Many Deep South Republican Voters Believe Interracial Marriage Should Be Illegal

[TheProgressivePatriot]

View attachment 70461

Rings true to me

Look jackass. I'm not privileged based on my skin color and you are not oppressed based on yours. I am where I am because of effort, intellect and character, not a government demanding I be treated differently because of my skin color or place of birth.

I take it your are black? It appears that I'm getting under your skin as evidenced by your need to resort to calling me names. Settle the **** down.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Thankfully in less then a generation these "people" will be long gone or totally marginalized


Despite the fact that the number of interracial marriages in the U.S. reached an all-time high this year, there are many who still believe that mixed-race marriage is unacceptable and should be made illegal, according to a new report.

On Monday, polling firm Public Policy Polling (PPP) revealed that 29 percent of likely GOP voters surveyed in Mississippi believe that interracial marriage should be illegal. Fifty-four percent said intermarriage should remain legal, and the rest responded that they weren’t sure. The survey also found that 21 percent of likely GOP voters polled in Alabama believe that interracial marriage should be illegal.


Interracial Marriage: Many Deep South Republican Voters Believe Interracial Marriage Should Be Illegal

Don't you advocate killing Muslims who marry non-Muslims, Batshit?

I know you do.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Yes you have a right to your bigoted antediluvian bovine excrement beliefs. You do not have the right to discriminate, marginalize or demean others. And save that idiotic civil war era "Democrats as racist" horseshit. It is just desperate and stupid. That was then and this is now and we know what the Republicans stand for NOW

Of course he has the right to discriminate, marginalize and demean. He thinks you're an idiot and I agree. It's called disagreement.
I don't like barack obama's policies, you call me racist.
I think illegal immigrants should be deported, I'm "anti immigrant".
I don't think gays should get special treatment and people who are confused about their gender should use the bathroom that corresponds to their plumbing and DNA and you call me a homophobe.
You'd have a damned hard time convincing my second wife that I'm racist, you twit, and for your information, I intensely dislike barack obama's white half as well.
My grandparents were immigrants, son. They came here LEGALLY.

I have lots of gay friends. They don't make me uncomfortable at all much less fearful of them, then they aren't asking me to install another bathroom for them and they don't ***** that the bar's pool team calls themselves the Straight Shooters As a matter of fact, it's a joke with our lesbian member.
Your thing is, you want to create groups and assign them a grievance that you can pretend to care in return for their votes.
Conservatives think we all should strive for excellence despite our differences.
Hell yes! black lives matter, but no more and no differently than any other life. People want equal rights? ACT equal and put in equal effort or shut the **** up.

Wow dude! That is quite a rant. You sound like you blew a gasket. Chill!! I do not recall calling you a racist, and I certainly would not have called you- or anyone – a racist for simply opposing Obama’s policies. That is just made up bovine excrement. However, BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION you think that people have the right to” discriminate, marginalize and demean” So WTF bubba.

However, if you think that all undocumented immigrants should be deported- then yes you are anti-immigrant. There is no other word for it. And, if you do not think that LGBT folks should treated with respect, equality and dignity- you are indeed anti LGBT- as is anyone who pushed that “special rights” crap or who clings to ignorant misinformation about transsexuals. But, this thread is not about any of that, is it?

It’s funny how people who are in fact racists love to call liberals racists, how people who hate call us hateful and claim that we are the ones who do not want equality. That is just horseshit. You claim that conservatives believe that “we all should strive for excellence despite our differences.” But it is conservatives who’s policies seek to hold back minorities, women, LGBT people, immigrants, the poor and even children. So that assertion is just more horseshit.

No rant, just stating my case. If you disagree, I couldn't be more pleased.
No, young fellow, I didn't say it was OK to discriminate, marginalize and demean just anyone, only idiots like you.
Again, you misunderstand me. I love immigrants. My paternal grandparents were immigrants. My second wife is an immigrant. I despise ILLEGAL immigrants the same way I would despise a man who forced his way into my home in the dead of night. I'm all for treating the same way too.
Of course I think that think that LGBT folks should treated with respect, equality and dignity, just not "special" respect, equality and dignity. They have all the rights I have, no more, no less.
There you go insinuating that I'm a racist again.... You say that it's Conservative policy that holds back minorities. WHAT POLICIES?
The one where we want everyone to compete on a level playing field? The one were we don't want one group to get a benefit that others are unqualified for by nature of race of ethnicity? Maybe the one where we would like to see everyone take advantage of the public education system and stop breeding until they can afford to raise children? That one? Or could it be the one about asking people to obey the laws of society and become productive members of society?
You call horseshit and really guy you are nothing but. You'd be comical if it wasn't so sad that you actually believe in your crap.

I DON'T OWE YOU SHIT! YOU DON'T OWE ME DIDDLY SQUAT! GOT IT?

That is the second time you called me "young man" I am retired and 68 years old bubba. I have been around the block a few times and can see right through your horseshit. You speak with forked tongue. Just one case in point- your claim to support gay rights while reiterating the nonsense about special rights which is just code for denying them protections from discrimination. Are laws against discrimination of blacks giving them "special rights" ?

OK, you're 2 years my senior but 40 years less mature. No forked tongue and no code. I really don't give a shit who you sleep with. I think you should have the right to enter into a legally binding civil union with whoever you choose. It doesn't effect me at all. Don't flaunt your shit at me and don't expect me to put a urinal in my ladies' room because you're confused.
Demanding that racial quotas be abolished is vastly different than denying protection from discrimination.
LEVEL PLAYING FIELD. This ain't a Saturday round of golf with your friends there's no handicap.
Get back to me when you find you can be intellectually honest

Oh what the **** are you talking about now? You are making moronic assumptions about who and what I am.

