Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You're the one who's claiming that America has all these problems of Systemic racism; I am not. So, what are YOUR solutions?
Put them here:
And therein lies the problem. Whites refuse to accept they have a large role in providing solutions to end the racism in their communities and that they teach to themselves.
Put your solutions here, no more deflection:
Explain why affirmative Action was created. Stop deflecting. Now as to my solution.
And therein lies the problem. Whites refuse to accept they have a large role in providing solutions to end the racism in their communities and that they teach to themselves.
So you want me to teach to myself that I am racist.
That is your solution?
Are you really that damn stupid?
There are several reasons why it's ignorant starting with the fact that you limited the conversation to "black" babies as if white women don't have abortions. But the biggest factor is that you stated that black people should should oppose Roe v Wade BECAUSE it oppresses us, your exact statement being "I can think of a ruling that blacks should absolutely oppose because it oppresses them: Roe v Wade". Why would Roe v Wade only oppress black people but according to you not white people?So bringing up the number of black babies that have been eliminated due to abortion is "ignorant"? Why is that ignorant?
Or do you mean it is INCONVENIENT. For you. Yes, I think that's what you mean.
Forcing women to give birth to children they don't want to have is exactly what was happening to the black women who were held as slaves and being used as broodmares either to increase the slave owners holdings or as a result of rape by him/them. How in the hell you arrived at the conclusion that taking away a woman's choice over her reproductive life is a good thing is beyond my comprehension so I revert back to my original conclusion that this is nothing more than a deflection.
And if you had bothered to read the Roe v Wade ruing you would know that at least a large part of the reasoning behind the ruling was the acknowledgment that no form of birth control is 100% effective. Convenient, inconveniet or not, it's still the woman's choice to make and 100% legal in this country at this time.
The U.S. isn't a white supremacist country because of who lives here, it's because of the laws that were passed based on the racist belief of white superiority and black inferiorty. THAT is what makes the origins of the U.S. white supremacist - the fact that the founders not only believed it, but that they created laws to enforce these beliefs.
I live here because I have as much right to this country as anyone else who was born here. And things don't change by abandoning them and going somehwhere else. That doesn't mean I agree with all of our laws, few people do, instead we work to do what we can to eliminate the inequalities.
the worst American is doing a lot better than the other countriesand it's definitely not racismrace relations should not be/is not an important subject
the economy/etc is
what MAJOR racial problems are there--that affect more of the people--more than the economy/taxes/etc?
Why should something that impacts everyone's day to day not be an important subject?
But racism effects most people's lives in the US on a daily basis.
Look, the US has the worst crime in the First World. It has ghettos where poor people are left to rot, and race has played a massive part in all of that.
I've been all over the world
I've posted and PROVEN many times, Africa is the shithole of the world
No, it's not "OF COURSE white women have benefited most" because when this conversation started you stated Affirmative Action was a program put into place that gave preferential hiring & college admittance to minorities and were using it as a false example of current legislation that is in place that elevates the rights of blacks above whites. You stuck with this position until it was pointed out to the that the text of the law is race neutral and that in fact more white women have benefited from the program than any other group.OF COURSE white women have benefited most by the numbers--blacks are only 12% of the population, so what do you expect?? What a silly basis for your argument. And did I say I oppose AA? I don't believe I did. Why do you assume so much?
No, it's not "OF COURSE white women have benefited most" because when this conversation started you stated Affirmative Action was a program put into place that gave preferential hiring & college admittance to minorities and were using it as a false example of current legislation that is in place that elevates the rights of blacks above whites. You stuck with this position until it was pointed out to the that the text of the law is race neutral and that in fact more white women have benefited from the program than any other group.OF COURSE white women have benefited most by the numbers--blacks are only 12% of the population, so what do you expect?? What a silly basis for your argument. And did I say I oppose AA? I don't believe I did. Why do you assume so much?
So yeah, you did originally imply that you opposed it as being anti-white even if you didn't spell it out that way.
