If a black person votes for Obama

[YOhio]

only because of his race, does that make the voter a racist? I really don't think so. No more than it makes a Mormon voting for Romney a religious bigot.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by YOhio

only because of his race, does that make the voter a racist? I really don't think so. No more than it makes a Mormon voting for Romney a religious bigot.

Not necessarily but Obama doesn't transcend his race because he mainly appeals to members of his father's race.

Why is he the candidate of his father's race and of the under thirty crowd? Now, my anecdotal observation about many of the under thirty crowd is that they have a sense of entitlement to everything without a need to accomplish. I wonder if that attaches to why he appeals to members of the under thirties. He caters to those who want to be coddled from cradle to grave, and the do nothing generation harbors that hope.

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by YOhio

only because of his race, does that make the voter a racist? I really don't think so. No more than it makes a Mormon voting for Romney a religious bigot.

I think you are right. However, in the case of a white guy voting for a white guy because he is white, that is racism. Mike proved it.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by BYU71

the case of a white guy voting for a white guy because he is white

It is not the same thing.

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

It is not the same thing.

I know. Mike proved it.

[YOhio]

Originally Posted by BYU71

I think you are right. However, in the case of a white guy voting for a white guy because he is white, that is racism. Mike proved it.

If the white voter chooses the white candidate because the other candidate is black, then that voter is a racist.

I freely admit that I maintain some sentiments of religious bigotry. I will not likely vote for a Scientologist, Wiccan, Mormon fundamentalist, Muslim fundamentalist, or Christian fundamentalist based solely on their religious. The candidate would have to make a very persuasive case to overcome my skepticism about their judgment.

Now, when it comes to black voters voting for a black candidate just because of their race, I completely sympathize with it. Fourty-five years ago blacks were being firehosed in Alabama. They couldn't drink the same water, sleep in the same hotels or sit on the same bus seat as white people. I'm certain it was unimaginable to the students of segregated schools that they would have an opportunity to vote for a black candidate for President of the United States in their lifetime. Those memories are still fresh to most blacks today and I imagine that they don't want to miss an opportunity to vote for the first viable black candidate for president. I don't agree that this is the best criteria for candidate selection, but I understand it and don't think it's racism.

[creekster]

We have had this debate before. Based on our discussions, it IS rascism, but it may not be objectionable. Go back and look at the definition of rascism that was accepted here.

one on-line definition says this:

1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

This forum used the second definition. But is it objectionable? different issue.

[SeattleUte]

I agree with YOhio except I quibble with him calling himself a religious bigot for bias against religious kooks. I submit he has a rational basis, on the merits, for his bias. Religion, unlike skin color, is a choice. It's hard to be a bigot against religion in the same sense as a racist is a bigot.

Creekster, throw away the dictionary when talking bout racism. We're talking about our ethos, our public virtue here, which, for the reasons YO explained, are on his side in this debate.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by YOhio

only because of his race, does that make the voter a racist? I really don't think so. No more than it makes a Mormon voting for Romney a religious bigot.

Minorities cannot be racists. You know this, YOhio.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Creekster, throw away the dictionary when talking bout racism. We're talking about our ethos, our public virtue here, which, for the reasons YO explained, are on his side in this debate.

I don't disagree with you, but playing the grumpy old man role I so relish, I merely point out that this very group settled on a very undiscrimnating menaing of the term rascism but now apparently backs away. HHHmph.