 

[Ernie S.]

No not under my skin at all you're not intelligent enough for that. Call it mildly frustrated by your lack of intellectual honesty.
Get back to me when you grow up, OK?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Thankfully in less then a generation these "people" will be long gone or totally marginalized


Despite the fact that the number of interracial marriages in the U.S. reached an all-time high this year, there are many who still believe that mixed-race marriage is unacceptable and should be made illegal, according to a new report.

On Monday, polling firm Public Policy Polling (PPP) revealed that 29 percent of likely GOP voters surveyed in Mississippi believe that interracial marriage should be illegal. Fifty-four percent said intermarriage should remain legal, and the rest responded that they weren’t sure. The survey also found that 21 percent of likely GOP voters polled in Alabama believe that interracial marriage should be illegal.


Interracial Marriage: Many Deep South Republican Voters Believe Interracial Marriage Should Be Illegal

Lived in the south

know a lot of people from there

and no one ever brought it up, not one time, ever.

I did hear a DJ in Philly say she would never insult her family by dating a white man.

course she was never called to task for being a racist, but that's magically different.

I live in the South and there is very little objection to interracial marriage here. Several such couples are among my customers.

You claim that the south is such a mellow and accepting place but that flies in the face of a good deal of news that we get up north about what is going on down there. There is everything from voter suppression of minorities to the polls that have been presented on interracial marriage and now there is this, in Mississippi Mississippi pass most anti-LGBT bill to date ( as well as a similar situation in N. Carolina) How do you explain that?

How do I explain it? There are corrupt politicians and racists on both sides; down here and up north. We try to protect our way of life, including our religious values and if we have a religious reason to refuse participation in an event or feel that our beliefs would make us ineffective in rendering service to a person we believe is acting in a way that our God despises, we should have the right not to place ourselves in that position. Call these folks conscientious objectors. Liberals decided they didn't have to fight for their country back in the 60s. You set the stage.
Come on down to Foley Alabama. Stop by my bar. I'll buy you a beer and educate you.

Give me the address.

 

[Ernie S.]

Of course he has the right to discriminate, marginalize and demean. He thinks you're an idiot and I agree. It's called disagreement.
I don't like barack obama's policies, you call me racist.
I think illegal immigrants should be deported, I'm "anti immigrant".
I don't think gays should get special treatment and people who are confused about their gender should use the bathroom that corresponds to their plumbing and DNA and you call me a homophobe.
You'd have a damned hard time convincing my second wife that I'm racist, you twit, and for your information, I intensely dislike barack obama's white half as well.
My grandparents were immigrants, son. They came here LEGALLY.

I have lots of gay friends. They don't make me uncomfortable at all much less fearful of them, then they aren't asking me to install another bathroom for them and they don't ***** that the bar's pool team calls themselves the Straight Shooters As a matter of fact, it's a joke with our lesbian member.
Your thing is, you want to create groups and assign them a grievance that you can pretend to care in return for their votes.
Conservatives think we all should strive for excellence despite our differences.
Hell yes! black lives matter, but no more and no differently than any other life. People want equal rights? ACT equal and put in equal effort or shut the **** up.

Wow dude! That is quite a rant. You sound like you blew a gasket. Chill!! I do not recall calling you a racist, and I certainly would not have called you- or anyone – a racist for simply opposing Obama’s policies. That is just made up bovine excrement. However, BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION you think that people have the right to” discriminate, marginalize and demean” So WTF bubba.

However, if you think that all undocumented immigrants should be deported- then yes you are anti-immigrant. There is no other word for it. And, if you do not think that LGBT folks should treated with respect, equality and dignity- you are indeed anti LGBT- as is anyone who pushed that “special rights” crap or who clings to ignorant misinformation about transsexuals. But, this thread is not about any of that, is it?

It’s funny how people who are in fact racists love to call liberals racists, how people who hate call us hateful and claim that we are the ones who do not want equality. That is just horseshit. You claim that conservatives believe that “we all should strive for excellence despite our differences.” But it is conservatives who’s policies seek to hold back minorities, women, LGBT people, immigrants, the poor and even children. So that assertion is just more horseshit.

No rant, just stating my case. If you disagree, I couldn't be more pleased.
No, young fellow, I didn't say it was OK to discriminate, marginalize and demean just anyone, only idiots like you.
Again, you misunderstand me. I love immigrants. My paternal grandparents were immigrants. My second wife is an immigrant. I despise ILLEGAL immigrants the same way I would despise a man who forced his way into my home in the dead of night. I'm all for treating the same way too.
Of course I think that think that LGBT folks should treated with respect, equality and dignity, just not "special" respect, equality and dignity. They have all the rights I have, no more, no less.
There you go insinuating that I'm a racist again.... You say that it's Conservative policy that holds back minorities. WHAT POLICIES?
The one where we want everyone to compete on a level playing field? The one were we don't want one group to get a benefit that others are unqualified for by nature of race of ethnicity? Maybe the one where we would like to see everyone take advantage of the public education system and stop breeding until they can afford to raise children? That one? Or could it be the one about asking people to obey the laws of society and become productive members of society?
You call horseshit and really guy you are nothing but. You'd be comical if it wasn't so sad that you actually believe in your crap.

I DON'T OWE YOU SHIT! YOU DON'T OWE ME DIDDLY SQUAT! GOT IT?

That is the second time you called me "young man" I am retired and 68 years old bubba. I have been around the block a few times and can see right through your horseshit. You speak with forked tongue. Just one case in point- your claim to support gay rights while reiterating the nonsense about special rights which is just code for denying them protections from discrimination. Are laws against discrimination of blacks giving them "special rights" ?

