deen deserves forgiveness and more chances to make it right.

Originally posted by luciddream
reply to post by undo

 

So we should openly promote hate speech? under the guise of "freedom of speech?

That how things get started. Until another law allowed supremacist group emerges.


What does degrading someone else bring one person? why should it be allowed? can someone openly say they are a pedophile? a serial killer? hey those are just words.. right?

imagine, a movie actor goes on to say, "hey i was a closet pedophile". Why should he lose role in movies for that? its not like he committed anything.

edit on 6/24/2013 by luciddream because: (no reason given)

there are already law allowed supremacist groups. that's the point. they aren't being curtailed because they are from specific sectors of the populace. this is the EXACT same problem that lead to the civil war, just from the opposite side. and what is the response to that? THE OPPOSITE. see, if the laws had remained common sense and didn't effect freedom of speech in such a way that it was unevenly applied, which is the problem in the first place, this would not be an issue.

the only way they are going to be able to stop this from turning sour on them now, is if the movers and shakers in the black community start speaking out against the trend of calling white people racists as a "racial group", anything less will come back to haunt their children and ours. if it keeps heading in the direction it is going in now, the end result will be a completely radicalized populace, with black racists on one side and white racists on the other. a sure recipe for genocide.

Originally posted by luciddream
reply to post by undo

 

So we should openly promote hate speech? under the guise of "freedom of speech?

I think you are over stating the other side of the argument. I do not believe is talking about actively promoting such hateful words. That is, unless you are a music industry or movie industry exec. In which case, you promote and sell all the hate speech you possibly can.

That how things get started. Until another law allowed supremacist group emerges.

The slippery slope fallacy is a poor way to execute an argument.

What does degrading someone else bring one person?

A boost to their self esteem, as the cost of someone else's.

why should it be allowed?

for a few reasons. Free speech is the primary one. But beyond that....if people are free to say what they want, doesn't it make the idiots that much easier to identify? Do you want people being disingenuous only to make you feel better? Despite how they really feel? Where I am from, that kind of person is called a snake in the grass.

can someone openly say they are a pedophile? a serial killer? hey those are just words.. right?

Yes. They are just words. However, the limit comes in at slander and libel. There are subtle differences that even our courts sometimes struggle with.

imagine, a movie actor goes on to say, "hey i was a closet pedophile". Why should he lose role in movies for that? its not like he committed anything.

edit on 6/24/2013 by luciddream because: (no reason given)

Do you have examples, or is this supposition? If supposition, refer to the slippery slope statement above.

I am always befuddled by the segment of society who thinks they should be able to say whatever they want, whenever they want with impunity. No society works that way. This is especially true of the work environment. The whole "it's my business and I'll say whatever I want" mentality is all fine and dandy until your employee(s) justifiably sue you for creating a hostile work environment.

Let's switch gears and change the word used. Let's say she was using the term "slut" instead. Would it still be okay? Of course not. How about the terms "slant eye" or "camel jockey"? You think you should have the right to just treat your employees like crap, free from reprisal?

The facts are, she used the word at the restaurant, in front of and/or towards employees. Her brother watched porn in front of employees and even showed it around. She thought it was a great idea (this is the prime reason I find her to be a repugnant piece of garbage) to host a wedding reception using black people in a purposefully derogatory way for her own amusement.

She deserves every bad thing coming her way.

www.yahoo.com

Paula Deen's Unlikely Defender: Bill Maher

I almost never agree with Bill.

Interesting video of Bill Maher's defense of Paula Deen.

reply to post by luciddream

imagine, a movie actor goes on to say, "hey i was a closet pedophile". Why should he lose role in movies for that? its not like he committed anything.

For starters, he would not be convicted of a crime for saying that... he would probably start an investigation to see if he committed a crime, and if he did, he would be convicted of an actual crime.

He would probably suffer the consequences of admission of something people generally detest, and that could hurt his career. That's life. I feel the same way about the little dress issue in Paula' Deen's reception. That could hurt her career, and she did it without fully considering the consequences, so that's life.

The difference is that Paula Deen did not admit to being racist; she admitted to occasionally using a word that was at one time a part of the vocabulary of her (and my) culture. If you hate anyone who uses that word, feel free to turn off her shows in protest. That is your right. The Food Network is also within their rights to not renew her contract.

It is also her right to hold dear and enjoy that culture, just as you do yours. If you want to misinterpret her intentions based on a word, that is also your right, but I would hope you would realize that others have the same right to despise your culture, and you by extension, if popular sentiment takes such a turn.

I hope that does not happen; I don't want anyone to be subjected to the ridicule the South has been subjected to.

What undo is saying is that the unequal interpretation of those rights to dislike people because of semantics will lead to more actual racism, not less. There is a point of "to far" when people begin to realize that the status quo has gone overboard, and I am afraid we are rapidly approaching that point.

TheRedneck

reply to post by TheRedneck

It is also her right to hold dear and enjoy that culture, just as you do yours. If you want to misinterpret her intentions based on a word, that is also your right, but I would hope you would realize that others have the same right to despise your culture, and you by extension, if popular sentiment takes such a turn.

So, bad things from culture should be allowed? then why are Muslims are so demonized? some of the extremist are just following their culture? so wife beating or multiple wives should be not an issue. If you don't let them beat their wives, they will do it secretly, so we should openly let them do it.

