Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Social Issues > Racism

Racism Do you feel that affirmative action should be expired, or do you feel that it should still be enforced? Defend your views on affirmative action in this forum.


Thanks Tree7Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 12th, 2017, 10:33 PM   #11
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Virginia
Posts: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by discollector View Post
1) Gee - too many paragraphs to respond. We're both on the same page here so no response necessary

2) As you stated, the immigration issue requires its own thread. But, the debacle is simply this:

Most Americans feel that unless you are a National ID wearing, Socialist Surveillance Number - oooops...Social Security Number owning, background checked, certified, registered and government subject of the NEW WORLD ORDER, you don't have any Rights. Most Americans don't get it that being in the U.S. without papers is not a crime - and, above all else, many people are here operating legally without papers because there was no credible and proper way for them to enter. No need to say anything else here as it is a separate topic and if anyone wants a response, they will start a relevant thread.

3) Your third paragraph is non-responsive in that we are not addressing any specifics so go to

4) I haven't accused you of anything. I'm just articulating my view which is 180 degrees opposite of what both the left and the right say regarding racial issues

5) I differ with you that people should keep their lifestyles behind locked doors, etc. I just finished watching NCIS Los Angeles. The main actor portrays a devout Muslim on the job and Americans are comfortable allowing people to be like that in real life. If someone is Christian, racist, separatist, anti- gay marriage, right of center, pro-gun, or even cognizant of the attempts to destroy America via multiculturalism, then we try to lock them out of society. That is why America ended up with Donald Trump

6) Nothing to discuss in that paragraph. I'm neutral

7) When I said that But, private entities to private entities owe the public / government nothing, it should have continued on the government owes them nothing. You should not have to register a church and if you believe all that hooey about a separation of church and state, the church should operate tax free AND people should not be able to write off donated money as a deduction... AND the government should be expressed prohibited from setting church policies and / or tenets of faith

We are in agreement on the balance of your points.
Just a quick response on the things I want to touch on: Muslim is not a race (and I'm sure you're aware of the difference, I'm just emphasizing this). The 1st Amendment requires the government respect freedom of religion, the same is not true for being racist when there's a victim. So-called "separation of church and state" (i.e. desire by religious folks to merge their church with the state to impose their religion on everyone else) is a topic for a different thread.

I do plan on trying to find threads or creating new ones regarding so-called "separation of church and state" and business owners/operators that try to use their religion as an excuse to get away with victimizing people.
Thanks from imaginethat

Last edited by Neil; November 12th, 2017 at 10:40 PM.
Neil is offline  
Old November 12th, 2017, 10:56 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 56,237
Great discussion. Thanks!
Thanks from discollector
imaginethat is offline  
Old November 13th, 2017, 08:20 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Georgia
Posts: 642
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil View Post
Just a quick response on the things I want to touch on: Muslim is not a race (and I'm sure you're aware of the difference, I'm just emphasizing this). The 1st Amendment requires the government respect freedom of religion, the same is not true for being racist when there's a victim. So-called "separation of church and state" (i.e. desire by religious folks to merge their church with the state to impose their religion on everyone else) is a topic for a different thread.

I do plan on trying to find threads or creating new ones regarding so-called "separation of church and state" and business owners/operators that try to use their religion as an excuse to get away with victimizing people.
I think Neil is going to become a credible poster here. We've been able to discuss issues - even disagree and remain very cordial and respectful with each other.

It's no secret. I have a view about race and it is not very popular. At the same time, there is no way my opinions ought to be ever mandated, by law, for others to obey.

For example, I do not believe in inter-racial marriage. OTOH, government has no business telling any of you who to love and who you should marry. Ditto for yours truly. If you seek out opinions before, during or after getting into an inter-racial relationship, they should be available without censorship.

Once a younger black co-worker (who looks on me as a kind of a father figure) came to me and said he was thinking about marrying a white girl. He asked me if I thought he should do it. I told him no. He looked at me almost incredulously as if something were wrong with me - after all, he was trying to do the right thing. I told him that if he married that girl, he had to wake up next to her and only he could decide whether to ask her.

If my co-worker needed the blessings of other white people or the validation from me, then he wasn't ready to get married. What we think should play no part... except that he might get looks of disapproval in some predominantly white neighborhoods (a consideration he should think about.)

