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.
She already stated that choosing a woman is sexist and choosing a non-white man is racist...because...Affirmative Action!
Now, what does that leave...hmmmm.
According to her, no woman or non-white person will ever be greater than the current selection.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifeexplorer
Please do not fabricate. I never said anything remotely like that.
I said the selection process should be merit based not race or gender based. I don't care whom is selected as long as the process remains merit based.
Really, you said nothing about Affirmative Action? These quotes are yours.
Quote:
Sure, she's on there because of the affirmative action and political correctness not because of her achievements.
Quote:
Like I said, it's nothing more than the racist affirmative action.
Quote:
Affirmative action is race, gender based not merit based.
Harriet got on the bill because she's a woman and black not because of her achievements. That's both racist and sexist.
[quote]
Quote:
What proof do you need? Plenty of people had far more achievements than her. It was decided they wanted a woman (gender discrimination) and a black (racial discrimination) for the bill.[/QUOTE]
Quote:
You again provided solid evidence that Tubman is an AA choice!
Quote:
Stating the truth is not trashing. She's on the bill because of her gender and skin color. That's sexist and racist!
Quote:
The true racism is choosing someone such as Tubman based on skin color rather than merit!
Quote:
Two words: affirmative action!
Quote:
Tubman is clearly an affirmative action choice to make things "fair"
Quote:
Because she was chosen over others for affirmative action and political correctness because of her gender and skin color not because of her greater achievements.
Quote:
Even their skills or achievements are inferior when compared to others, they should be included because of their skin color or gender?
I guess I just don't see a reason to change it. Who cares - it's money - we spend it - we don't frame it and hang it on the wall. I'm no fan of Jackson but the fact that he's been on the $20 bill since before I was born doesn't bother me. It makes you wonder who came up with what person would be on what coin or dollar. Washington on the lowest value bill (and the quarter), Ben Franklin on the $100. Larger denominations most of us don't see are really weird choices, IMHO - McKinley on the $500 and Grover Cleveland (Grover Cleveland!!) on the $1000. Just odd. But the choices were made and I just don't see any reason to change them. I hope it's not a new trend. It's just weird.
They change all the time. It's not a new trend. They haven't changed in a while, but it's not a new thing. The first $5 had Alexander Hamilton on it. Lincoln has only been on since 1914, and prior to this. There have been several different $5 bill variations since it was first introduced in 1861, with a cast of various people.
It's fine if you think it's a waste of time to do, but it's not a new thing. We change the design of money quite a lot actually.
Andrew Jackson had native allies as well. He also had an Indian stepson.
I've never heard of any Native American stepsons, do you have a link? Lyncoya was a Creek orphan that Jackson adopted and raised with Andrew Jackson Jr. Lyncoya died of tuberculosis in his late teens.
That is a valid point. So is the one made by LifeExplorer.
This is not a USPS Stamp. A one time use throwaway. Currency should represent something special. As the national flag or a public monument does.
Do they let you keep the bill after you spend it? I should start shopping where you're shopping.
But seriously though, money is also a one time use thing. For every piece of money, measured in dollars and cents, you spend, that amount is gone. If I go to Target and give the cashier a $20, then come back a few days later and get a $20 in change, there's almost no chance that it's the same $20. Same image on it, but you also can buy a whole book of stamps.
I'm not seeing the difference. Both the stamp and the money are nothing but symbolic gestures as far as what imagery is on it. Both exist purely for a utility based purpose though.
Choosing a women through affirmative action, which is race and gender based, is sexist but choosing a women because of her achievements is not.
Do you have problem understanding this?
Did you get tired of reading all of those Affirmative Action posts you made?
This one is the most telling:
Quote:
It was decided they wanted a woman (gender discrimination) and a black (racial discrimination) for the bill.
This is what proves my point that it is your belief that no woman or non-white person can EVER be greater than a white male.
Of course, you want to abolish Affirmative Action, so as long as it is law you will automatically KNOW (hehe) that someone was chosen because of it.
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.
