Fuck the Race Card Part II

[funks 1]

On certain topics we will need to agree to disagree. I simply believe the black community blames way to many misfortunes on skin color. That is my belief.

In reference to my original post. Do you believe it is fair and just that the NFL is mandated to interview black candidates or else face a fine?

[littlestranger 0]

Quote

But for Gods sakes, the shit ended 150 years ago.

MEOW

you keep bringing it up in this forum, why don't you follow your own advice and GET OVER IT.

[justinb138 0]

Quote

"There is way to much crying going on about racial injustices. My point here is that black people tend to make a mountain out of a mole hill."

I would have to disagree with that. 99% of the people don't make a big issue out of most things. Unfortunately, it's the 1% that do that everyone hears about.

[funks 1]

Quote

Quote

But for Gods sakes, the shit ended 150 years ago.

MEOW

you keep bringing it up in this forum, why don't you follow your own advice and GET OVER IT.

There is nothing for me to get over. I did not bring up slavery in my initial comment. It was brought up to me and I simply responded to it. I would consider the source of the slavery statements as the one that needs to get over it.

Once again, back to my original post. Is it right for the NFL to institute the mandate it has?

If so, should the NFL also be mandated to try out at least one white person for all running back positions seeing that the majority if not all of running back positions are held by black athletes?????

[Ron 10]

Quote

First Africans selling each other in slavery and Blacks owning slaves here are two different issues that occurred in two different countries. Yes, Africans sold each other into slavery. That was a smaller part of how Africans ended up here. The larger part is Europeans capturing Africans and enslaving them. Tell the whole story.

Still when you look at it you have several ways Blacks ended up here. Captured by whites, captured by blacks, indentured servitude, came over AFTER slavery, born here.

Now, can you tell me what % of Blacks came from which method? I can pretty much bet that 100% of the blacks that are in the States right now were not slaves captured, brough here, and sold here.

So, why is the fact that 150 years ago a guy was treated really badly mean jack shit today? If you want to go farther back the American Indians were getting a bad deal LONG before your relatives were. And if you want to look at something closer, look at the internment of Japanese in WW2, or how the World treated Jews....ect, ect.

People have treated people badly....Just becasue it was done to your great great grandad, does not make it more or less worse than the others. Just becasue it was done in the States does not make it better or worse either.

Quote

Second, assuming there were "six Negroes" in Louisiana and "125 free Negroes" who owned slaves what do you think the percentage of all slave owners they comprise during it's 400 year history? A drop in the bucket.

Did you read the link?

Quote

In 1860 only a small minority of whites owned slaves. According to the U.S. census report for that last year before the Civil War, there were nearly 27 million whites in the country. Some eight million of them lived in the slaveholding states.

The census also determined that there were fewer than 385,000 individuals who owned slaves (1). Even if all slaveholders had been white, that would amount to only 1.4 percent of whites in the country

ONLY 1.4% of whites owned slaves. ..So why should I suffer for 1.4% being a jackass?

And to answer your question:"what do you think the percentage of all slave owners they comprise during it's 400 year history? A drop in the bucket."

Quote

According to federal census reports, on June 1, 1860 there were nearly 4.5 million Negroes in the United States, with fewer than four million of them living in the southern slaveholding states. Of the blacks residing in the South, 261,988 were not slaves. Of this number, 10,689 lived in New Orleans. The country's leading African American historian, Duke University professor John Hope Franklin, records that in New Orleans over 3,000 free Negroes owned slaves, or 28 percent of the free Negroes in that city.

To return to the census figures quoted above, this 28 percent is certainly impressive when compared to less than 1.4 percent of all American whites and less than 4.8 percent of southern whites. The statistics show that, when free, blacks disproportionately became slave masters.

Quote

Addressing your question about owing descendants of slaves something, I've never in any thread on here said anything about reparations

No, but you have said time after time that we need to make things right. You have supported affirmative action, and others who will read this HAVE supported reperations.

Quote

To me it's tantamount to arguing about who would win in a fight between Captain Kirk and Bruce Lee.

Bruce Lee hands down...Unless Kirk has a Phaser. Now Lee vs. Spock...I don't know, Spock had the strength of 10 men.