OK, you're 2 years my senior but 40 years less mature. No forked tongue and no code. I really don't give a shit who you sleep with. I think you should have the right to enter into a legally binding civil union with whoever you choose. It doesn't effect me at all. Don't flaunt your shit at me and don't expect me to put a urinal in my ladies' room because you're confused.
Demanding that racial quotas be abolished is vastly different than denying protection from discrimination.
LEVEL PLAYING FIELD. This ain't a Saturday round of golf with your friends there's no handicap.
Get back to me when you find you can be intellectually honest

Oh what the **** are you talking about now? You are making moronic assumptions about who and what I am.

No sir it's apparent to everyone what you are.

 

[Ernie S.]

We're in the book and I've posted the name of the bar many times.

 

[Unkotare]

...

However, if you think that all undocumented immigrants should be deported- then yes you are anti-immigrant. There is no other word for it.....

Of course there is another expression for it: Opposition to illegal immigration.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Wow dude! That is quite a rant. You sound like you blew a gasket. Chill!! I do not recall calling you a racist, and I certainly would not have called you- or anyone – a racist for simply opposing Obama’s policies. That is just made up bovine excrement. However, BY YOUR OWN ADMISSION you think that people have the right to” discriminate, marginalize and demean” So WTF bubba.

However, if you think that all undocumented immigrants should be deported- then yes you are anti-immigrant. There is no other word for it. And, if you do not think that LGBT folks should treated with respect, equality and dignity- you are indeed anti LGBT- as is anyone who pushed that “special rights” crap or who clings to ignorant misinformation about transsexuals. But, this thread is not about any of that, is it?

It’s funny how people who are in fact racists love to call liberals racists, how people who hate call us hateful and claim that we are the ones who do not want equality. That is just horseshit. You claim that conservatives believe that “we all should strive for excellence despite our differences.” But it is conservatives who’s policies seek to hold back minorities, women, LGBT people, immigrants, the poor and even children. So that assertion is just more horseshit.

No rant, just stating my case. If you disagree, I couldn't be more pleased.
No, young fellow, I didn't say it was OK to discriminate, marginalize and demean just anyone, only idiots like you.
Again, you misunderstand me. I love immigrants. My paternal grandparents were immigrants. My second wife is an immigrant. I despise ILLEGAL immigrants the same way I would despise a man who forced his way into my home in the dead of night. I'm all for treating the same way too.
Of course I think that think that LGBT folks should treated with respect, equality and dignity, just not "special" respect, equality and dignity. They have all the rights I have, no more, no less.
There you go insinuating that I'm a racist again.... You say that it's Conservative policy that holds back minorities. WHAT POLICIES?
The one where we want everyone to compete on a level playing field? The one were we don't want one group to get a benefit that others are unqualified for by nature of race of ethnicity? Maybe the one where we would like to see everyone take advantage of the public education system and stop breeding until they can afford to raise children? That one? Or could it be the one about asking people to obey the laws of society and become productive members of society?
You call horseshit and really guy you are nothing but. You'd be comical if it wasn't so sad that you actually believe in your crap.

I DON'T OWE YOU SHIT! YOU DON'T OWE ME DIDDLY SQUAT! GOT IT?

That is the second time you called me "young man" I am retired and 68 years old bubba. I have been around the block a few times and can see right through your horseshit. You speak with forked tongue. Just one case in point- your claim to support gay rights while reiterating the nonsense about special rights which is just code for denying them protections from discrimination. Are laws against discrimination of blacks giving them "special rights" ?

OK, you're 2 years my senior but 40 years less mature. No forked tongue and no code. I really don't give a shit who you sleep with. I think you should have the right to enter into a legally binding civil union with whoever you choose. It doesn't effect me at all. Don't flaunt your shit at me and don't expect me to put a urinal in my ladies' room because you're confused.
Demanding that racial quotas be abolished is vastly different than denying protection from discrimination.
LEVEL PLAYING FIELD. This ain't a Saturday round of golf with your friends there's no handicap.
Get back to me when you find you can be intellectually honest

Oh what the **** are you talking about now? You are making moronic assumptions about who and what I am.

No sir it's apparent to everyone what you are.

Oh boy! Seriously ?? You have got to be ******* kidding! You have just destroyed any and all credibility that you might have had. I will not dignify that stupidity with any response leave alone a denial of what you " think I am" I have tried to refrain from using profanity and name calling here but you are pushing the limits of my self control.

 

[Unkotare]

No rant, just stating my case. If you disagree, I couldn't be more pleased.
No, young fellow, I didn't say it was OK to discriminate, marginalize and demean just anyone, only idiots like you.
Again, you misunderstand me. I love immigrants. My paternal grandparents were immigrants. My second wife is an immigrant. I despise ILLEGAL immigrants the same way I would despise a man who forced his way into my home in the dead of night. I'm all for treating the same way too.
Of course I think that think that LGBT folks should treated with respect, equality and dignity, just not "special" respect, equality and dignity. They have all the rights I have, no more, no less.
There you go insinuating that I'm a racist again.... You say that it's Conservative policy that holds back minorities. WHAT POLICIES?
The one where we want everyone to compete on a level playing field? The one were we don't want one group to get a benefit that others are unqualified for by nature of race of ethnicity? Maybe the one where we would like to see everyone take advantage of the public education system and stop breeding until they can afford to raise children? That one? Or could it be the one about asking people to obey the laws of society and become productive members of society?
You call horseshit and really guy you are nothing but. You'd be comical if it wasn't so sad that you actually believe in your crap.

I DON'T OWE YOU SHIT! YOU DON'T OWE ME DIDDLY SQUAT! GOT IT?