You know that's not what I said. This is what I stated:You said 100% of the white people were white supremacists just be cause they lived in this country at the time. Well guess what, if you are going to start saying 100%, it doesn't stop at white.
Frankly, I don't care if you go or stay, and if you want to get rid of inequalities, you need to stop seeing yourself as less than equal, own it.
You know that's not what I said. This is what I stated:You said 100% of the white people were white supremacists just be cause they lived in this country at the time. Well guess what, if you are going to start saying 100%, it doesn't stop at white.
"I've never researched what percentage of the U.S. population were slave owners but it is indisputable that the country was 100% white supremacist because it was written into our laws"
I've listed some of the laws and rulings that I was referring to below but I thought I'd already posted this
Frankly, I don't care if you go or stay, and if you want to get rid of inequalities, you need to stop seeing yourself as less than equal, own it.
So in your race addled mind, the only reason I could possibly be opposing inequalities is because I view myself as less than equal? WHY would you conclude that? And please stop misquoting me, I said that the United States of American was a 100% white supremacist country when it was founded. Black people were not considered citizens whether they were slaves or freed therefore they were completely excluded from any decision making including that which involved them. Blacks could also not sue white people nor testify against them, they essentially had no rights to speak of. White women could not vote and only white, land owning males could participate in government decision making and voting. That means that all black people, all white women and all poor whites who didn't own land were excluded.
racism [the white supremacy referred to is definition #2]
[rey-siz-uh m]
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
Examples of Institutional Racism by Whites Against Blacks
- a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.
- a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
NOTE: There are no comparable statutes by Blacks Against Whites)
- Excerpt From the State of Texas's Declaration of Secession
"She [the state of Texas] was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery--the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits--a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time.
....
We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the ***white *** race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an ***inferior*** and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.
....
That in this free government all ***white men*** are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states.
- Supreme Court Justice Taney in Dred Scot v Sanford
blacks "had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit. He was bought and sold and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic, whenever profit could be made by it."
Dred Scott case
- Blacks in the military circa WWII
Black Codes
Black Codes (United States) - Wikipedia
Black Codes in the antebellum South heavily regulated the activities and behavior of blacks. North Carolina restricted slaves from leaving their plantation; if one tried to court (date) a woman on another property, he risked severe punishments at the hands of the patrollers or needed a pass in order to pursue this relationship.[8] In many southern states, particularly after the insurrection of 1831, free Blacks were prohibited from the basic constitutional rights to assemble in groups, bear arms, learn to read and write, exercise free speech, or testify against white people in Court.[9][10][11][12] After 1810, states made manumissions of slaves more difficult to obtain, often requiring an act of legislature for each case. This sharply reduced the incidence of planters freeing slaves.[12]
[article]
List of Jim Crow Laws Listed By State
List of Jim Crow law examples by state - Wikipedia
a few examples
Alabama
Arizona
- "It shall be unlawfully to conduct a restaurant or other place for the serving of food in the city, at which white and colored people are served in the same room, unless such white and colored persons are effectually separated by a solid partition extending from the floor upward to a distance of seven feet or higher, and unless a separate entrance from the street is provided for each compartment."
1864: Miscegenation [Statute] Marriages between whites with "Negroes, Indians, Mongolians" were declared illegal and void. The word "Descendants" does not appear in the statute.
California
An 1850 California statute provided that “no black, mulatto person, or Indian, shall be allowed to give evidence in favor of, or against a white man.” In 1854, the Supreme Court of California held that the statute precluded persons of Chinese descent from testifying for or against a white man. “It can hardly be supposed that any Legislature would . . exclud[e] domestic negroes and Indians, . . . and turn loose upon the community the more degraded tribes of the same species, who have nothing in common with us.”[5]
California's constitution stated that "no native of China" shall ever exercise the privileges of an elector in the state." Similar provisions appeared in the constitutions of Oregon and Idaho.
