RationalMadman challenged, I accepted.

I never even argued with you to begin with. U give yourself too much credit. Child

Oh look, two pages in and 🐓 💩 so-called “rational” madman (an “experienced” debater.  RN has not fully accepted the challenge he put forth. 

Speaks volumes. 

Hm.. whatever you would like to say. Seems like you at least tried. Also adding "insults" that apply more towards you than me. At least based on your behavior. 

If racism is in a culture then you can win that debate either way around with how it's currently worded since if I prove racism is a cause for inequality, you can say that's the culture not the race.

For topic 3 if the very reason that certain ethnicities run from the cops, resist arrest more violently and/or are overall less cooperative is due to racist approached from the cops traumatising their elders and even peers and leading to a phobia of cops as well as the cops being more anticipating of an abrasive interaction, these things combined can lead to topic 3 getting very muddied especially with how long of a topic title you gave.

The thing is I actually agree to you on some level but what do you mean by 'culture' and why can culture on one end not coincide with real racism on the other side?

I am just perplexed why it's one or the other for you?

Big Hat, No Cattle

Black Pastor reacts to debate between BLM supportive speakers and Ben Shapiro: “It has nothing to do with race, and everything to do with culture.”

😂 You’re funny. 

You’re so wrong on all subjective opinions put forth. It’s the cult of victimology indoctrination that causes blacks to behave as they do when it comes to any authority figures: adults (their elders), teachers, law enforcement officers, etc. Cops are not inherently “racists,” and you know it. 

“The victimology cult has in turn engendered a cult of black separatism. Inspired by the Black Power movement of the 1960s, which violently rejected whites as terminally evil, today’s separatism, in the same vein, flirts disastrously with the idea that, because white racism ineluctably drives black people outside the bounds of civic virtue, blacks shouldn’t be seriously punished or morally condemned for criminal behavior. Black transgressiveness is understandable, even “cool.” A typical consequence of this view was the feting of the four black youths who maimed several people in Los Angeles after the Rodney King verdict, with the Nation of Islam setting up a defense fund for the “L.A. Four.” The most recent manifestation of the idea was Jesse Jackson’s intervention when a Decatur, Illinois, high school suspended for two years seven black teenagers who injured bystanders during a gang fight at a school football game. Jackson painted this response to thuggery as a racist attempt to deny “our children” an education.”

It’s not a topic “title,” it’s an introduction.

Only you would muddy it with nonsensical retorts. The reality of what the topic brings forth can be easily discussed, as there are several resources from which to pull from to address factually accurate truths vs the leftist fictional narrative. 

“Seven: Excessive police brutality against blacks shows that racism reigns eternal.Certainly blacks have suffered greater police brutality than whites. But this constitutes not the prevalence of overt racism, but its last holdout; as Orlando Patterson argues, you’d expect racism to persist longest precisely among undereducated keepers of order working under conditions likely to spark impulsiveness. And most important, the police brutality situation is improving rapidly. For example, though I think Officer Justin Volpe would not have brutalized a white suspect as he brutalized Haitian Abner Louima, his expectation that the “blue wall of silence” would protect him proved false. In the Diallo and Dorismond killings, the undertraining of police officers to deal with chaotic, tense situations was much more at fault than white racism—and, of course, black officers have been involved in similar cases across the country, though such cases don’t get headlines in the liberal media.”

so what is the actual topic you want to debate?

You told me to select three topics and what position I’d take, then you’d choose. 

Now you want me to choose? 🤦‍♂️

I could out argue you on any of the three. But the first and third are a part of my favorite current real world topics, and ones I’ve researched to no end since I obtained my criminology degree. 

I am okay with the first. Remove the part after the semicolon and I will accept

Nope. The second part is part and parcel to the first part. 

You are the one who is afraid.

If you can bypass all examples of racism, shether systemic or social/specific to 'culture problems' then you can autowin.

No, you’re the one who is afraid.

Bet you didn’t watch that video I linked to with the black pastor. That video explains to the proverbial “T” why both parts of topic one are not NOT mutually exclusive (they go hand in hand). 

Yeah you want a loophole in topics 1 and 3 to say all racism is cultural not racial

i remember one guy said something like this.

"if you call icing frosting, you should beat yourself."

to which the other person said "trust me i am"

Wrong. That’s not what I’m (or Ben Shapiro in that video for which the black pastor agreed, as do many blacks for that matter) saying AT ALL!!! 

If you cannot comprehend plainly written language, what makes you think you can out argue me in a debate!?! 

Thanks for contributing nothing. 

  

Oh how cute, the typical “I know you are but what am I” sophomorically banal response. 🙄

I could really say the same. Everyother comment is "🙄".

Either way I wasn't trying to write something as an insult.

No. You really look u could not say the same. 

Go outside and play, or pester someone else. 

Your the one pestering me. 

You came at me with the challenge, I accepted. 

I provided three topics and my position (pro), to date you’ve yet to choose either topic in their entirety. Your excuses have been invalidated. And your blatant misunderstanding of what topic 1 and 3 are clearly about speaks volumes. 

Clearly your challenge was an empty one. 

I mean really, when you asked me what I meant by “culture,” having given you a detailed reply, you said nothing. It’s as if you just ignored all of it. The. You asked me what topic I wanted to debate, sidestepping your role of choosing. 

At this point it’s pretty clear you’re not wanting to debate me on any of those clearly worded  three separate topics given. 

So be it. 🗡️

Melcharaz,

Onky intellectual cowards block people with whom they disagree with or cannot out argue. 

🃏 

More sophomoric banality via psychological projection. 

You continuing shows just how childish you are right now. If its not clear, i'm not even trying to make insults after I made it clear I wasn't here for arguing. I merely was stating my interest in the (possible) debate. 

If I just stop responding maybe you'll stop baiting an argument? Hm, maybe.