That is the second time you called me "young man" I am retired and 68 years old bubba. I have been around the block a few times and can see right through your horseshit. You speak with forked tongue. Just one case in point- your claim to support gay rights while reiterating the nonsense about special rights which is just code for denying them protections from discrimination. Are laws against discrimination of blacks giving them "special rights" ?

OK, you're 2 years my senior but 40 years less mature. No forked tongue and no code. I really don't give a shit who you sleep with. I think you should have the right to enter into a legally binding civil union with whoever you choose. It doesn't effect me at all. Don't flaunt your shit at me and don't expect me to put a urinal in my ladies' room because you're confused.
Demanding that racial quotas be abolished is vastly different than denying protection from discrimination.
LEVEL PLAYING FIELD. This ain't a Saturday round of golf with your friends there's no handicap.
Get back to me when you find you can be intellectually honest

Oh what the **** are you talking about now? You are making moronic assumptions about who and what I am.

No sir it's apparent to everyone what you are.

Oh boy! Seriously ?? You have got to be ******* kidding! You have just destroyed any and all credibility that you might have had. I will not dignify that stupidity with any response leave alone a denial of what you " think I am" I have tried to refrain from using profanity and name calling here but you are pushing the limits of my self control.

You two badasses better dial it back before someone gets hurt!

 

[Publius1787]

View attachment 70461

Rings true to me

I'll bet it does. The problem is that "progressives" do not understand the word "equality" to mean "equality under the law," but "equality of results." When you implement programs intent on trying to gain equality of results you absolutely must necessarily destroy equality under the law. Equality under the law is certainly a privilege that many countries don't enjoy. Of course, no country does this perfectly, but the privilege of equality under the law was one earned and bestowed by a bunch of old white men who got their ideas from other old white men such as Locke, Mill, and Cicero. In any case, both equality under the law and progressivism which concentrates more on equality of results at the expense of equality under the law are both the ideals of old white heterosexual protestant men (Remember that when you write such ridiculous signatures). Blacks have developed a couture that aligns more with the latter for the simple reason that it is easier to convince people that you're a victim in order to gain equality of results than the duties required of earning ones own way in a system that promotes equality under the law. It's a shame really. In short, the progressive view of fighting oppression is to implement laws that sanction oppression; albeit in a different direction.

So yes, for those of us fortunate enough to have been raised in a country dominated by the idea, however flawed it may have been implemented, the privilege of equality under the law (That is to say equality of individual liberty), are certainly fearful of the oppression offered by the "equality of results" advocated by progressives.

I think Milton Freidman said it best when he said that those countries that place individual liberty before equality receive a great deal of both. Those who place equality before individual liberty receive neither.

 

[Ernie S.]

No rant, just stating my case. If you disagree, I couldn't be more pleased.
No, young fellow, I didn't say it was OK to discriminate, marginalize and demean just anyone, only idiots like you.
Again, you misunderstand me. I love immigrants. My paternal grandparents were immigrants. My second wife is an immigrant. I despise ILLEGAL immigrants the same way I would despise a man who forced his way into my home in the dead of night. I'm all for treating the same way too.
Of course I think that think that LGBT folks should treated with respect, equality and dignity, just not "special" respect, equality and dignity. They have all the rights I have, no more, no less.
There you go insinuating that I'm a racist again.... You say that it's Conservative policy that holds back minorities. WHAT POLICIES?
The one where we want everyone to compete on a level playing field? The one were we don't want one group to get a benefit that others are unqualified for by nature of race of ethnicity? Maybe the one where we would like to see everyone take advantage of the public education system and stop breeding until they can afford to raise children? That one? Or could it be the one about asking people to obey the laws of society and become productive members of society?
You call horseshit and really guy you are nothing but. You'd be comical if it wasn't so sad that you actually believe in your crap.

I DON'T OWE YOU SHIT! YOU DON'T OWE ME DIDDLY SQUAT! GOT IT?

That is the second time you called me "young man" I am retired and 68 years old bubba. I have been around the block a few times and can see right through your horseshit. You speak with forked tongue. Just one case in point- your claim to support gay rights while reiterating the nonsense about special rights which is just code for denying them protections from discrimination. Are laws against discrimination of blacks giving them "special rights" ?

OK, you're 2 years my senior but 40 years less mature. No forked tongue and no code. I really don't give a shit who you sleep with. I think you should have the right to enter into a legally binding civil union with whoever you choose. It doesn't effect me at all. Don't flaunt your shit at me and don't expect me to put a urinal in my ladies' room because you're confused.
Demanding that racial quotas be abolished is vastly different than denying protection from discrimination.
LEVEL PLAYING FIELD. This ain't a Saturday round of golf with your friends there's no handicap.
Get back to me when you find you can be intellectually honest

Oh what the **** are you talking about now? You are making moronic assumptions about who and what I am.

No sir it's apparent to everyone what you are.

Oh boy! Seriously ?? You have got to be ******* kidding! You have just destroyed any and all credibility that you might have had. I will not dignify that stupidity with any response leave alone a denial of what you " think I am" I have tried to refrain from using profanity and name calling here but you are pushing the limits of my self control.

funny shit right there. I call you on your dishonesty and I lack credibility. Look oh ye of little intellect, I don't give a shit for your opinion or your penchant to twist statements into some imagined personality flaw. I have less and less respect for you with each post and you are currently well into negative territory. Let's see if we can straighten out your ignorance one step at a time. I am for equal rights and equal opportunity not for guaranteeing equal outcome. I and against racial quotas and segregation in the public sector. That doesn't make me racist.
Let me know when you are clear about that and maybe, if I'm sufficiently motivated, I may explain the difference between being anti-immigrant and anti law breaker.

 

[Ernie S.]