Why would white women be the largest beneficiares if the program was created to elevate minorities? That's the only point I'm trying to make. Everyone keeps crying about how affirmative action is elevating unqualifed black people over qualified white people when in fact the group who has benefited most from the program have been white women, but it's not just you who believed this, it's most of the whites here on these boards who have participated in conversations on race.They are going to benefit most by numbers because the black population is only 12%.
Except affirmative action does not authorize thisAnd no, I don't automatically oppose it as being "anti-white". However, there is no doubt that if you are black, Hispanic or Native-American in the scenario above, you are given a wider admission criteria than if you are white. So in that case, AA is of benefit to minorities, and that cannot be refuted.
You know that's not what I said. This is what I stated:You said 100% of the white people were white supremacists just be cause they lived in this country at the time. Well guess what, if you are going to start saying 100%, it doesn't stop at white.
"I've never researched what percentage of the U.S. population were slave owners but it is indisputable that the country was 100% white supremacist because it was written into our laws"
I've listed some of the laws and rulings that I was referring to below but I thought I'd already posted this
Frankly, I don't care if you go or stay, and if you want to get rid of inequalities, you need to stop seeing yourself as less than equal, own it.
So in your race addled mind, the only reason I could possibly be opposing inequalities is because I view myself as less than equal? WHY would you conclude that? And please stop misquoting me, I said that the United States of American was a 100% white supremacist country when it was founded. Black people were not considered citizens whether they were slaves or freed therefore they were completely excluded from any decision making including that which involved them. Blacks could also not sue white people nor testify against them, they essentially had no rights to speak of. White women could not vote and only white, land owning males could participate in government decision making and voting. That means that all black people, all white women and all poor whites who didn't own land were excluded.
racism [the white supremacy referred to is definition #2]
[rey-siz-uh m]
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
Examples of Institutional Racism by Whites Against Blacks
- a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.
- a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
NOTE: There are no comparable statutes by Blacks Against Whites)
- Excerpt From the State of Texas's Declaration of Secession
"She [the state of Texas] was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery--the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits--a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time.
....
We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the ***white *** race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an ***inferior*** and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.
....
That in this free government all ***white men*** are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states.
- Supreme Court Justice Taney in Dred Scot v Sanford
blacks "had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit. He was bought and sold and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic, whenever profit could be made by it."
Dred Scott case
- Blacks in the military circa WWII
Black Codes
Black Codes (United States) - Wikipedia
Black Codes in the antebellum South heavily regulated the activities and behavior of blacks. North Carolina restricted slaves from leaving their plantation; if one tried to court (date) a woman on another property, he risked severe punishments at the hands of the patrollers or needed a pass in order to pursue this relationship.[8] In many southern states, particularly after the insurrection of 1831, free Blacks were prohibited from the basic constitutional rights to assemble in groups, bear arms, learn to read and write, exercise free speech, or testify against white people in Court.[9][10][11][12] After 1810, states made manumissions of slaves more difficult to obtain, often requiring an act of legislature for each case. This sharply reduced the incidence of planters freeing slaves.[12]
[article]
List of Jim Crow Laws Listed By State
List of Jim Crow law examples by state - Wikipedia
a few examples
Alabama
Arizona
- "It shall be unlawfully to conduct a restaurant or other place for the serving of food in the city, at which white and colored people are served in the same room, unless such white and colored persons are effectually separated by a solid partition extending from the floor upward to a distance of seven feet or higher, and unless a separate entrance from the street is provided for each compartment."
1864: Miscegenation [Statute] Marriages between whites with "Negroes, Indians, Mongolians" were declared illegal and void. The word "Descendants" does not appear in the statute.
California
An 1850 California statute provided that “no black, mulatto person, or Indian, shall be allowed to give evidence in favor of, or against a white man.” In 1854, the Supreme Court of California held that the statute precluded persons of Chinese descent from testifying for or against a white man. “It can hardly be supposed that any Legislature would . . exclud[e] domestic negroes and Indians, . . . and turn loose upon the community the more degraded tribes of the same species, who have nothing in common with us.”[5]
California's constitution stated that "no native of China" shall ever exercise the privileges of an elector in the state." Similar provisions appeared in the constitutions of Oregon and Idaho.
