Why South Hate?

[Hittanryan]

I don't hate the south, but I'm not a big fan of it. Too conservative, too right wing, too religious.

Hey! you just listed the reasons why I hate New England, at least if you switch it up. Too liberal, too left wing, too atheist

Yeah you've made abundantly clear that you hate personal and political freedoms and would rather the government impose religious doctrine on the entire country instead of, say, managing the economy.

[Savaslara]

Redneck, you people don't even know what that means do you? You don't know that the term is a respectable term that originated in the fight against the Mining Corporations? Redneck, in the literal translation was someone who fought in the Mining Corporation-Mining Union wars of the late 18 hundreds, where those miners fighting for better wages and better conditions wore red bandannas around their necks.

So yeah as someone from Kentucky, and a proud Southern I am more than happy to be called a Redneck, Hillbilly, or whatever "slur" people come up with.

Also in regards to South hate I will admit we do have a rather bad image fostered from the bigots that ran about in white hoods making us all look like a bunch of blundering fools. However civil war misconceptions don't help as the OP stated.

And now southern states are notorious union-busters and "rednecks" are fiercely opposed to regulation of business even when it would help them. Funny how things change over time, isn't it?

Aye, although you can blame that on the campaigns by Reagan iirc to turn the South Republican, as an avowed Centralist I would like to say that not all Southerns stand for the right.

[The Aryan Nations]

you now need to tell me why you chose the term homophobe.

is the gay community so insecure they must assume anyone who disapproves of them is scared of them?

Because the term 'homophobe' can't mean someone who hates gays.

Nope, not at all

there is this language named 'latin'. bastardizing it does not help anyone anywhere.

[Des-Bal]

you now need to tell me why you chose the term homophobe.

is the gay community so insecure they must assume anyone who disapproves of them is scared of them?

You'd have to ask them that.


The meaning of phobe is closer to hate than fear. Regardless I fail to recognize the subtle differences between "disapproving of miscegenation" and "being a racist".

[The Aryan Nations]

Redneck, you people don't even know what that means do you? You don't know that the term is a respectable term that originated in the fight against the Mining Corporations? Redneck, in the literal translation was someone who fought in the Mining Corporation-Mining Union wars of the late 18 hundreds, where those miners fighting for better wages and better conditions wore red bandannas around their necks.

So yeah as someone from Kentucky, and a proud Southern I am more than happy to be called a Redneck, Hillbilly, or whatever "slur" people come up with.

Also in regards to South hate I will admit we do have a rather bad image fostered from the bigots that ran about in white hoods making us all look like a bunch of blundering fools. However civil war misconceptions don't help as the OP stated.

And now southern states are notorious union-busters and "rednecks" are fiercely opposed to regulation of business even when it would help them. Funny how things change over time, isn't it?

>union busting
the unions have been known to cause more trouble than they help. such as forcing workers to join them and pay dues, and then do nothing for them, and to make it impossible to fire troublemakers. its one of the reasons that American public schools suck.
>fiercely opposed to regulation
yes, this is a good thing. its called 'respecting the rights of others'.

[Frisbeeteria]

STRING EM HIGH AND LET EM DIE, CAUSE IF IT AINT WHITE IT AINT RIGHT

Since you've ignored the trolling warning, we'll just hand you a *** 24 hour forumban *** to get your attention.

[Savaslara]

And now southern states are notorious union-busters and "rednecks" are fiercely opposed to regulation of business even when it would help them. Funny how things change over time, isn't it?

>union busting
the unions have been known to cause more trouble than they help. such as forcing workers to join them and pay dues, and then do nothing for them, and to make it impossible to fire troublemakers. its one of the reasons that American public schools suck.
>fiercely opposed to regulation
yes, this is a good thing. its called 'respecting the rights of others'.

I wouldn't say the idea of a Union is bad for the working man, just the modern evolution of the organization. Should we revert to traditional Unions where workers rights are protected, but the company owner can terminate employees within reason. And of course any man, Union or not has the right to work. Thank you Wisconsin for attempting/pushing that.

[Hittanryan]

And now southern states are notorious union-busters and "rednecks" are fiercely opposed to regulation of business even when it would help them. Funny how things change over time, isn't it?