No rant, just stating my case. If you disagree, I couldn't be more pleased.
No, young fellow, I didn't say it was OK to discriminate, marginalize and demean just anyone, only idiots like you.
Again, you misunderstand me. I love immigrants. My paternal grandparents were immigrants. My second wife is an immigrant. I despise ILLEGAL immigrants the same way I would despise a man who forced his way into my home in the dead of night. I'm all for treating the same way too.
Of course I think that think that LGBT folks should treated with respect, equality and dignity, just not "special" respect, equality and dignity. They have all the rights I have, no more, no less.
There you go insinuating that I'm a racist again.... You say that it's Conservative policy that holds back minorities. WHAT POLICIES?
The one where we want everyone to compete on a level playing field? The one were we don't want one group to get a benefit that others are unqualified for by nature of race of ethnicity? Maybe the one where we would like to see everyone take advantage of the public education system and stop breeding until they can afford to raise children? That one? Or could it be the one about asking people to obey the laws of society and become productive members of society?
You call horseshit and really guy you are nothing but. You'd be comical if it wasn't so sad that you actually believe in your crap.

I DON'T OWE YOU SHIT! YOU DON'T OWE ME DIDDLY SQUAT! GOT IT?

That is the second time you called me "young man" I am retired and 68 years old bubba. I have been around the block a few times and can see right through your horseshit. You speak with forked tongue. Just one case in point- your claim to support gay rights while reiterating the nonsense about special rights which is just code for denying them protections from discrimination. Are laws against discrimination of blacks giving them "special rights" ?

OK, you're 2 years my senior but 40 years less mature. No forked tongue and no code. I really don't give a shit who you sleep with. I think you should have the right to enter into a legally binding civil union with whoever you choose. It doesn't effect me at all. Don't flaunt your shit at me and don't expect me to put a urinal in my ladies' room because you're confused.
Demanding that racial quotas be abolished is vastly different than denying protection from discrimination.
LEVEL PLAYING FIELD. This ain't a Saturday round of golf with your friends there's no handicap.
Get back to me when you find you can be intellectually honest

Oh what the **** are you talking about now? You are making moronic assumptions about who and what I am.

No sir it's apparent to everyone what you are.

Oh boy! Seriously ?? You have got to be ******* kidding! You have just destroyed any and all credibility that you might have had. I will not dignify that stupidity with any response leave alone a denial of what you " think I am" I have tried to refrain from using profanity and name calling here but you are pushing the limits of my self control.

In other words, you've tried all the rhetoric you have and are losing badly. You are considering the last resort, namely cursing and crocodile tears. I'm not impressed or threatened by either

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

View attachment 70461

Rings true to me

I'll bet it does. The problem is that "progressives" do not understand the word "equality" to mean "equality under the law," but "equality of results." When you implement programs intent on trying to gain equality of results you absolutely must necessarily destroy equality under the law. Equality under the law is certainly a privilege that many countries don't enjoy. Of course, no country does this perfectly, but the privilege of equality under the law was one earned and bestowed by a bunch of old white men who got their ideas from other old white men such as Locke, Mill, and Cicero. In any case, both equality under the law and progressivism which concentrates more on equality of results at the expense of equality under the law are both the ideals of old white heterosexual protestant men (Remember that when you write such ridiculous signatures). Blacks have developed a couture that aligns more with the latter for the simple reason that it is easier to convince people that you're a victim in order to gain equality of results than the duties required of earning ones own way in a system that promotes equality under the law. It's a shame really. In short, the progressive view of fighting oppression is to implement laws that sanction oppression; albeit in a different direction.

So yes, for those of us fortunate enough to have been raised in a country dominated by the idea, however flawed it may have been implemented, the privilege of equality under the law (That is to say equality of individual liberty), are certainly fearful of the oppression offered by the "equality of results" advocated by progressives.

I think Milton Freidman said it best when he said that those countries that place individual liberty before equality receive a great deal of both. Those who place equality before individual liberty receive neither.

You are making a lot of assumptions about what progressives understand, believe un and want, while painting them all with the same broad brush. In addition, I find your remarks about "black culture" equally ignorant and abhorrent.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

That is the second time you called me "young man" I am retired and 68 years old bubba. I have been around the block a few times and can see right through your horseshit. You speak with forked tongue. Just one case in point- your claim to support gay rights while reiterating the nonsense about special rights which is just code for denying them protections from discrimination. Are laws against discrimination of blacks giving them "special rights" ?

OK, you're 2 years my senior but 40 years less mature. No forked tongue and no code. I really don't give a shit who you sleep with. I think you should have the right to enter into a legally binding civil union with whoever you choose. It doesn't effect me at all. Don't flaunt your shit at me and don't expect me to put a urinal in my ladies' room because you're confused.
Demanding that racial quotas be abolished is vastly different than denying protection from discrimination.
LEVEL PLAYING FIELD. This ain't a Saturday round of golf with your friends there's no handicap.
Get back to me when you find you can be intellectually honest

Oh what the **** are you talking about now? You are making moronic assumptions about who and what I am.

No sir it's apparent to everyone what you are.

Oh boy! Seriously ?? You have got to be ******* kidding! You have just destroyed any and all credibility that you might have had. I will not dignify that stupidity with any response leave alone a denial of what you " think I am" I have tried to refrain from using profanity and name calling here but you are pushing the limits of my self control.

funny shit right there. I call you on your dishonesty and I lack credibility. Look oh ye of little intellect, I don't give a shit for your opinion or your penchant to twist statements into some imagined personality flaw. I have less and less respect for you with each post and you are currently well into negative territory. Let's see if we can straighten out your ignorance one step at a time. I am for equal rights and equal opportunity not for guaranteeing equal outcome. I and against racial quotas and segregation in the public sector. That doesn't make me racist.
Let me know when you are clear about that and maybe, if I'm sufficiently motivated, I may explain the difference between being anti-immigrant and anti law breaker.