Why would white women be the largest beneficiares if the program was created to elevate minorities? That's the only point I'm trying to make. Everyone keeps crying about how affirmative action is elevating unqualifed black people over qualified white people when in fact the group who has benefited most from the program have been white women, but it's not just you who believed this, it's most of the whites here on these boards who have participated in conversations on race.They are going to benefit most by numbers because the black population is only 12%.
Except affirmative action does not authorize thisAnd no, I don't automatically oppose it as being "anti-white". However, there is no doubt that if you are black, Hispanic or Native-American in the scenario above, you are given a wider admission criteria than if you are white. So in that case, AA is of benefit to minorities, and that cannot be refuted.
Why would white women be the largest beneficiares if the program was created to elevate minorities? That's the only point I'm trying to make. Everyone keeps crying about how affirmative action is elevating unqualifed black people over qualified white people when in fact the group who has benefited most from the program have been white women, but it's not just you who believed this, it's most of the whites here on these boards who have participated in conversations on race.They are going to benefit most by numbers because the black population is only 12%.
Except affirmative action does not authorize thisAnd no, I don't automatically oppose it as being "anti-white". However, there is no doubt that if you are black, Hispanic or Native-American in the scenario above, you are given a wider admission criteria than if you are white. So in that case, AA is of benefit to minorities, and that cannot be refuted.
What state were you born in and what state do you currently live in?the problem is racism is nowhere near the problem the blacks are to themselves
murder
crime
not graduating
etc
You know that's not what I said. This is what I stated:You said 100% of the white people were white supremacists just be cause they lived in this country at the time. Well guess what, if you are going to start saying 100%, it doesn't stop at white.
"I've never researched what percentage of the U.S. population were slave owners but it is indisputable that the country was 100% white supremacist because it was written into our laws"
I've listed some of the laws and rulings that I was referring to below but I thought I'd already posted this
Frankly, I don't care if you go or stay, and if you want to get rid of inequalities, you need to stop seeing yourself as less than equal, own it.
So in your race addled mind, the only reason I could possibly be opposing inequalities is because I view myself as less than equal? WHY would you conclude that? And please stop misquoting me, I said that the United States of American was a 100% white supremacist country when it was founded. Black people were not considered citizens whether they were slaves or freed therefore they were completely excluded from any decision making including that which involved them. Blacks could also not sue white people nor testify against them, they essentially had no rights to speak of. White women could not vote and only white, land owning males could participate in government decision making and voting. That means that all black people, all white women and all poor whites who didn't own land were excluded.
racism [the white supremacy referred to is definition #2]
[rey-siz-uh m]
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
Examples of Institutional Racism by Whites Against Blacks
- a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.
- a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
NOTE: There are no comparable statutes by Blacks Against Whites)
- Excerpt From the State of Texas's Declaration of Secession
"She [the state of Texas] was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery--the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits--a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time.
....
We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the ***white *** race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an ***inferior*** and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.
....
That in this free government all ***white men*** are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states.
- Supreme Court Justice Taney in Dred Scot v Sanford
blacks "had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit. He was bought and sold and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic, whenever profit could be made by it."
Dred Scott case
- Blacks in the military circa WWII
Black Codes
Black Codes (United States) - Wikipedia
Black Codes in the antebellum South heavily regulated the activities and behavior of blacks. North Carolina restricted slaves from leaving their plantation; if one tried to court (date) a woman on another property, he risked severe punishments at the hands of the patrollers or needed a pass in order to pursue this relationship.[8] In many southern states, particularly after the insurrection of 1831, free Blacks were prohibited from the basic constitutional rights to assemble in groups, bear arms, learn to read and write, exercise free speech, or testify against white people in Court.[9][10][11][12] After 1810, states made manumissions of slaves more difficult to obtain, often requiring an act of legislature for each case. This sharply reduced the incidence of planters freeing slaves.[12]
[article]
List of Jim Crow Laws Listed By State
List of Jim Crow law examples by state - Wikipedia
a few examples
Alabama
Arizona
- "It shall be unlawfully to conduct a restaurant or other place for the serving of food in the city, at which white and colored people are served in the same room, unless such white and colored persons are effectually separated by a solid partition extending from the floor upward to a distance of seven feet or higher, and unless a separate entrance from the street is provided for each compartment."
