Martin omally apologizes for saying "all lives matter"

[god1]

Isn't it funny that 'contracts' and 'courts' can be biased as well? And that historically 'contrats' and 'courts' have been against African Americans as well here in the United States? My example works perfectly well and fine, you're just scared to acknowledge it.

Where do you live? You're just being silly.

No professional conducts business the way you described. In fact that's exactly the reason the family of the "wronged" are in court.

The topic is bias of the media and whether civic exclusion/segregation is as effective as inclusion.

 

[UncleBuck]

Where do you live? You're just being silly.

No professional conducts business the way you described. In fact that's exactly the reason the family of the "wronged" are in court.

The topic is bias of the media and whether civic exclusion/segregation is as effective as inclusion.

are you claiming that the courts are not biased against blacks?

you know who else shares that view? white supremacists like jared taylor.

 

[god1]

are you claiming that the courts are not biased against blacks?

you know who else shares that view? white supremacists like jared taylor.

No doubt, by definition courts are suspectable to bias. Why would you think otherwise? Courts and jurys are composed of humans.

Improvement comes via inclusion, not segregation. The objective is to overcome bias, not amplifiy it.

 

[god1]

none of the rest of what you wrote contradicts what you said to him.

you clearly don't believe the courts are biased against blacks.

Boy you're just really obtuse tonight. I'll try to help you out.
Start with my original comment to him.
Try to absorb my second comment.
Recognize in my comment to you, the referral to "bias" is scalar in nature, as opposed to a vector. Note the comment re composition of the judicial system.

Ask yourself, what would determine the direction of the bias vector given my definition?

 

[UncleBuck]

Boy you're just really obtuse tonight. I'll try to help you out.
Start with my original comment to him.
Try to absorb my second comment.
Recognize in my comment to you, the referral to "bias" is scalar in nature, as opposed to a vector. Note the comment re composition of the judicial system.

Ask yourself, what would determine the direction of the bias vector given my definition?

please tell me how i misconstrued your remarks:

Isn't it funny that 'contracts' and 'courts' can be biased as well? And that historically 'contrats' and 'courts' have been against African Americans as well here in the United States?

Where do you live? You're just being silly.

 

[god1]

please tell me how i misconstrued your remarks:

Isn't it funny that 'contracts' and 'courts' can be biased as well? And that historically 'contrats' and 'courts' have been against African Americans as well here in the United States?

Where do you live? You're just being silly.

Okay, I'll take you at your word that you're confused and I wasn't clear enough.

Take your last sentence, the part just before the comma, "My example works perfectly well and fine, ..."
My original response "Come up with a different analogy" was in reference to this concept. I continue to tell you it's not appropriate in this second response. "No professional conducts business the way you described. In fact that's exactly the reason the family of the "wronged" are in court."
Then I go on to describe to you what the conversation is about.

I completely ignored your original comment re "court bias" as justification for the analogy. It just isn't applicable. It's not how business is conducted.

That response wasn't a denial that potential bias does exist; people are part of the equation. I recognize now, my goofy sentence structure didn't help.

Later Buck