The fact that you have to take on such a belligerent and condescending tone indicates to me just how insecure and afraid of other peoples ideas that you are. You are not interested in discussing issue. Rather you want to badger me and try to make me think that I'm stupid. Maybe if you presented your ideas in a rational and non judgmental way, you might find that we have some common ground. However, I am not going to deal with your childish arrogance.

 

[Publius1787]

View attachment 70461

Rings true to me

I'll bet it does. The problem is that "progressives" do not understand the word "equality" to mean "equality under the law," but "equality of results." When you implement programs intent on trying to gain equality of results you absolutely must necessarily destroy equality under the law. Equality under the law is certainly a privilege that many countries don't enjoy. Of course, no country does this perfectly, but the privilege of equality under the law was one earned and bestowed by a bunch of old white men who got their ideas from other old white men such as Locke, Mill, and Cicero. In any case, both equality under the law and progressivism which concentrates more on equality of results at the expense of equality under the law are both the ideals of old white heterosexual protestant men (Remember that when you write such ridiculous signatures). Blacks have developed a couture that aligns more with the latter for the simple reason that it is easier to convince people that you're a victim in order to gain equality of results than the duties required of earning ones own way in a system that promotes equality under the law. It's a shame really. In short, the progressive view of fighting oppression is to implement laws that sanction oppression; albeit in a different direction.

So yes, for those of us fortunate enough to have been raised in a country dominated by the idea, however flawed it may have been implemented, the privilege of equality under the law (That is to say equality of individual liberty), are certainly fearful of the oppression offered by the "equality of results" advocated by progressives.

I think Milton Freidman said it best when he said that those countries that place individual liberty before equality receive a great deal of both. Those who place equality before individual liberty receive neither.

You are making a lot of assumptions about what progressives understand, believe un and want, while painting them all with the same broad brush. In addition, I find your remarks about "black culture" equally ignorant and abhorrent.

Oh they are? I have a few question for you. Indeed they are simple questions. Are there various black/African American cultures in the United States? Do they differ from the various white cultures? Are all cultures the same? Are all cultures equal in promoting progress? I facts are abhorrent to you then I'm afraid fantasy land is the only place you'll feel comfortable.

My assumptions are spot on, else you would have argued where I went wrong instead of simply contradicting me. Progressives are all about implementing programs that promote "positive liberty," (I'm taking a risk in assuming you actually know what that is). History has shown us that those cultures that place negative liberty at the forefront of their law not only have more negative liberty, but positive liberty as well. Of course, I can paint progressives with a broad brush because if they weren't positive liberty oriented then they wouldn't be called "progressives."

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

View attachment 70461

Rings true to me

I'll bet it does. The problem is that "progressives" do not understand the word "equality" to mean "equality under the law," but "equality of results." When you implement programs intent on trying to gain equality of results you absolutely must necessarily destroy equality under the law. Equality under the law is certainly a privilege that many countries don't enjoy. Of course, no country does this perfectly, but the privilege of equality under the law was one earned and bestowed by a bunch of old white men who got their ideas from other old white men such as Locke, Mill, and Cicero. In any case, both equality under the law and progressivism which concentrates more on equality of results at the expense of equality under the law are both the ideals of old white heterosexual protestant men (Remember that when you write such ridiculous signatures). Blacks have developed a couture that aligns more with the latter for the simple reason that it is easier to convince people that you're a victim in order to gain equality of results than the duties required of earning ones own way in a system that promotes equality under the law. It's a shame really. In short, the progressive view of fighting oppression is to implement laws that sanction oppression; albeit in a different direction.

So yes, for those of us fortunate enough to have been raised in a country dominated by the idea, however flawed it may have been implemented, the privilege of equality under the law (That is to say equality of individual liberty), are certainly fearful of the oppression offered by the "equality of results" advocated by progressives.

I think Milton Freidman said it best when he said that those countries that place individual liberty before equality receive a great deal of both. Those who place equality before individual liberty receive neither.

You are making a lot of assumptions about what progressives understand, believe un and want, while painting them all with the same broad brush. In addition, I find your remarks about "black culture" equally ignorant and abhorrent.

Oh they are? I have a few question for you. Indeed they are simple questions. Are there various black/African American cultures in the United States? Do they differ from the various white cultures? Are all cultures the same? Are all cultures equal in promoting progress? I facts are abhorrent to you then I'm afraid fantasy land is the only place you'll feel comfortable.

My assumptions are spot on, else you would have argued where I went wrong instead of simply contradicting me. Progressives are all about implementing programs that promote "positive liberty," (I'm taking a risk in assuming you actually know what that is). History has shown us that those cultures that place negative liberty at the forefront of their law not only have more negative liberty, but positive liberty as well. Of course, I can paint progressives with a broad brush because if they weren't positive liberty oriented then they wouldn't be called "progressives."

Ok, lets back up here. You made the statement that :

Blacks have developed a couture that aligns more with the latter for the simple reason that it is easier to convince people that you're a victim in order to gain equality of results than the duties required of earning ones own way in a system that promotes equality under the law.

You did not say “some backs or black cultures” You said “blacks” All of them. Now, you are coming back asking me if there are different black cultures and if they are different from white culture. That would not be a way to divert attention away from your contention that all blacks are part of a culture of dependence and entitlement and prefer it to working to get ahead….would it?

