What do you think of the Southeast US?

[Dachs]

Carthage is in Tunisia, sport

 

[Lord of Elves]

Silly me, Morocco, Tunisia. Need to bone up on my African geography. In any case, my point is that Formaldehyde's argument seems to be entirely based on some sort of Civil War-inspired belief that the south is an area entirely characterized by oppression of African-Americans and non-Europeans in general by the evil, faceless Caucasian hegemony. Which it doesn't take too great a mind to realize is only true if you also put aside the whole civil rights movement and pretend that Martin Luther King was never born.

Addressing your "preaching argument", Formaldehyde, any scientific inquiry would rule that as bunk by the point that it is second-hand information. Unless you are willing to go around surveying or doing your own study (or citing one) within the south, you can say virtually anything you want, but without the required evidence it is as worthy as the opinion of your average kindergardiner. Your citations of various off-color statements of politicians do little at all to represent any sort of cumulative sentiment within the south, as you yourself I am certain would concede that just because New Yorkers elected Elliot Spitzer does not mean they are all adulterers. Claiming that as evidence is either some sort of belief that representative assembly can never in any way be flawed, or simply a lack of knowledge pertaining to the actual nature of the south.

Moving back to the preacher, I am quite certain you would be able to find similar incidents occurring in the north. That the altercation you cite occurred in the south is only a minor piece of information in what would otherwise be your average news report. For example, Westboro Baptist Church (the establishment made infamous by "Thank God for dead soldiers", and the ministrations of Fred Phelps who is by no means welcome in Great Britain) is located in the mid-west. You could use this to say that the mid-west has a bigot issue, but what it more in my opinion accurately describes is that Kansas has a very large fundamentalist Christian population.

What your citation might more accurately describe is that Greenville is a center for anti-homosexual movements, rather than some sort of evidence of the conspiracy occurring in the south to impede social and technological progress. Also debunked by the presence of Research Triangle Park and other tech-industry centers within the Raleigh area, and throughout the south.

Now as far as religious persecution goes, I will be among the first people to say that we have a very real problem with that down here, but it has been my understanding that you have been referring to racial bigotism, which I do not believe is to the scale you seem to claim it is anymore.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Addressing your "preaching argument", Formaldehyde, any scientific inquiry would rule that as bunk by the point that it is second-hand information.

Are you going to provide such a "scientific inquiry" to prove that bigotry doesn't really exist in the South anymore because a sufficient number of Southerners claim it must be true? Or is everything you have to offer "second hand information"?

Once again, if there wasn't a sufficient amount of bigotry then these racist politicians would never become elected. That requires a large amount of support from likeminded people. Now doesn't it? If not, how do you explain the almost complete lack of bigots who successfully run for office in the north? That the ones who even appear like they have made a bigoted remark are doomed from political offfice?

What your citation might more accurately describe is that Greenville is a center for anti-homosexual movements, rather than some sort of evidence of the conspiracy occurring in the south to impede social and technological progress..

Are you now claiming that religion-inspired homophobia only occurs in the immediate area of Greenville, South Carolina, and really no place else in the South? Got any "scientific inquiries" which even suggest this hypothesis of yours might even possibly be true?

Does the recent persecution of a lesbian teenager in Mississippi who couldn't even attend her own prom sound familiar?

http://www.southernstudies.org/2009...-calls-for-better-state-and-federal-laws.html

Gay rights advocates point out that the tragic attacks on Sean Kennedy and Duanna Johnson illustrate the necessity of having comprehensive state-level hate-crime laws that include sexual orientation and gender identity. Currently, 31 states, plus the the District of Columbia, include sexual orientation in their hate crimes legislation, and just 11 include gender identity.

The South ranks far behind in legislation. Eight out of 13 Southern states' hate-crime laws are not inclusive of sexual orientation protections, and not one Southern state contains gender identity protections. According to the Human Rights Campaign, the five Southern states that do include sexual orientation in their hate crime laws are Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, Tennessee and Texas. The five Southern states that do not include sexual orientation or gender identity in their hate crime legislation are Alabama, Mississippi, North Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia.

Four states in the United States have no hate-crime laws whatsoever. Three are in the South: Arkansas, South Carolina and Georgia.

Also debunked by the presence of Research Triangle Park and other tech-industry centers within the Raleigh area, and throughout the south.

You mean in certain specific areas where the people are generally better educated, less provincial in their views, and where there are typically more Northerners than normal, that there is generally less bigotry? And this somehow debunks my views?

 

[Lord of Elves]

You can't at all link affiliation to the north or south to general intelligence. My family has been in this part of the country for generations, and we have a very large "faction", of left-leaning persons within it that you would probably consider educated and qualified.

Your information is second-hand due to the fact that it comes from quotes of people not immediately involved in the situations in question. I am not attempting to "counter", your evidence with evidence of my own, but merely pointing out that your argument is by no means justified simply by the citations you have brought into the discussion. Forgive my saying so, but your argument seems tilted to the slant that southerners are inherently unintelligent, uncivilized, and racially hateful by nature of being southerners. This is the equivalent of bigotry towards southerners, which is a confession of a failure to practice the values you so easily and highly preach from your place of residence, which God forbid might be in the south.

My point regarding the church in Greenville is that you could use that to argue that that region has problems, but it is hardly evidence of some sort of greater failure on the part of the south. Now, I will not argue against the idea that the south is a hot place for religious persecution and ignorance, but I will counter the idea that the south is racially bigoted or southerners by virtue of being from that area, are unintelligent and uncivilized. I will be the first person to admit that the south has its share of religious problems, but that does not represent a failure on the part of the south's population.

Also, is it at all possible that the citizenry elected such officials for reasons other than their racial or sexual intolerance, or are all northern elected officials canonized saints?

 

[Formaldehyde]

You can't at all link affiliation to the north or south to general intelligence.

You can't seem to help creating absurd strawmen from every remark I make, even after I have repeatedly stated that I have no such opinion! If you want me to respond to any more of your absurd characterizations of my posts, I suggest you actually quote me instead of deliberately twisting my words into another form that you think you can successfully attack!

And I suggest you actually provide your own facts to support your own continuing use of "second-hand" information, instead of continuing to whine that it pertains to me instead of you. So far, you have provided absolutely nothing in this regard while I continue to do so!

In other words, try actually discussing the issues instead of repeatedly trying to attack me in a completely ridiculous manner for opinions I obviously don't even hold!

 

[Lord of Elves]

You can't seem to help creating absurd strawmen from every remark I make, even after I have repeatedly stated that I have no such opinion! If you want me to respond to any more of your absurd characterizations of my posts, I suggest you actually quote me instead of deliberately twisting my words into another form that you think you can successfully attack!

And I suggest you actually provide your own facts to support your own continuing use of "second-hand" information, instead of continuing to whine that it pertains to me instead of you. So far, you have provided absolutely nothing in this regard while I continue to do so!

In other words, try actually discussing the issues instead of repeatedly trying to attack me in a completely ridiculous manner for opinions I obviously don't even hold!

You have provided nothing at all but quotes from newspaper articles, which hold quotes from quotes, from quotes, as well as the odd quote from politicians who quite usually haven't been office for several years.