1864: Miscegenation [Statute] Marriages between whites with "Negroes, Indians, Mongolians" were declared illegal and void. The word "Descendants" does not appear in the statute.
California
An 1850 California statute provided that “no black, mulatto person, or Indian, shall be allowed to give evidence in favor of, or against a white man.” In 1854, the Supreme Court of California held that the statute precluded persons of Chinese descent from testifying for or against a white man. “It can hardly be supposed that any Legislature would . . exclud[e] domestic negroes and Indians, . . . and turn loose upon the community the more degraded tribes of the same species, who have nothing in common with us.”[5]
California's constitution stated that "no native of China" shall ever exercise the privileges of an elector in the state." Similar provisions appeared in the constitutions of Oregon and Idaho.
Okay, let me help you out, Jim Crow (a character in an 1828 dance) represents laws that were passed starting in 1876 and lasting through 1965. I wasn't even alive in 1965, and we aren't living in the past. To the best of my understanding, there is nothing about your race or my race that makes either one of us superior. In other words, you aren't telling me something that is up for debate (it's history and it happened). But, if you want to suggest that writing laws that forbid anything and specifically involve race today, they are not going to be against African Americans. If you want to be anything other than equal, tell me what I owe you because you are black.
You know that's not what I said. This is what I stated:You said 100% of the white people were white supremacists just be cause they lived in this country at the time. Well guess what, if you are going to start saying 100%, it doesn't stop at white.
"I've never researched what percentage of the U.S. population were slave owners but it is indisputable that the country was 100% white supremacist because it was written into our laws"
I've listed some of the laws and rulings that I was referring to below but I thought I'd already posted this
Frankly, I don't care if you go or stay, and if you want to get rid of inequalities, you need to stop seeing yourself as less than equal, own it.
So in your race addled mind, the only reason I could possibly be opposing inequalities is because I view myself as less than equal? WHY would you conclude that? And please stop misquoting me, I said that the United States of American was a 100% white supremacist country when it was founded. Black people were not considered citizens whether they were slaves or freed therefore they were completely excluded from any decision making including that which involved them. Blacks could also not sue white people nor testify against them, they essentially had no rights to speak of. White women could not vote and only white, land owning males could participate in government decision making and voting. That means that all black people, all white women and all poor whites who didn't own land were excluded.
racism [the white supremacy referred to is definition #2]
[rey-siz-uh m]
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
Examples of Institutional Racism by Whites Against Blacks
- a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.
- a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
NOTE: There are no comparable statutes by Blacks Against Whites)
- Excerpt From the State of Texas's Declaration of Secession
"She [the state of Texas] was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery--the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits--a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time.
....
We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the ***white *** race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an ***inferior*** and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.
....
That in this free government all ***white men*** are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states.
- Supreme Court Justice Taney in Dred Scot v Sanford
blacks "had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit. He was bought and sold and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic, whenever profit could be made by it."