And yes, I understand positive and negative liberty. I also understand equal opportunity and equality of outcome. Furthermore, I understand the need of conservative to rigidly cling to a concept in the name of ideology while ignoring the need for balance. Negative liberty-freedom from external restraint on one's actions- is fine in a society where everyone behaved responsibly and with compassion for their fellow human beings- but such a place does not exist and never will. The fact is that no one can exercise their free will or “positive liberty” unless they are free from societal constraints. Negative liberty-which you apparently subscribe to- allows segments of society to impose constraints to certain other segments of society- therefor inhibiting their free will with impunity. So, the imposition of constraints on the free will of those who would abuse their autonomy at the expense of others-quashing their freedom- is quite appropriate and necessary.

Yes, progressive may promote positive liberty, but to a point only. Every freedom has its limitations and carries with it responsibilities and it is progressives who understand that better than conservative. Think the second amendment. Interestingly, when convenient, conservatives don’t mind exercising their positive liberty -which can also be defined as freedom from internal controls -such as when shop owners seek to discriminate against gays, or when an employer denies birth control coverage to employees in the name of religious freedom. Then, they complain when there is a legal and social backlash – restraints on their behavior- that would not be possible with a strict adherence to the concept of negative liberty.

Yes, positive liberty that you accuse liberals of “being all about” can be abused and carried to far- by conservatives. Therefore, both forms of liberty have their place but must to balanced and complimentary.

Previously you accused “progressives” of not understanding or supporting equality under the law while promoting equality of result. I for one support equality under the law with limited focus on result such affirmative action on a limited and specific basis- again, a balance. You seem to think that liberals or progressives want to magically render everyone equal in all respects which is ridiculous. We understand that that perfect equality of outcome is impossible. We are not necessarily Marxists, or even Socialists and even if we were, it does mean that we believe in absolute equality. Read Marx some time.

We also understand that even if equality of outcome were possible, it would stifle personal characteristics, resulting in widespread unhappiness. But by the same measure, perfect equality of opportunity is also impossible. No opportunity can be wide enough not to prioritize one quality above another. Again, a balance is called for in favor of ridged, ideological based rhetoric .

 

[Publius1787]

View attachment 70461

Rings true to me

I'll bet it does. The problem is that "progressives" do not understand the word "equality" to mean "equality under the law," but "equality of results." When you implement programs intent on trying to gain equality of results you absolutely must necessarily destroy equality under the law. Equality under the law is certainly a privilege that many countries don't enjoy. Of course, no country does this perfectly, but the privilege of equality under the law was one earned and bestowed by a bunch of old white men who got their ideas from other old white men such as Locke, Mill, and Cicero. In any case, both equality under the law and progressivism which concentrates more on equality of results at the expense of equality under the law are both the ideals of old white heterosexual protestant men (Remember that when you write such ridiculous signatures). Blacks have developed a couture that aligns more with the latter for the simple reason that it is easier to convince people that you're a victim in order to gain equality of results than the duties required of earning ones own way in a system that promotes equality under the law. It's a shame really. In short, the progressive view of fighting oppression is to implement laws that sanction oppression; albeit in a different direction.

So yes, for those of us fortunate enough to have been raised in a country dominated by the idea, however flawed it may have been implemented, the privilege of equality under the law (That is to say equality of individual liberty), are certainly fearful of the oppression offered by the "equality of results" advocated by progressives.

I think Milton Freidman said it best when he said that those countries that place individual liberty before equality receive a great deal of both. Those who place equality before individual liberty receive neither.

You are making a lot of assumptions about what progressives understand, believe un and want, while painting them all with the same broad brush. In addition, I find your remarks about "black culture" equally ignorant and abhorrent.

Oh they are? I have a few question for you. Indeed they are simple questions. Are there various black/African American cultures in the United States? Do they differ from the various white cultures? Are all cultures the same? Are all cultures equal in promoting progress? I facts are abhorrent to you then I'm afraid fantasy land is the only place you'll feel comfortable.

My assumptions are spot on, else you would have argued where I went wrong instead of simply contradicting me. Progressives are all about implementing programs that promote "positive liberty," (I'm taking a risk in assuming you actually know what that is). History has shown us that those cultures that place negative liberty at the forefront of their law not only have more negative liberty, but positive liberty as well. Of course, I can paint progressives with a broad brush because if they weren't positive liberty oriented then they wouldn't be called "progressives."

Ok, lets back up here. You made the statement that :

Blacks have developed a couture that aligns more with the latter for the simple reason that it is easier to convince people that you're a victim in order to gain equality of results than the duties required of earning ones own way in a system that promotes equality under the law.

You did not say “some backs or black cultures” You said “blacks” All of them. Now, you are coming back asking me if there are different black cultures and if they are different from white culture. That would not be a way to divert attention away from your contention that all blacks are part of a culture of dependence and entitlement and prefer it to working to get ahead….would it?

Indeed, not all blacks adhere to "black culture." But so many blacks do that it is reasonable enough to refer to them in the singular form. Black cultures in the United States are among the most culturally conservative. If you don't tow the black line they'll give you a hard time. Do you need me to elaborate on this point?

And yes, I understand positive and negative liberty. I also understand equal opportunity and equality of outcome. Furthermore, I understand the need of conservative to rigidly cling to a concept in the name of ideology while ignoring the need for balance. Negative liberty-freedom from external restraint on one's actions- is fine in a society where everyone behaved responsibly and with compassion for their fellow human beings- but such a place does not exist and never will. The fact is that no one can exercise their free will or “positive liberty” unless they are free from societal constraints. Negative liberty-which you apparently subscribe to- allows segments of society to impose constraints to certain other segments of society- therefor inhibiting their free will with impunity. So, the imposition of constraints on the free will of those who would abuse their autonomy at the expense of others-quashing their freedom- is quite appropriate and necessary.