>union busting
the unions have been known to cause more trouble than they help. such as forcing workers to join them and pay dues, and then do nothing for them, and to make it impossible to fire troublemakers. its one of the reasons that American public schools suck.
>fiercely opposed to regulation
yes, this is a good thing. its called 'respecting the rights of others'.

Public schools suck because they're locally funded and have softball curricula compared to the rest of the world which means "high school diploma" still counts as "unskilled labor."

Regulation is required to keep the free market free. Otherwise, competition gets stifled through massive consolidation.

[The Aryan Nations]

you now need to tell me why you chose the term homophobe.

is the gay community so insecure they must assume anyone who disapproves of them is scared of them?

You'd have to ask them that.


The meaning of phobe is closer to hate than fear. Regardless I fail to recognize the subtle differences between "disapproving of miscegenation" and "being a racist".

well, i can help you with that.

>disapproving of Miscegenation (which has not been an issue since about 1970)
because if enough people interbreed, then there will be no more of our people left. its not racist, its promoting genetic diversity. why are you so anti-polyculturalist? (yes, the polyculturalist was a joke)

>being a racist
is hating someone on account of their genes.

[Unchecked Expansion]

there is this language named 'latin'. bastardizing it does not help anyone anywhere.

Then you're going to refrain from speaking English from now on? (and French, Italian, Spanish...)

[Cromarty]

Because the term 'homophobe' can't mean someone who hates gays.

Nope, not at all

there is this language named 'latin'. bastardizing it does not help anyone anywhere.

There is this language called 'English'. It's what we're speaking, and words that mean one thing in another language mean something else in this.

[The Aryan Nations]

>union busting
the unions have been known to cause more trouble than they help. such as forcing workers to join them and pay dues, and then do nothing for them, and to make it impossible to fire troublemakers. its one of the reasons that American public schools suck.
>fiercely opposed to regulation
yes, this is a good thing. its called 'respecting the rights of others'.

Public schools suck because they're locally funded and have softball curricula compared to the rest of the world which means "high school diploma" still counts as "unskilled labor."

Regulation is required to keep the free market free. Otherwise, competition gets stifled through massive consolidation.

>public schools suck on account of funding!
oh how wrong you are...

Regulation is the definition of a unfree market

[Unchecked Expansion]

>disapproving of Miscegenation (which has not been an issue since about 1970)
because if enough people interbreed, then there will be no more of our people left. its not racist, its promoting genetic diversity.

It's opposing genetic diversity. It's promoting limited gene pools, that kills genetic diversity.

[Des-Bal]

well, i can help you with that.

>disapproving of Miscegenation (which has not been an issue since about 1970)
because if enough people interbreed, then there will be no more of our people left. its not racist, its promoting genetic diversity. why are you so anti-polyculturalist? (yes, the polyculturalist was a joke)

>being a racist
is hating someone on account of their genes.

You're welcome to draw that distinction, I don't. I consider "disapproving" of homosexuals as homophobic I'm pretty sure most people would.

[The Aryan Nations]

there is this language named 'latin'. bastardizing it does not help anyone anywhere.

There is this language called 'English'. It's what we're speaking, and words that mean one thing in another language mean something else in this.

you use a latin prefix which means 'to fear'. therefore, 'homophobia' means 'fear of homosexuals' which is an inaccurate term. something using 'ism' would be far more accurate. perhaps 'gayism'

[Ecans]

Any chance of getting this forum back on topic? You know, the "South" thing?

[Cromarty]

There is this language called 'English'. It's what we're speaking, and words that mean one thing in another language mean something else in this.

you use a latin prefix which means 'to fear'. therefore, 'homophobia' means 'fear of homosexuals' which is an inaccurate term. something using 'ism' would be far more accurate. perhaps 'gayism'

Words change their meaning. Just as Yank now means 'American' so 'homophobia' means 'hatred or fear of homosexuals'

its called english

dwi

[Hittanryan]

Public schools suck because they're locally funded and have softball curricula compared to the rest of the world which means "high school diploma" still counts as "unskilled labor."

Regulation is required to keep the free market free. Otherwise, competition gets stifled through massive consolidation.