Dred Scott case
- Blacks in the military circa WWII
Black Codes
Black Codes (United States) - Wikipedia
Black Codes in the antebellum South heavily regulated the activities and behavior of blacks. North Carolina restricted slaves from leaving their plantation; if one tried to court (date) a woman on another property, he risked severe punishments at the hands of the patrollers or needed a pass in order to pursue this relationship.[8] In many southern states, particularly after the insurrection of 1831, free Blacks were prohibited from the basic constitutional rights to assemble in groups, bear arms, learn to read and write, exercise free speech, or testify against white people in Court.[9][10][11][12] After 1810, states made manumissions of slaves more difficult to obtain, often requiring an act of legislature for each case. This sharply reduced the incidence of planters freeing slaves.[12]
[article]
List of Jim Crow Laws Listed By State
List of Jim Crow law examples by state - Wikipedia
a few examples
Alabama
Arizona
- "It shall be unlawfully to conduct a restaurant or other place for the serving of food in the city, at which white and colored people are served in the same room, unless such white and colored persons are effectually separated by a solid partition extending from the floor upward to a distance of seven feet or higher, and unless a separate entrance from the street is provided for each compartment."
1864: Miscegenation [Statute] Marriages between whites with "Negroes, Indians, Mongolians" were declared illegal and void. The word "Descendants" does not appear in the statute.
California
An 1850 California statute provided that “no black, mulatto person, or Indian, shall be allowed to give evidence in favor of, or against a white man.” In 1854, the Supreme Court of California held that the statute precluded persons of Chinese descent from testifying for or against a white man. “It can hardly be supposed that any Legislature would . . exclud[e] domestic negroes and Indians, . . . and turn loose upon the community the more degraded tribes of the same species, who have nothing in common with us.”[5]
California's constitution stated that "no native of China" shall ever exercise the privileges of an elector in the state." Similar provisions appeared in the constitutions of Oregon and Idaho.
Okay, let me help you out, Jim Crow (a character in an 1828 dance) represents laws that were passed starting in 1876 and lasting through 1965. I wasn't even alive in 1965, and we aren't living in the past. To the best of my understanding, there is nothing about your race or my race that makes either one of us superior. In other words, you aren't telling me something that is up for debate (it's history and it happened). But, if you want to suggest that writing laws that forbid anything and specifically involve race today, they are not going to be against African Americans. If you want to be anything other than equal, tell me what I owe you because you are black.
Thank you. I have been trying to pin one poster here down on this. He said basically I have to do something like acknowledge my own racism in my community.
About one-third of my neighborhood is black, including my kitty-corner neighbor and the house next to them. Everyone seems totally cool with this. So I don't know what I'm supposed to do with that. If he means that I'm supposed to convince myself I'm really racist but didn't know it---absolutely no way. NOPE
You know that's not what I said. This is what I stated:You said 100% of the white people were white supremacists just be cause they lived in this country at the time. Well guess what, if you are going to start saying 100%, it doesn't stop at white.
"I've never researched what percentage of the U.S. population were slave owners but it is indisputable that the country was 100% white supremacist because it was written into our laws"
I've listed some of the laws and rulings that I was referring to below but I thought I'd already posted this
Frankly, I don't care if you go or stay, and if you want to get rid of inequalities, you need to stop seeing yourself as less than equal, own it.
So in your race addled mind, the only reason I could possibly be opposing inequalities is because I view myself as less than equal? WHY would you conclude that? And please stop misquoting me, I said that the United States of American was a 100% white supremacist country when it was founded. Black people were not considered citizens whether they were slaves or freed therefore they were completely excluded from any decision making including that which involved them. Blacks could also not sue white people nor testify against them, they essentially had no rights to speak of. White women could not vote and only white, land owning males could participate in government decision making and voting. That means that all black people, all white women and all poor whites who didn't own land were excluded.
racism [the white supremacy referred to is definition #2]
[rey-siz-uh m]
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
Examples of Institutional Racism by Whites Against Blacks
- a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to dominate others or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.
- a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
NOTE: There are no comparable statutes by Blacks Against Whites)
- Excerpt From the State of Texas's Declaration of Secession
"She [the state of Texas] was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery--the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits--a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time.
....
We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the ***white *** race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an ***inferior*** and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.
....
That in this free government all ***white men*** are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states.
- Supreme Court Justice Taney in Dred Scot v Sanford
blacks "had no rights which the white man was bound to respect; and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit. He was bought and sold and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic, whenever profit could be made by it."
