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.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 24 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,560 posts, read 16,548,014 times
Reputation: 6042
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz
Are you telling me there is no longer intentional racial segregation? Get real.
Are you telling me there wouldn't be racial segregation if it wasn't illegal? If so, why did they make it illegal in the first place?
I mean, if it isn't a problem, lets repeal that law. Who cares right?
I lived in the city of "Moore, Oklahoma" for about 15 years. That city was created largely as a result of the "white flight" which came with the forced busing of the 1970's. Trust me, if it wasn't illegal, Moore would be pretty much 100% white to this day.
I never said that some people do not purposefully segregate themselves, only that the majority of which you spoke of is based on wealth, not race in todays day in age, and that causes racial segregation.
Further more, White flight is highly misused in this thread and in general. and even in your own post.
Heck, you even used racial busing as an argument, but there is no racial busing in suburbs, all kids black and white go to the same schools.
Yes.
I also know race is a cultural construct not a biological reality.
Ethnicity plays a part in our biological and phenotypic differences.
So people develop a false taxonomy of race to explain ethnic and cultural differences based on the oh so unreliable trait of skin color.
Your race is redefinable, changeable, and fluid based on self identification and the perception of others. This makes it an invalid, unreliable, and possibly dangerous institution to cling on to.
Ethnicity is pretty straight forward, it's largely genetic. I personally think it still shouldn't be a means of actively separating us from one another. So it ultimately boils down to cultural differences. Cultural differences are much harder to reconcile than anything else and in my experience what really separates humanity from one another.
Most people self segregate anyways. It's the government that is forcing this integration kumbayah policy.
Agreed and; as long as Jim Crow's kept in its place, different "races" WILL mix together as long as all the players in the game have something to get out of it and, I'm NOT talking about people trying to cheat each other, more like people working together.
This is better topic for Stormfront. At least they are honest about what they want. For those of you upset about affirmative action and minority scholarships and blah blah blah remember what institutions reaped the benefits of free labor . its a feeble attempt at reparations and IMO it doesn't go far enough.
Actually, they kind of do. They just don't call it that, and make pains to ensure that it's a one-way street that could never, ever benefit white Christians in any way.
That kind of self-segregation is already legal, so there is no reason to be discussing it.
The real question is, if you owned an apartment complex, should you be allowed to discriminate? Can you choose to only rent to white people, or only black people, or only Christians, or only Mormons, etc?
If you ran a business, can you discriminate when you hire people? Can you choose to only hire white people? Or Russians? Or Muslims?
To say that it is acceptable to voluntarily segregate, and then say that discrimination shouldn't be allowed, is to say that you aren't actually allowed to voluntarily segregate.
Voluntary means "not coerced". For the government to disallow segregation, requires the use of coercion. But discrimination is not coercion.
So do you support discrimination or not?
In Obama's Amerika, you cannot put bank branches where you choose to:
You don't have to sell your home . what are you talking about? The gov isnt forcing you to do anything. You can. Get up and leave the closing table if you want but we are smarter than that. Want to buy into a redlined area? Well.... Just have a nice blond couple show up at closing for ya. Thanks for the house buddy. Lol
I'm not interested in the particulars of how these things might work in reality. I'm merely concerned with the principles involved.
What I'm saying is, if the government gives you a right to someone else's property, it necessarily means that person is obligated to give/sell/rent his property to you.
Even if you declare that you only have that right because I was offering my property or labor up for sale. It still gives me fundamentally no say in who I sell my property/labor to.
Lets pretend that you had an old computer, and you decided to sell your computer. And you had two friends who wanted to buy it. And lets pretend that one of your friends already has a computer and the other doesn't. So you would prefer to sell your computer to the friend who didn't already own a computer.
What the government is saying is that you aren't allowed to make that kind of judgement. That you must sell it effectively to whoever offers the most money.
Now, I understand that racial discrimination of strangers isn't the same as my example, but it is based on the same principle. Do you have the right to choose who you sell your property to? And for that matter, can you offer to sell your property for different prices to different people?
Look at it like this, many businesses offer "age-related discounts". Such as the senior-citizen discount. Children usually pay less than adults. But isn't this just discrimination?
There is a "military discount", so why can't you have a "white people discount?" Or an "American citizen discount"? I mean, "gender" is technically a "protected class". But a lot of businesses give free admission to women, or give other such perks based on gender. Isn't that discrimination?
Is there a fundamental difference between giving women free admission, and giving whites free admission?
If a business isn't allowed to discriminate, then lets pretend that they made prostitution legal. Could a prostitute refuse service to black men? Or Asian men? Or White men? For that matter, should they have the right to discriminate based on gender?
This notion that you aren't allowed to dispense with your property as you see fit, is to say that you don't actually own your property. And if your property is a product of your labor, then it is saying you don't own your labor, and if you don't own your labor, you don't own yourself. It would make you a slave. And the government can force you to do things against your will, under weight of heavy fines and punishments, if you refuse their demands.
It is an ignorant, unprincipled, and dangerous idea.
Last edited by Redshadowz; 10-04-2015 at 12:32 PM..
With all the racial trouble that I have heard about the Main Stream media journalists never talk about racial separation as a possible solution to the racial problems in this country. Multiculturalism and integration is taken as a given with no discussion needed or allowed. Now before we come right out and advocate racial separation we can at least consider that it is a possible solution to many of our racial problems even though you may disagree with it after considering all that it entails. So why isn't it even an area of discussion? It is possibly a legitimate solution to our racial problems. It isn't nonsense like believing in flying saucers or that their might be men living inside the earth that no body has ever seen. It seems that the holier-than-thou leftist intellectuals in all their self righteous smugness think that their ideas are worthy to be implemented and no other ideas are intelligent enough to be considered.
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.