At first I thought he was just misinformed and tried to politely correct them, but now I see that they really just try to provoke people and using arguments of similar structures to the ones caring so much about displaying the Confederate Flag "because it's part of their American history".
Yes, obviously because I disagree with your word banning I must be one of those confederate flag waving rednecks.
It would be impossible for me to be a lifelong liberal voter with a track record of donating to liberal causes, a certificate in LGBTQ studies and a history of activism on a variety of issues.
Sensible people can have sensible disagreements. Jumping to insulting people who disagree with you and tarring them is poor form and reflects badly on your position.
Not "must" but bayesian statistics would argue it likely. Just as it would be highly unusual for somebody who generally supports progressive social ideas to loudly oppose language changes which are generally agreed to be anti-racist. If you do fall into this tiny minority, it would be fascinating to understand how you justify this apparent dissonance.
You keep spreading false facts and when disproved, just jump on to false logic:
You're claiming I'm insulting you, but how? By pointing out the fact that much like people who'd argue it's fine to display the confederate flag because it's large part of american history regardless of the bad things associated with it or how it makes black people feel?
Are you insulted by comparison of argument structure?
Good, perhaps that'll help you see how black people might feel when they're faced with people like you, who insist on using terms that would have never coined if black people weren't an underrepresented minority in the software industry.