Dred Scott case
- Blacks in the military circa WWII
Black Codes
Black Codes (United States) - Wikipedia
Black Codes in the antebellum South heavily regulated the activities and behavior of blacks. North Carolina restricted slaves from leaving their plantation; if one tried to court (date) a woman on another property, he risked severe punishments at the hands of the patrollers or needed a pass in order to pursue this relationship.[8] In many southern states, particularly after the insurrection of 1831, free Blacks were prohibited from the basic constitutional rights to assemble in groups, bear arms, learn to read and write, exercise free speech, or testify against white people in Court.[9][10][11][12] After 1810, states made manumissions of slaves more difficult to obtain, often requiring an act of legislature for each case. This sharply reduced the incidence of planters freeing slaves.[12]
[article]
List of Jim Crow Laws Listed By State
List of Jim Crow law examples by state - Wikipedia
a few examples
Alabama
Arizona
- "It shall be unlawfully to conduct a restaurant or other place for the serving of food in the city, at which white and colored people are served in the same room, unless such white and colored persons are effectually separated by a solid partition extending from the floor upward to a distance of seven feet or higher, and unless a separate entrance from the street is provided for each compartment."
1864: Miscegenation [Statute] Marriages between whites with "Negroes, Indians, Mongolians" were declared illegal and void. The word "Descendants" does not appear in the statute.
California
An 1850 California statute provided that “no black, mulatto person, or Indian, shall be allowed to give evidence in favor of, or against a white man.” In 1854, the Supreme Court of California held that the statute precluded persons of Chinese descent from testifying for or against a white man. “It can hardly be supposed that any Legislature would . . exclud[e] domestic negroes and Indians, . . . and turn loose upon the community the more degraded tribes of the same species, who have nothing in common with us.”[5]
California's constitution stated that "no native of China" shall ever exercise the privileges of an elector in the state." Similar provisions appeared in the constitutions of Oregon and Idaho.
Okay, let me help you out, Jim Crow (a character in an 1828 dance) represents laws that were passed starting in 1876 and lasting through 1965. I wasn't even alive in 1965, and we aren't living in the past. To the best of my understanding, there is nothing about your race or my race that makes either one of us superior. In other words, you aren't telling me something that is up for debate (it's history and it happened). But, if you want to suggest that writing laws that forbid anything and specifically involve race today, they are not going to be against African Americans. If you want to be anything other than equal, tell me what I owe you because you are black.
Thank you. I have been trying to pin one poster here down on this. He said basically I have to do something like acknowledge my own racism in my community.
About one-third of my neighborhood is black, including my kitty-corner neighbor and the house next to them. Everyone seems totally cool with this. So I don't know what I'm supposed to do with that. If he means that I'm supposed to convince myself I'm really racist but didn't know it---absolutely no way. NOPE
I grew up in a similar situation, decades ago. I, until 4 years ago, lived in a similar neighborhood.
These people are full of shit.
Thank you. I have been trying to pin one poster here down on this. He said basically I have to do something like acknowledge my own racism in my community.
About one-third of my neighborhood is black, including my kitty-corner neighbor and the house next to them. Everyone seems totally cool with this. So I don't know what I'm supposed to do with that. If he means that I'm supposed to convince myself I'm really racist but didn't know it---absolutely no way. NOPE
Funny, why all this false angst over the termination of the pregancies of black women but none for white women? And why all the lying? Black genocide? Genecide is what the Nazis did to the Jewish people when they rounded them up and sent them to be gassed to death. Terminating a pregnancy is not genocide, an embryo is not a baby nor is an abortion murder or unlawful in the United States. And anyone who complains about Planned Parenthood which strives to prevent unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases is nothing more than a hypocrit. And of course they believe they have the moral high ground even though harassing and threatening women who are attempting to exercise their reproductive rights is a federal crimeThe black population is 12%.***. That's not JUST a "women's right to choose"--what terrible language--those are black babies with beating hearts being killed. Their lives being ended.