Quote

It'll never happen so why bother discussing it

Oh, nevermind. sorry.

Quote

Unless of course it could be used as a tool to divide people. Interesting thought.

No, I think it can matter. Maybe not for THIS disscussion, but don't you find it interesting that only 1.4% of whites ever owned slaves?

Also, do you think it is fair to make the NFL interview black coaches? Why not just hire the best guy?

Do you think that the NFL, that is 70% black, should make teams look at white linemen more?

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Nightingale 0]

Quote

Quote

College is a heck of a lot easier for the kids who don't have to worry about where their next meal is coming from.

My school is paid for by the US Army. Almost ANYONE can join the Army, do three years and for 1200 taken out 100.00/mth for the first year get 33,000 for school.

I get a check for 1,004/mth to go to school. I have a job, so I don't worry where my next meal is.

Almost anyone could do that.

The military is a good option for some people. However, it's not a solution for everyone. There are others that are simply not cut out for it, and others that are barred from joining due to medical issues (anything you have to take daily medication for, scholiosis, mental illness, stuff like that).

[Ron 10]

Quote

The military is a good option for some people. However, it's not a solution for everyone. There are others that are simply not cut out for it, and others that are barred from joining due to medical issues (anything you have to take daily medication for, scholiosis, mental illness, stuff like that).

Yep thats why my I wrote:

Quote

My school is paid for by the US Army. Almost ANYONE can join the Army, do three years and for 1200 taken out 100.00/mth for the first year get 33,000 for school.

I get a check for 1,004/mth to go to school. I have a job, so I don't worry where my next meal is.

Almost anyone could do that.

A hell of a lot more people are qualified than not.

Quote

There are others that are simply not cut out for it

Thats not a good reason. Some are not cut out for holding downa job. If they want something bad enough then they should do what it takes to get it.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[eflynn 0]

Believe what you'd like to, but understand you don't know enough about the Black community to make create an informed opinion.

As far as your original post I think it's unofortunate that it seems to be necessary... i.e. without it there would be fewer Black coaches. Can I understand why some people would say it isn't fair? Yes.

[littlestranger 0]

Quote

Once again, back to my original post. Is it right for the NFL to institute the mandate it has?

The NFL can do whatever the hell they want.

[funks 1]

Quote

Believe what you'd like to, but understand you don't know enough about the Black community to make create an informed opinion.

As far as your original post I think it's unofortunate that it seems to be necessary... i.e. without it there would be fewer Black coaches. Can I understand why some people would say it isn't fair? Yes.

Once again, please explain to me what there is to understand about the black community? Eagerly awaiting your response.

So since you say it is necessary to mandate black coaches are interviewed I guess that means you agree that a mandate should be in place stating all teams must try out one white athlete for all running back positions? Is that correct?

[Ron 10]

Quote

The NFL can do whatever the hell they want.

Does than mean it would be OK to remove the rule as well?

How about other organizations? Can Citibank, Ford, ect stop all AA programs if they feel like it?

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[funks 1]

Quote

Quote

Once again, back to my original post. Is it right for the NFL to institute the mandate it has?

The NFL can do whatever the hell they want.

Of course they can do (almost) whatever the want. Does that make it right? Was it right for Jesse Jackson to form an alliance and threaten lawsuits and put pressure on the NFL to institute this sort of mandate?

What if I pushed for a mandate giving a white man preferential treatment. Would I be considered a racist? Hell yes I would.

[littlestranger 0]

Quote

Does than mean it would be OK to remove the rule as well?

The RULE? Did I miss something?

[funks 1]

Quote

Quote

Does than mean it would be OK to remove the rule as well?

The RULE? Did I miss something?

Wow, so you have been making all these comments without even reading the original post????

How about going back and starting from post #1 in this thread?

[Ron 10]

Quote

The RULE? Did I miss something?

Did you read the start of this thread?

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[eflynn 0]

"Still when you look at it you have several ways Blacks ended up here. Captured by whites, captured by blacks, indentured servitude, came over AFTER slavery, born here.

Now, can you tell me what % of Blacks came from which method? I can pretty much bet that 100% of the blacks that are in the States right now were not slaves captured, brough here, and sold here.