At the end of the day, I don't judge others on the basis of their beliefs. It would be nice if everybody tried it... just my .02 cents worth.
Thanks from Neil
discollector is online now  
Old November 14th, 2017, 02:29 AM   #14
forgot my old user name
 
right to left's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,743
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil View Post
I'm opposed to anything being forced or coerced based on race/ethnicity - forced segregation or forced integration.

I'm for a free market, where people decide where they want to live, where they want to work or go to school (where they want to apply for a job, be a student, etc.), who they want to associate with, where and when they want to travel, etc.

Anything that's forced or coerced is done by the state, with armed agents, and when it's done for purposes other than to bring someone accused of breaking the law - a law where there's a victim (individual or collective, such as traffic violation), is socialism. State-imposed racism is socialist.
This century sure hasn't been good for all the libertarian pipedreams we were hearing about how the MARKET will decide everything best for us all!

Government isn't the only thing that FORCES people to act against their desires. Lack of MONEY is the other forcing factor that separates the rich from the poor. So, as wealthier whites in America looked for options to free their children from having to attend school with black children, they could send them to private schools if they could afford it, or make up home-schooling associations if they were of more modest means. And now that the charter schooling privatization movement has run its way through the past three administrations, according to recent polling data, American schools are more segregated now than they were in the late 60's, when busing/forced integration programs were tried.

So, what are you really for? Money is freedom and poverty is lack of freedom under libertarian capitalism!
right to left is offline  
Old November 14th, 2017, 06:10 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: upnorth
Posts: 1,521
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil View Post
Muslim is not a race
Up until about 20 years ago, we always called them "Arabs". When referring to their religion they were called "Moslems". Both terms have been replaced by "Muslim". I still call them Arabs because I find the similarity between one Arab and another transcends religion.
Pilgrim is offline  
Old November 14th, 2017, 06:33 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Georgia
Posts: 642
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilgrim View Post
Up until about 20 years ago, we always called them "Arabs". When referring to their religion they were called "Moslems". Both terms have been replaced by "Muslim". I still call them Arabs because I find the similarity between one Arab and another transcends religion.
Although "race" is an imprecise term - even though anthropologists have categories of race, I find a few things here interesting:

An old argument of the immigration religionists was to challenge you to go to the hospital emergency room and "see" how many so called illegal aliens came if for free (sic) medical care. When the LEO community wants to profile a person to determine of they are a potential terrorist, they always come up with some physical attributes.

In a general sense, we all can look at a person and make certain determinations about their biological makeup (aka race and religion) from physical attributes. You may want to refer to these attributes as race, ethnicity, etc. and have side arguments over exactly what it is, but the reality is Omar Mateen, Nidal Hasan, the 9 / 11 terrorists, Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik all shared physical traits that would have allowed the average person to guess their nationality / ethnicity / race / religion and most would have been right on their first guess.

Over the years there has been a lot of amalgamation of the races, religions, cultures, nationalities, etc., but then again, no civilization has ever survived the mixing of cultures, religions, races, etc.
discollector is online now  
Old November 14th, 2017, 11:41 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Georgia
Posts: 642
Quote:
Originally Posted by right to left View Post
This century sure hasn't been good for all the libertarian pipedreams we were hearing about how the MARKET will decide everything best for us all!

Government isn't the only thing that FORCES people to act against their desires. Lack of MONEY is the other forcing factor that separates the rich from the poor. So, as wealthier whites in America looked for options to free their children from having to attend school with black children, they could send them to private schools if they could afford it, or make up home-schooling associations if they were of more modest means. And now that the charter schooling privatization movement has run its way through the past three administrations, according to recent polling data, American schools are more segregated now than they were in the late 60's, when busing/forced integration programs were tried.

So, what are you really for? Money is freedom and poverty is lack of freedom under libertarian capitalism!
Your allegations are too complex for me, as someone who leans toward libertarianism, to respond to in this thread.

First it seems (and I'm only observing here) that you believe that if schools are segregated, that is proof of racism and, in your belief system) racism is an evil. Again this is mere observation.

Secondly, money is basically a standard of value and a medium of exchange. Real wealth is in owning land and producing necessities. Again, your argument is extremely weak and vague at best, so feel free to expound on what you're trying to convey.

