Kenny Bunk explains how the laws of the Jim Crow Era were just badly enforced, and the Civil Rights Acts just an overreaction:
Of course Pat is correct in pointing out that these laws are no longer necessary and were in fact, never quite constitutionally legal ... that is they were specifically designed to unconstitutionally favor one group of citizens over others as a remedy for grievances already specifically addressed by constitutional amendments and other laws.Viennacon reveals that an evil Democrat was responsible for all the bad parts of the Civil Rights Act
For example, our British cousins are at least a bit more forthright in calling their version of Affirmative Action what it really is, "Positive Discrimination."
Instead of enforcing existing laws, which certainly could have been done to address Negro grievances in the first place, law after law was piled on top of them. In a strange way, this is an echo of "Gun Laws," which in many cases were originally enacted to keep Negroes from their Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
However, the Negro vote, 12% of our population, is now concentrated in such a way as to dominate national elections and the representative bodies of the most populated states and is a key Democrat constituency, without which they would pass from national power. Thus, in a practical sense, we are stuck with Political Correctness and Affirmative Action.
Remember the Negroes were an important Republican constituency in earlier non-urban times. That is, until the last freed slaves and then their immediate offspring, passed from the scene.
The section ruling on private industry was flatly unconstitutional. The Act had these elements added by Emmanuel Celler (D - N.Y.) after hearings during the negotiation. Republicans, though they were widely in support of the Act should have demanded this be taken out. It was blatantly an expansion of government illegaly into the private sphere, and short-sighted people that they were, they never imagined how the libs would abuse it.MichaelCorleone is sure that antidiscrimination laws is all that's keeping us from utopia:
Does anyone really believe if Civil Rights laws were repealed we’d go back to black and white drinking fountains?MasterGunner01 - liberals are trapped in the 1960s Civil Rights era:
No. And I’ll go one further - we’ll all live much more productive and satisfying lives together.
Does anyone really believe if Civil Rights laws were repealed we'd go back to black and white drinking fountains? Blacks riding in the back of the bus? Separate entrances areas for blacks?Jabba the Nutt knows the entire Government is full of evil Democrats, so no more Federal Civil Rights!
NO, but liberals and Blacks certainly do. They're trapped in the 1950s and early 1960s segregation mindset — one they cherish and nourish every day.
The Fed have proven themselves incapable of objectively enforcing the “civil rights laws’. They are purely an arm of the Democrat Party. The first to go, has to be the sexual harassment laws, and then the civil rights laws. Return this to the States and the People. The Feds ought to have little tonothing to do with individual Americans and getting involved with all this crap has proven to be a disaster once Jim Crow was overthrown.MeganC relates how she was victmized in High School, so screw everyone else!
I graduated high school Class of 2008. In all four of my years in high school black males who I didn't even know would come up and put their arms around me, hug me, rub on me, and etc. and I could always count on the liberal faculty to do absolutely nothing about it.While that kind of collective guilt is awful, MeganC showed up on our little blog, and handled some of our more...exuberant posters with what I thought was class.
Meaning all those civil rights laws never applied to me when I needed them so why should I give a sh*t about them?
Do I have to start telling stories about my Texas relatives again? Racism is alive and well in America.
ReplyDeleteOnly in Freeperland would the repeal of the Civil Rights Act lead to less racism. On the other hand, I'm surprised there was even one voice of reason (Firebrand) on that thread.
ReplyDeleteI always thought the CRA should have been based on the "badges and incidents" power of the 13th Amendment, which would have placed it on much firmer constitutional ground than the Commerce Clause. Of course, it would have only ever applied to black discrimination then.
ReplyDelete"While that kind of collective guilt is awful, MeganC showed up on our little blog, and handled some of our more...exuberant posters with what I thought was class."
ReplyDeleteYep. The lady has grace. Mind, she's probably had to deal with the crap for years and has a lot of practice. Young woman marries much older man? How many won't think either gold digger or Daddy issues.
In terms of the Civil Rights Act - I would love to see it scrapped if it was truly no longer needed. It really shouldn't be needed by now - even the most rock skulled has realized that everyone is just people. Yet it is going to be needed for another 50 years or so. The idea of slavery as a good thing didn't die out until the grand children of slave owners did. (I know, it still crops up, but go with this for a second)
What I do disagree with is affirmative action, as currently practiced. Got a shitty school serving primarily minority students? Put in some decent teachers, rather than skewing the curve.
With you on affirmative action.
DeleteI think there's something to be said for diversity of background helping education, but merit is at least as important.
There is also an argument that some must face greater obstacles to get to the same place, and thus have more merit with the same metrics. But that's more an argument for class based action, not racial.
But the Freepers reflexive "black dude? Well he can't have earned it!" excuse for racism is awesome in it's failure to hide anything.
Agree on diversity - but USE it! Don't just nod to it in class, bring it out. Talk about it. Take a simple English lesson, for example. You read something, then analyze it. Totally perfect to bring in different ways of thought, and how different cultures interpret the same text through their own filters. It is a minor pet peeve - American students are raised to accept one way of interpreting things. It's a big world, but for most of them may not even exist.
DeleteI know - a conservative arguing for understanding is really odd! :P
Today's "Holier-than-thou" vanity on FR ...
ReplyDeleteFriendofGeorge declares his holy superiority
False flag!
ReplyDeleteWestboro Baptist Church founder Fred Phelps: The Unsung Hero of the Gay Rights Movement
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3134946/posts
Not totally a false flag.
ReplyDeleteFred Phelps made his nut by supporting gay rights in court cases in the 70's. He was rather effective, too.
Now, while I have exactly zero problem with gay rights (just don't ask the Church to marry you) I am a little bit pissed off by this pissant. He's no pastor, he's a fucking hypocrite, and his "churches" model for funding is a mockery.
Forgive me if I don't shed a tear for his passing. They say "Go knows his own." I bloody well hope so;