'I cannot stand Jewish people'
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
Actually, I rather people round their own logical stances rather than 'take shots'
However, does one afternoon's rant create a hostile work enviornment- or does three refusals to accept an apology create said 'enviorment'?
So would saying I hate lawyers be non PC ? Or is that perhaps too common to be not PC? Note I don't care what sex, religion or skin color they are.
Why is one person responsible for how someone else feels? Some people are just far too ready to blame others for their feeling, when in fact, nobody can make you feel anything. Your reactions are your reactions. They are a product of your environment and your life circumstances. You either learn how to deal with your emotions or you let them run your life. That is your choice and nobody can make you feel one way or the other. Like I've said before, is someone tells me I'm an azzhole, I just agree with them and the situation is defused. A fragile ego is a very cruel task master.
Google "civil rights" and "hostile work environment."
I agree, actually. I'm appalled at all this crap.
Quite right so then this woman needs to learn how to deal. I don't care much about her hate for Jews nor her manner of expression. But really would you want to give your hard earned money to someone this out of control? She is displaying unhinged behaviour. She is easily dismissed as she does not "appear" to have any ability to persuade others. She should seek help sooner rather than later. This will just be the surface of her psychological problems.
I've had bad experiences with Muslims in the past, so I can't stand Muslim people. I've had bad experiences with white people in the past, so I can't stand us. I've had bad experiences with black peole in the past, so I can't stand black people either. Hmmm... is that why I have no friends?
There are two fairly large
logic flaws in your argument. You may wish to change them onyour own or do you prefer to have them pointed out?
Fantastic! Yes I've always wanted some random guy on the internet to tell me where and in what ways I am wrong and they, of course, are right. Can you also be really condescending when you do it too? Because that would just be super!
Of course if you're actually interested in discussing anything, this being a discussion forum and all (I know, it's too predictable, right?) you might try a slightly different approach. But that's your call.
Either way, just so you know, I don't actually care.
Fantastic! Yes I've always wanted some random guy on the internet to tell me where and in what ways I am wrong and they, of course, are right. Can you also be really condescending when you do it too? Because that would just be super!
Of course if you're actually interested in discussing anything, this being a discussion forum and all (I know, it's too predictable, right?) you might try a slightly different approach. But that's your call.
Either way, just so you know, I don't actually care.
That is flaw #1 IN your argument. You ASSUME that your poitn of debate is YOURSELF and NOT the POINT you are attempting to make. Therefore, you arguments become a series of Ad Homeinem, Ad Hoc attacks..
All too common in internet debates- but all too unfortunate.
That is flaw #1 IN your argument. You ASSUME that your poitn of debate is YOURSELF and NOT the POINT you are attempting to make. Therefore, you arguments become a series of Ad Homeinem, Ad Hoc attacks..
All too common in internet debates- but all too unfortunate.
Your flaw is assuming she is having a structured debate with you, and not a normal discussion.... despite her having pointed out which it was.
That is flaw #1 IN your argument. You ASSUME that your poitn of debate is YOURSELF and NOT the POINT you are attempting to make. Therefore, you arguments become a series of Ad Hominum, Ad Hoc attacks..
Instead of a concise analysis of why you feel your position is correct.
All too common in internet debates- but all too unfortunate.
ALWAYS separate yourself from the point at hand.
Its only the internet...after all.
I wouldn't define the discsuuion as normal. Any pretense to civility has gone out the window- unfortunately- SLM attempts to 'paint ' a false structural opponent, then blast at it.
I wouldn't define the discsuuion as normal. Any pretense to civility has gone out the window- unfortunately- SLM attempts to 'paint ' a false structural opponent, then blast at it.
hmmm... false? That's one opinion I suppose.
OF COURSE it's a false position, Karrie.
My BASIC PREMISE remains the same - a slight that could have been repaired with a simple offer and acceptance of apology became a travesty of bureaucratic theatre.
Fourty years ago, any man, Hadasin or not, blundering his way to his
assumed greater need' for medical care ahead of an infant wouldl have been firml;y told to wait.
Inthe age of group political correctness, he got away with it. Can't make an 'ethnic fuss' now, can we?
OF COURSE it's a false position, Karrie.
My BASIC PREMISE remains the same - a slight that could have been repaired with a simple offer and acceptance of apology became a travesty of bureaucratic theatre.
Fourty years ago, any man, Hadasin or not, blundering his way to his
assumed greater need' for medical care ahead of an infant wouldl have been firml;y told to wait.
Inthe age of group political correctness, he got away with it. Can't make an 'ethnic fuss' now, can we?
False - It depends upon how the person acts upon it.
OF COURSE it's a false position, Karrie.
My BASIC PREMISE remains the same - a slight that could have been repaired with a simple offer and acceptance of apology became a travesty of bureaucratic theatre.
Fourty years ago, any man, Hadasin or not, blundering his way to his
assumed greater need' for medical care ahead of an infant wouldl have been firml;y told to wait.
Inthe age of group political correctness, he got away with it. Can't make an 'ethnic fuss' now, can we?
I disagree.
You're assuming the reasoning for getting him in is what the bigoted woman says it was, that her bigotry is based on that moment, and not that her perception of that moment is based off her bigotry. That assumption is largely flawed.
What we do know is what transpired between these two women. And without the tinted lens through which you're looking, one comes to the conclusion that the woman in question is a bigoted moron who behaved inappropriately at work.
You have of course every right to disagree, but thank you for the disagrement without the 'innuendo packing'.
Although I am 'new ' here,I would advise ALL posters to PRACTISE DECORUM. there was nothing in my premise which made it 'racist'
or me a 'Bigot', religous fanatic', illiterate', et cetera yad yad yada...
You really don't want to look like silly puddings, now, do you?
You have of course every right to disagree, but thank you for the disagrement without the 'innuendo packing'.
Although I am 'new ' here,I would advise ALL posters to PRACTISE DECORUM. there was nothing in my premise which made it 'racist'
or me a 'Bigot', religous fanatic', illiterate', et cetera yad yad yada...
You really don't want to look like silly puddings, now, do you?
It sounds like you're doing some heavy reading between the lines, or I missed a post or two to you.
Judgement and info not posted yet- file number 339124 - approx 7 weeks or longer for it to be posted.
SRA | Morris, Danielle Lisa - 339124 | Solicitors Regulation Authority
SRA | Morris, Danielle Lisa - 339124 | Solicitors Regulation Authority
they are starting off with a hefty fine...and then, is this her firm being examined, or her by her firm, or her by some higher law ethics committee... I'm confused