Government with its free education (a real draw for foreigners) for every child - even if they aren't citizens sounds good to you, but they churn out liberal robots that are incapable of surviving without Uncle Scam. And government programs like Socialist Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc. are all a testament to the fact that the ONLY things the government excels at is raising and collecting taxes, maintaining a massive military, imprisoning its citizenry, and jeopardizing the Rights of the people.

Racial integration cannot take the poor out of poverty. The poor have to be motivated by doing things that will make them self sufficient. Tax me and give the poor a meal, you fed him for a day. Teach the poor a useful skill and you've fed them for the rest of their life.
discollector is online now  
Old November 15th, 2017, 10:58 PM   #18
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Virginia
Posts: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by right to left View Post
This century sure hasn't been good for all the libertarian pipedreams we were hearing about how the MARKET will decide everything best for us all!
That's because we don't have libertarian policies fully in place & implemented right now. Right now it's a bit socialist & we need to cut back on that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by right to left View Post
Government isn't the only thing that FORCES people to act against their desires. Lack of MONEY is the other forcing factor that separates the rich from the poor.
I'm focused on is race/ethnicity issues in general here, not what separates rich from poor. That's sort of the definition of being poor, having a lack of "money" (wealth, assets, etc.). I do plan on getting more in depth into free market principles per se later on, in different threads.

Quote:
Originally Posted by right to left View Post
So, as wealthier whites in America looked for options to free their children from having to attend school with black children, they could send them to private schools if they could afford it, or make up home-schooling associations if they were of more modest means.
LOL I seriously don't buy that that's why whites (or anyone else, for that matter) send their children to private schools. Not all blacks are poor, and some of them send their children to private schools. If the goal for wealthy whites is to send their children to schools without blacks, and wealthy blacks are sending their children to those same schools, then they're not succeeding with that. So much for your premise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by right to left View Post
And now that the charter schooling privatization movement has run its way through the past three administrations, according to recent polling data, American schools are more segregated now than they were in the late 60's, when busing/forced integration programs were tried.
Maybe it's a reaction (regardless of whether it's rational or irrational) to busing/forced integration, which is why forced integration is not a solution for anything. It's not about the "integration" part, it's about the "forced" part, and there's a difference (day & night) between desegregation and forced integration (being against forced integration and forced segregation means being for desegregation; I'm for desegregation). Anything that's forced by the state for social engineering purposes or what not has a tendency to result in adverse side effects, "unintended" (sometimes I question whether it really was unintended) consequences, undesirable outcomes (e.g., more segregation now), etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by right to left View Post
So, what are you really for?
What do mean what am I really for? I'm for what I say I'm for. It sounds like you're accusing me of being dishonest. What's your evidence (at this point) that I'm not saying what I'm really for?

Quote:
Originally Posted by right to left View Post
Money is freedom and poverty is lack of freedom under libertarian capitalism!
That begs the question, how do you define poverty, and is there poverty under libertarian capitalism? More people prosper when there's more liberty for everyone. Restrictions imposed by the state take jobs away, which leads to a reduction in resources/abundance for everyone (except those who are wealthier and can afford the higher costs).

It could probably be argued that money is not freedom & poverty is even more lack of freedom under state capitalism aka socialism (well, except for the top 0.01% wealthy crony capitalists, I suppose).

Last edited by Neil; November 15th, 2017 at 11:02 PM.
Neil is offline  
Old November 15th, 2017, 11:10 PM   #19
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Virginia
Posts: 68
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilgrim View Post
Up until about 20 years ago, we always called them "Arabs". When referring to their religion they were called "Moslems". Both terms have been replaced by "Muslim". I still call them Arabs because I find the similarity between one Arab and another transcends religion.
I have no idea who you're referring to when you say "we".

I'm not religious, and I get confused about the labeling, but one thing I know is that not all Arabs (as in the people of a "middle east" region, ethnicity, race, whatever) are members of the religion of Islam, and not all members of the religion of Islam are Arabs (again, as in the people of a "middle east" region, ethnicity, race, whatever).
Neil is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Social Issues > Racism

Tags
racist



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Racist..... urbrother Civil Rights 15 October 3rd, 2016 11:07 PM
Everyone's a Racist RNG Social Issues 15 April 4th, 2014 01:49 PM
Bob is a racist Bookworm Racism 89 September 3rd, 2012 10:20 PM
Is this racist 2 fxashun Racism 2 July 28th, 2009 06:30 PM
Is this racist? fxashun Racism 156 July 24th, 2009 04:23 PM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.