***SORRY--I need to correct this. Black women receive one-third of abortions, not half.
It's black genocide and make no mistake about it. One of the proudest moment in my life was when I stood in a museum, no lie, next to a bust of Margaret Sanger and gave the REAL history of that evil witch--the history washed up by Progressives. I wanted my children to know what she REALLY stood for, that horrible woman. How can you support Planned Parenthood, knowing what she was???
PS And Sanger basically used the "broodmare" argument. Slave owners wanted more black children for slave purposes. Sanger wanted less of them because she believed them sub-human, as disgusting as that is. Either way, both angles are utterly repulsive.
Funny, why all this false angst over the termination of the pregancies of black women but none for white women? ....The black population is 12%.***. That's not JUST a "women's right to choose"--what terrible language--those are black babies with beating hearts being killed. Their lives being ended.
***SORRY--I need to correct this. Black women receive one-third of abortions, not half.
It's black genocide and make no mistake about it. One of the proudest moment in my life was when I stood in a museum, no lie, next to a bust of Margaret Sanger and gave the REAL history of that evil witch--the history washed up by Progressives. I wanted my children to know what she REALLY stood for, that horrible woman. How can you support Planned Parenthood, knowing what she was???
PS And Sanger basically used the "broodmare" argument. Slave owners wanted more black children for slave purposes. Sanger wanted less of them because she believed them sub-human, as disgusting as that is. Either way, both angles are utterly repulsive.
Funny, why all this false angst over the termination of the pregancies of black women but none for white women? And why all the lying? Black genocide? Genecide is what the Nazis did to the Jewish people when they rounded them up and sent them to be gassed to death. Terminating a pregnancy is not genocide, an embryo is not a baby nor is an abortion murder or unlawful in the United States. And anyone who complains about Planned Parenthood which strives to prevent unwanted pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases is nothing more than a hypocrit. And of course they believe they have the moral high ground even though harassing and threatening women who are attempting to exercise their reproductive rights is a federal crimeThe black population is 12%.***. That's not JUST a "women's right to choose"--what terrible language--those are black babies with beating hearts being killed. Their lives being ended.
***SORRY--I need to correct this. Black women receive one-third of abortions, not half.
It's black genocide and make no mistake about it. One of the proudest moment in my life was when I stood in a museum, no lie, next to a bust of Margaret Sanger and gave the REAL history of that evil witch--the history washed up by Progressives. I wanted my children to know what she REALLY stood for, that horrible woman. How can you support Planned Parenthood, knowing what she was???
PS And Sanger basically used the "broodmare" argument. Slave owners wanted more black children for slave purposes. Sanger wanted less of them because she believed them sub-human, as disgusting as that is. Either way, both angles are utterly repulsive.
Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act - Wikipedia
The Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act (FACE or the Access Act, Pub. L. No. 103-259, 108 Stat. 694) (May 26, 1994, 18 U.S.C. § 248) is a United States law that was signed by President Bill Clinton in May 1994, which prohibits the following three things: (1) the use of physical force, threat of physical force, or physical obstruction to intentionally injure, intimidate, interfere with or attempt to injure, intimidate or interfere with any person who is obtaining reproductive health services or providing reproductive health services (this portion of the law typically refers to abortion clinics), (2) the use of physical force, threat of physical force, or physical obstruction to intentionally injure, intimidate, interfere with or attempt to injure, intimidate or interfere with any person who is exercising or trying to exercise their First Amendment right of religious freedom at a place of religious worship, (3) the intentional damage or destruction of a reproductive health care facility or a place of worship.[1][2]
I have no problem with birth control. Most birth control is prevention of a pregnancy, not killing a developing baby. But there is a big difference from keeping an ovum from fertilizing and ripping a fetus apart limb from limb and sucking it out of its mother's womb. And don't be fooled, that's exactly what happens in an abortion.
Gassing Jews wasn't murder in Nazi Germany either. May God have mercy on our souls.