If you knew what negative liberty was then you would have no need to direct quote the definition from Wikipedia. The first sentence in fact. Positive liberty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia . In any case, you proved exactly what I contended, that the very definition of modern progressivism involves destroying negative liberty in pursuit of positive liberty. So, once again, my equality of results over equality under the law analysis rings true. My assumptions were therefore correct.

Yes, progressive may promote positive liberty, but to a point only. Every freedom has its limitations and carries with it responsibilities and it is progressives who understand that better than conservative. Think the second amendment. Interestingly, when convenient, conservatives don’t mind exercising their positive liberty -which can also be defined as freedom from internal controls -such as when shop owners seek to discriminate against gays, or when an employer denies birth control coverage to employees in the name of religious freedom. Then, they complain when there is a legal and social backlash – restraints on their behavior- that would not be possible with a strict adherence to the concept of negative liberty.

I'd hate to be put in the position to defend shop owners who would shut their doors to gay's but no liberty is lost in the process. The shop is the property of the owner and he has freedom of association. The customer likewise has the freedom to solicit services but has no right to them. Progressives would contest that the property owner forfeits his property the moment he opens his doors to the public. I say it's bull hockey. And a shop owner who simply refuses to carry and or proscribe birth control is denying it to no one. They'll simply need to search for it elsewhere. No one should be forced to cater to those who have the very common modern disease that prevents progressive women from being able to keep their legs shut. But cakes and birth control aside, they are ridiculous and easy issues. Racial discrimination is a much harder and more vulgar issue. Still, I tend to come down on the side of the racist shop keepers rights, though I would never shop there. I think there are plenty of historical examples where discrimination has lead to markets that otherwise would not exist that fulfilled the market demand.

In any case, progressives have taken positive liberty legislation way too far. You say within limitation. I say bull shit. Everything from redistribution of wealth, to affirmative action, to overlooking the Bill of Rights altogether. Progressives proclaim rights of housing, healthcare, a livable wage, and all the other goodies that promote laziness and degeneration of society. Couldn't keep your legs closed at the "club" last night; don't worry, we'll give you welfare and a livable wage at mickey D's. Or you could get an abortion funded by the taxpayers (Which I have the guilty pleasure of supporting by the way).

Yes, positive liberty that you accuse liberals of “being all about” can be abused and carried to far- by conservatives. Therefore, both forms of liberty have their place but must to balanced and complimentary.

Give me the test line where progressives would stop in their pursuit of negative liberty. As indicated before, those who pursue a system based on negative liberty usually get a great deal of both. those who pursue the opposite; neither.

Previously you accused “progressives” of not understanding or supporting equality under the law while promoting equality of result. I for one support equality under the law with limited focus on result such affirmative action on a limited and specific basis- again, a balance. You seem to think that liberals or progressives want to magically render everyone equal in all respects which is ridiculous. We understand that that perfect equality of outcome is impossible. We are not necessarily Marxists, or even Socialists and even if we were, it does mean that we believe in absolute equality. Read Marx some time.

Oh, I've read Marx to a very intimate degree. So much in fact that I cringe when liberals or conservatives attempt to characterize his work. Modern day Marxists haven't read Marx.

We also understand that even if equality of outcome were possible, it would stifle personal characteristics, resulting in widespread unhappiness. But by the same measure, perfect equality of opportunity is also impossible. No opportunity can be wide enough not to prioritize one quality above another. Again, a balance is called for in favor of ridged, ideological based rhetoric .

So where do you draw the line?

 

[PoliticalChic]

The message seems to be that Southerners and Republicans are racist. Are states that are in the North of the country and largely vote for the Democratic Party really so open-minded and tolerant?

Here is a recent article with a critic of one such Northern state published the Huffington Post:

"Nowadays, New York state is home to the nation’s most segregated schools.


“For several decades, the state has been more segregated for blacks than any Southern state, though the South has a much higher percent of African American students,” wrote the authors of a report from the UCLA Civil Rights Project in 2014.


For Delmont, that statistic is less than surprising.


“When you actually dig into it, some of the language is different and some of the ways in which they achieved segregation of schools is different, but the outcomes were often not very different than what was going on in the South,” he said."

The South Isn't The Reason Schools Are Still Segregated, New York Is

.

Thanks, Decus.....


Check this out....it supports exactly what you posted:

"Do you know which state has the worst ratio of white voter turnout to African-American voter turnout? Massachusetts. Do you know what has the best, where African-American turnout actually exceeds white turnout? Mississippi."
John Robertson Wednesday, February 27th, 2013 in a Supreme Court oral argument

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The message seems to be that Southerners and Republicans are racist. Are states that are in the North of the country and largely vote for the Democratic Party really so open-minded and tolerant?

Here is a recent article with a critic of one such Northern state published the Huffington Post:

"Nowadays, New York state is home to the nation’s most segregated schools.


“For several decades, the state has been more segregated for blacks than any Southern state, though the South has a much higher percent of African American students,” wrote the authors of a report from the UCLA Civil Rights Project in 2014.


For Delmont, that statistic is less than surprising.


“When you actually dig into it, some of the language is different and some of the ways in which they achieved segregation of schools is different, but the outcomes were often not very different than what was going on in the South,” he said."

The South Isn't The Reason Schools Are Still Segregated, New York Is

.

Thanks, Decus.....


Check this out....it supports exactly what you posted:

"Do you know which state has the worst ratio of white voter turnout to African-American voter turnout? Massachusetts. Do you know what has the best, where African-American turnout actually exceeds white turnout? Mississippi."
John Robertson Wednesday, February 27th, 2013 in a Supreme Court oral argument

And that is supposed to have what-exactly to do with the thread topic and the degree of racism in the south ?