Aielyn
You seem distressed by typos.
Except, you dope, he hasn't called just bigots "racists", he's called people "racist" merely for identifying someone as belonging to a racial group
So, African Americans are racist, and so are Aboriginies
I see, when "ethnicity" is defined by certain specific properties, that's OK, but when "race" is defined in EXACTLY the same way, that's 'racism'. What hypocrisy
And yet you ignore the usage of "race" based on similar preconditions. How convenient
Yet you both have no problems categorising people according to equally unscientific criteria, but under the nice-n-cuddly term of "ethnicity".
And yet anyone using race in *exactly* the same way is "racist". What a hypocritical idiot you are.
However, while describing someone as "white" can be
And identifying someone as an "ethnic" group they don't actually belong to is the same thing. Yet somehow, that is not "racist"
No, it's a sensible question that turns his idiotic logic agains himself, ie.
"race" cannot be defined scientifically, so is arbitrary = RACIST "ethnicity" cannot be defined scientifically, so is arbitrary = GOOD
great circular reasoning: confining the usage of "race" according to "racists", and ignoring the usage of the term which has identical criteria to "ethnicity", yet "ethnicity" is AOK, but "race" is "racist", even when used in the same way.
great thinking there, bozo
And you have not once been able to address the point that "race" and "ethnicity" can be used in an identical fashion, yet you ludicrously buttert that "race" is bad because it is arbitrary, but "ethnicity" is fine because it is just as arbitrary!
Fantastic logic.
And you've not shown that race can't be simiarly defined. You just keep shrieking that using "race" is "racist", but your lame construct is somehow OK.
BTW, still waiting to hear if African-Americans are all racists