>public schools suck on account of funding!
oh how wrong you are...

Regulation is the definition of a unfree market

Way to ignore what I said about the curricula.

And without regulations, they become unfree anyway, less free, in fact, than if there were some damn antitrust laws in place. Then again, you support revisionist history, I wouldn't expect you to remember much about the Gilded Age.

[The Aryan Nations]

>public schools suck on account of funding!
oh how wrong you are...

Regulation is the definition of a unfree market

Way to ignore what I said about the curricula.

And without regulations, they become unfree anyway, less free, in fact, than if there were some damn antitrust laws in place. Then again, you support revisionist history, I wouldn't expect you to remember much about the Gilded Age.

>way to ignore what i said about curricula
yes, its because they lower the standards so minorities and poor people are capable of passing. remember? no child left behind didnt help either..

>without regulation they become unfree anyway!
so, to prevent the market from being unfree, we make it unfree?

you seem to be insinuating that the 1800s were not a free market time.

[Des-Bal]

>way to ignore what i said about curricula
yes, its because they lower the standards so minorities and poor people are capable of passing. remember? no child left behind didnt help either..

>without regulation they become unfree anyway!
so, to prevent the market from being unfree, we make it unfree?

you seem to be insinuating that the 1800s were not a free market time.

So your blaming the american public school system on minorities? You are providing a stellar defense of the south right now.

[Nidaria]

Any chance of getting this forum back on topic? You know, the "South" thing?

None whatsoever. Certainly all that liberals here care about is the fact that the South wants to protect its Judeo-Christian values from the corrupting force of homosexuality. Of course, since when did liberals tolerate the Judeo-Christian values which made the West the most powerful and successful civilization in history?

[Unchecked Expansion]

Any chance of getting this forum back on topic? You know, the "South" thing?

None whatsoever. Certainly all that liberals here care about is the fact that the South wants to protect its Judeo-Christian values from the corrupting force of homosexuality. Of course, since when did liberals tolerate the Judeo-Christian values which made the West the most powerful and successful civilization in history?

Since when was hating people for being different a good thing?
The good parts of Christian morality are the not judging, the loving your neighbour and disregarding grudges and disagreement. Those are the parts worth keeping.
Plus, give me one way in which homosexuality is corrupting.

[Hittanryan]

Way to ignore what I said about the curricula.

And without regulations, they become unfree anyway, less free, in fact, than if there were some damn antitrust laws in place. Then again, you support revisionist history, I wouldn't expect you to remember much about the Gilded Age.

>way to ignore what i said about curricula
yes, its because they lower the standards so minorities and poor people are capable of passing. remember? no child left behind didnt help either..

>without regulation they become unfree anyway!
so, to prevent the market from being unfree, we make it unfree?

you seem to be insinuating that the 1800s were not a free market time.

To prevent the market from being unfree, we make it slightly less free, which is still more free than an unregulated market. And no, a market dominated by monopolies is not free.

[Des-Bal]

None whatsoever. Certainly all that liberals here care about is the fact that the South wants to protect its Judeo-Christian values from the corrupting force of homosexuality. Of course, since when did liberals tolerate the Judeo-Christian values which made the West the most powerful and successful civilization in history?

I had to check some of your older posts to see if you were being sarcastic, trolling, or just legitimately wrong. This should be the heads up that there are problems with your position.

If people could whisper love thy neighbor as often as they shout thou shalt not the world would be a much better place.

[Nidaria]

None whatsoever. Certainly all that liberals here care about is the fact that the South wants to protect its Judeo-Christian values from the corrupting force of homosexuality. Of course, since when did liberals tolerate the Judeo-Christian values which made the West the most powerful and successful civilization in history?

Since when was hating people for being different a good thing?
The good parts of Christian morality are the not judging, the loving your neighbour and disregarding grudges and disagreement. Those are the parts worth keeping.
Plus, give me one way in which homosexuality is corrupting.

Homosexuality detracts from the sanctity of marriage and people are thus more lax in sexual matters. This has been illustrated in every western country which has legalized homosexuality.

We do love our neighbor, that is why we seek to protect everyone from corrupting influences.