So, why is the fact that 150 years ago a guy was treated really badly mean jack shit today? If you want to go farther back the American Indians were getting a bad deal LONG before your relatives were. And if you want to look at something closer, look at the internment of Japanese in WW2, or how the World treated Jews....ect, ect."


As I've said previously, what happened previously has an effect on what goes on today and what will happen in the future. No matter what the topic is. The world is bigger than what happens to Khari and Ron. So while putting an end on paper to slavery 150 years ago made it illegal to own slaves, the previous 300+ years of slavery did a tremendous amount of damage to those people. And consequently future generations. That's the connection between someone being treated "badly" 150 years ago and his relative today.


"People have treated people badly....Just becasue it was done to your great great grandad, does not make it more or less worse than the others. Just becasue it was done in the States does not make it better or worse either."

Everyone's pain is supreme. Because it's theirs not necessarily because it's worse that someone else's. I'm not here to debate which race caught it the worst. Where it occurred and by who does play a factor.



"ONLY 1.4% of whites owned slaves. ..So why should I suffer for 1.4% being a jackass?"

That's one year, 1860. It took place for 300+. That's a huge amount of time in our country's history.


"No, but you have said time after time that we need to make things right. You have supported affirmative action, and others who will read this HAVE supported reperations."

Yes, I am in support of AA but I'm also in support of better education in place of or in conjunction with AA. I think it was a temporary fix that once was put into place, caused people to forget about the actual issue.


"Bruce Lee hands down...Unless Kirk has a Phaser. Now Lee vs. Spock...I don't know, Spock had the strength of 10 men."

Again, we disagree. Kirk's never lost a battle and if he did it was fixed. 83 episodes of ass kicking. The karate chop, the double ax handle across the back, and the jump kick would fade Bruce Lee. And he always gets the chick.

Quote

It'll never happen so why bother discussing it

Oh, nevermind. sorry.

Quote

Unless of course it could be used as a tool to divide people. Interesting thought.

No, I think it can matter. Maybe not for THIS disscussion, but don't you find it interesting that only 1.4% of whites ever owned slaves?

Also, do you think it is fair to make the NFL interview black coaches? Why not just hire the best guy?

Do you think that the NFL, that is 70% black, should make teams look at white linemen more?

[funks 1]

[reply
Do you honestly feel like the NFL discriminates agains white lineman?

[justinb138 0]

Quote

What's unfortunate is there seems to be a need for the policy.

What makes you believe that?

[littlestranger 0]

Quote

Wow, so you have been making all these comments without even reading the original post????

Yeah I just like throwing shit out there to piss you off.

[eflynn 0]

"Once again, please explain to me what there is to understand about the black community? Eagerly awaiting your response."

WE'RE DIFFERENT PEOPLE WITH DIFFERENT WAYS OF LOOKING AT THINGS FOR A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT REASONS. That's the last time I'm going to say it. If you took the time to actually understand "these people who seem so opposed to you" you might find your view/position would change. Simply stating what you believe isn't going to help you understand.

"So since you say it is necessary to mandate black coaches are interviewed I guess that means you agree that a mandate should be in place stating all teams must try out one white athlete for all running back positions? Is that correct?"

That's what you get for guessing. Wrong (as Charlie Murphy would say)! If the white rb is the best for the team then so be it. That doesn't bother me.

[eflynn 0]

Quote

[reply
Do you honestly feel like the NFL discriminates agains white lineman?

No. The same way it does not discriminate against black coaches.

[billvon 3,070]

Do not call people names. Your one warning.

[eflynn 0]

Quote

Quote

What's unfortunate is there seems to be a need for the policy.

What makes you believe that?

If there was no need for the policy then the number of Black coaches would basically stay the same with or without it. They're not required to hire a Black coach, simply interview one. Remember, the NFL is a business well before it's a sport. There's no way anyone is going to risk losing money by hiring a sub par coach.

[funks 1]

Quote

Quote

[reply

Quote

Explain the rise in the number of Black coaches after the mandate.

What rise? All the black coaches in the NFL were hired before the mandate. Do you even know when the mandate was instituted and what has transpired since then? Obviously not.

• Quote

[Ron 10]

Quote

Do not call people names. Your one warning

Could you tell me where I did? I have no idea.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334