Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We're talking about the message of what is acceptable and what isn't.
The highway is not the message that being normalized. The KKK is.
So if Conservatives are against gay marriage, gay teachers, gay print ads b/c it attempts to normalize society (and especially children) to what they're calling unacceptable, why aren't they also opposing KKK highway, which would also be normalizing what the KKK stands for?
Evidently you don't know what the KKK stands for. They started by keeping the Northern soldiers and black men from raping and murdering white women after the Civil War. I see absolutely no reason for denying them the right to do something good.
Now tell me something the NAACP has ever done for white people. Nothing! They are a racist organization too.
And tell me what the black panthers have ever done that was good for anybody?
I personally would not belong to any of these organizations, but I have read the constitution. Civil rights are for everybody including the KKK.
Location: The Land Mass Between NOLA and Mobile, AL
1,796 posts, read 1,664,569 times
Reputation: 1411
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCN
Evidently you don't know what the KKK stands for. They started by keeping the Northern soldiers and black men from raping and murdering white women after the Civil War. I see absolutely no reason for denying them the right to do something good.
Now tell me something the NAACP has ever done for white people. Nothing! They are a racist organization too.
And tell me what the black panthers have ever done that was good for anybody?
I personally would not belong to any of these organizations, but I have read the constitution. Civil rights are for everybody including the KKK.
Um, the KKK endorsed (extra-legal) lynching and murders, and was essentially a terrorist organization (See Orlando Patterson's Rituals of Blood among other works for more on the U.S.'s culture of scapegoating and lynching). While today the Klan is much more benign than it used to be, it at best foments hatred, lies, and ignorance. (I won't even address the "protecting white womanhood" racist canard with a response, and for the record, I'm a white girl). In contrast, the NAACP historically has used legal means and lengthy court battles to ensure equality for all. Their work not only included the landmark Brown (1954) decision, but also several specific anti-lynching campaigns, including the Van Nuys Act, none of which was successfully passed by Congress.
And the Black Panthers of the late 1960s and early 1970s benefited many poor people of all races in urban areas through their establishment of free breakfast programs for children, adult literacy programs, and low-cost and free health clinics. In fact, the FBI under Hoover was most concerned about infiltrating the BP due to these activities--you can get COINTELPRO documents through the Freedom of Information Act that will verify this.
I don't personally really care about the KKK adopting a slice of highway in whatever location--people will react to that as they will, depending on their experience and knowledge. But the matter of freedom of speech attaching to individuals and to groups is different, and for groups, the right to say things in publicly owned space may depend on such factors as tax-exempt status. For example, churches are not supposed to make political statements because they do not pay taxes. For another example of restrictions on free speech in the public sphere, as a member of an organization of whatever political stripe, I might be required to get a parade permit prior to a protest in order to occupy that public space in a manner that could interfere with the way others conduct their business. What I'm saying is that the issue is neither simple nor only related to the First Amendment; there are also potential issues related to the Fourth, to prior restraint on speech. In addition, there are issues related to what a particular state, which should ideally be committed to supporting all of its constituents, may be perceived to be supporting by accepting money or services from a group that actively promotes white supremacy.
Why is it that the "kneegrows" have their "Black caucuses", "Black elected officials" , etc and everything is fine, but if the white elected officials did the same thing it would be a racists problem. Double standards here.
White people have most certainly had their own white caucuses, white elected officials, white everything. Believe it or not, some posters here are so ancient that we remember Sunset Laws, Jim Crow and peaceful protesters attacked with German Shepherds and fire hoses. We remember when there were separate entrances, separate seating sections, separate night clubs and restaurants. To be able to vote in America's early days, one had to be a white, land-owning male. Shoot, women have only had the vote for less than 100 years. So for well over 200 years, the vast majority of jobs, money and influence has been in the hands of white males. Don't be so greedy!
Evidently you don't know what the KKK stands for. They started by keeping the Northern soldiers and black men from raping and murdering white women after the Civil War. I see absolutely no reason for denying them the right to do something good.
Now tell me something the NAACP has ever done for white people. Nothing! They are a racist organization too.
And tell me what the black panthers have ever done that was good for anybody?
I personally would not belong to any of these organizations, but I have read the constitution. Civil rights are for everybody including the KKK.
What a bunch of BS. The fact that you actually stick up for the KKK says all that needs to be said about you.
Evidently you don't know what the KKK stands for. They started by keeping the Northern soldiers and black men from raping and murdering white women after the Civil War. I see absolutely no reason for denying them the right to do something good.
Now tell me something the NAACP has ever done for white people. Nothing! They are a racist organization too.
The NAACP does allow whites to join unlike the CBC. It costs nothing.
Oh, and the war is long over, that is not what they stand for.
if they really want to get more money, they could stake out that section of road and ticket the litterers who will, no doubt, feel that it is a good place to dump their trash.
NO! I am white and I am against groups or organizations which are doing against other races, religions, etc.
Will you support if communist party try to do the same?
NO! I am white and I am against groups or organizations which are doing against other races, religions, etc.
Will you support if communist party try to do the same?
Sure.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