Culture will conflict with law.

Originally posted by luciddream

Culture will conflict with law.

what culture do you presume we should adopt then? one where only some people are allowed to say racist things? i thought we were fighting against that!?

reply to post by undo


The oppressed will always be hating the other(directly or indirectly), unless the other groups go thru what the oppressed have went thru, it won't be the same

Live in another's shoe kinda thought.

Maybe then, thing will be balanced, but that would never happen. Pendulum has to swing someway, all we can do is slow it down.


Someone gotta be ignorant to say, "lets forget everything in the past, we start fresh today".. but is everyone starting equally?

reply to post by luciddream

So, bad things from culture should be allowed?

To some degree, yes.

To other degrees, no.

I for one do not demonize Muslim culture. I may disagree with it, but as long as it is not being forced on me, I have no issue. I will have an issue where individuals are being mistreated as part of a culture, just as I would have an issue with someone in my culture actually practicing racist actions (firing of employees because of skin color, refusing to hire because of skin color, demeaning because of skin color, etc.).

Paula Deen did not do that so far as I have found. Please feel free to show me differently.

Paula Deen said a word. That word has different connotations in your culture than in mine. To demand that it be interpreted in your cultural context is... well... racist. Your interpretation is based on a prejudged misinterpretation of the meaning, just like refusing to hire someone because of skin color is based on a prejudged misinterpretation of the ability of that person.

All cultures should be allowed to exist. All cultures have value. No culture is inherently superior or inferior to any other... even our own.

TheRedneck

reply to post by TheRedneck


There is a "good" term for the N-word?

reply to post by luciddream

One cannot level a table by standing it on the other end.

What you propose is an infinite continuation of racism, alternating between races. That is a horror I do not wish to imagine. In England, Henry VIII rejected Catholicism and Queen Catherine of Aragon, moving the country to accept Protestantism. When he then rejected Anne Boleyn, the next Queen, prosecution of Protestants began again. The country went through a zig-zag of executing one group, then another as power moved back and forth, finally terminating with Catherine's daughter, "Bloody Mary" who got her nickname for her unrestrained executions of Protestants. Millions died over religious views on both sides. Do you really propose we go through this with races?

TheRedneck

reply to post by luciddream


the democratic platform is a vicious circle. they enact laws that discourage human potential, erect offices who's sole purpose is to be as racially motivated as possible and deliberately encourage the continuation of racism against white people, specifically. as dr. ben carter is evidence of, not toeing the line that one must be for black people only if one is a black professional, further segregates the populace. i'm telling you that in their efforts to solve racial issues, they have erected a monstrosity that is growing new racists on both sides, every day.

reply to post by luciddream

There is a "good" term for the N-word?

In my culture, as in Paula Deen's culture, it simply means "black."

We attempt to not use it, since it has caused so much uproar, and it was at one time used as a slur. But those days are long gone, and it is nearly impossible to decide to suddenly stop using a word that has been a part of the common language.

TheRedneck

reply to post by TheRedneck


Ok Good, but Allowing it now, infects the next generation with an "OK to use" as well doesn't it?

One sides associates with all the atrocities one did, and other side things it just a word.

So how is this going to stop? both sides seem adamant.


Nothing keeps hatred going like a commonly used word to refuel the hate.

Originally posted by whyamIhere
www.yahoo.com

Paula Deen's Unlikely Defender: Bill Maher

I almost never agree with Bill.

Interesting video of Bill Maher's defense of Paula Deen.

i think bill just got his first wake up call about the extent of the issue. he said, well should she be held accountable today for something she said years ago, and the answer the rest of the panel gave was, YES! but that's not all. notice he asked them first if it's okay if rappers use it. one of the panel members said, no, rappers should not use it either. and this has the potential to be a retroactive crime and the circumstances of the crime are not considered, nor is the person treated first to a jury of their peers, nor is it necessary to hear or even know, what the person said in their own defense. as long as it was said, it's a crime against humanity. period.

do you really want a system in place, where you are tried in the court of public opinion for stuff you did years ago, without the benefit of any other evidence in your defense. that sounds absolutely horrific. just imagine if a crazy white racist got ahold of a system like that-- the damage they would do with it, would be unconscionable. think down the road. today is the day before tomorrow.

I love how this information emerged. She was ASKED if she had used the word - she responded honestly (though naively) and said she had. Because of that, she got fired.

I'm in the middle of reading Catch 22. The word Nigger comes around again and again. I read a line to my brother, repeating the word: does that make me a racist?

Here's a better more common example. When people are drunk and having fun, they tend to say things they don't actually feel - just for ironic effect. Sometimes someone will say 'n-word', in jest - not in good taste, of course - but it doesn't make them racists.

Originally posted by TheRedneck
reply to post by luciddream

There is a "good" term for the N-word?

In my culture, as in Paula Deen's culture, it simply means "black."

We attempt to not use it, since it has caused so much uproar, and it was at one time used as a slur. But those days are long gone, and it is nearly impossible to decide to suddenly stop using a word that has been a part of the common language.

TheRedneck

Especially when the black entertainment community continues to use the word with so much zeal and commitment.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


Cause they "earned it" lol