Segregation now, segregation forever!

Big deal!

We passed a law giving African Americans and women the right to vote KNOWING there would still be bigots who STILL DISCRIMINATE.

YOUR ARGUMENT has no merit.

Okay, but here is where pinheads trip each other up, one of you is saying this is the reason they want it passed, and the other is saying you know that passing it will not resolve the problem or produce the result desired. So how is this a legitimate and rational reason for wanting it to pass? It makes no logical sense, it defies logic in every sense. Do you comprehend that?
 
It's not a matter of it being wrong. We can all agree it was wrong, and I have never EVER articulated otherwise. Gay Marriage is nowhere near the same thing, and it is appalling to me, you would compare giving a black man the right to vote and engage in the American political process, is the same thing as offering sanctity and tradition up to homosexuals in order to mock religion. I just don't see where the two things are remotely close to each other.

Throughout history, there have not been people in political power, advocating change in our segregationist policy, prior to 1963! It doesn't exist, because black people were shut out of the political process, and it was not an issue, it was presumed and assumed you supported and condoned segregationist policy, because that was how things were in America. No one stood up and said it was bad! Everyone accepted it, and continued to condone it! Again, you want to try and pretend this was some long-standing moral fight, and it really wasn't a fight. Whether politicians and lawmakers openly spoke of support for segregationist policy or not, they did indeed condone and support the status quot for a century. We certainly DID live in a segregate society, and our governmental leadership was duplicitous in fostering and maintaining it.

The Quakers and the Abolitionists would likely disagree with you...
 
Can you tell me where I said it was illegal to stand before God?

Thx for ignoring the points I made and trying to change the direction of the conversation.

The only point I saw you make, was that you apparently thought it was illegal for homosexuals to pledge their love before God. Or maybe, you thought these bonds had been outlawed or something? I just wanted to know where that was, and if it was a Democrat who initiated it?

I do apologize for my interjection of rationality and common sense changing the direction of the conversation, I know you were really counting on it continuing down the path of incompetent stupidity, and I hate I ruined that for ya!
 
So why isn't Separate but Equal ok for Schools and public accomadations. I mean if Blacks got exactly the same schools as whites then why not keep them appart. Because, Separate but Equal always insures that one of the two will be inferior to the other. Just as separate schools, even when basically evenly situated as the Topeka Schools were, perpetuates a stigma of inferiority, so to does separate but equal unions among people.
 
The Quakers and the Abolitionists would likely disagree with you...

Well they didn't disagree, did they? We certainly had a segregate society for 100 years, long after the days of the Quakers and Abolitionists! I don't know that I ever saw anything from either Quakers or Abolitionists which suggested blacks and whites were equal or should be considered equal in society. They opposed the enslavement of human beings, they felt they should be free, and in that sense, given equal consideration as fellow human beings, but none of them ever suggested they were equal to whites or advocated for such policies.

Here is where the modern day liberal nitwit, gets Civil Rights and the Civil War confused... the literally view the Civil War as the beginning of Civil Rights, and it wasn't. Those who favored abolition to slavery, were NOT advocates of racial equality! They just weren't! And to continue pretending that this was the case, is simply ignorant of historical fact, and an insult to Civil Rights, in my opinion.
 
So why isn't Separate but Equal ok for Schools and public accomadations. I mean if Blacks got exactly the same schools as whites then why not keep them appart. Because, Separate but Equal always insures that one of the two will be inferior to the other. Just as separate schools, even when basically evenly situated as the Topeka Schools were, perpetuates a stigma of inferiority, so to does separate but equal unions among people.

No one has advocated "separate but equal" unions among people. Is that your understanding of my CU proposal?
 
Well they didn't disagree, did they? We certainly had a segregate society for 100 years, long after the days of the Quakers and Abolitionists! I don't know that I ever saw anything from either Quakers or Abolitionists which suggested blacks and whites were equal or should be considered equal in society. They opposed the enslavement of human beings, they felt they should be free, and in that sense, given equal consideration as fellow human beings, but none of them ever suggested they were equal to whites or advocated for such policies.

Here is where the modern day liberal nitwit, gets Civil Rights and the Civil War confused... the literally view the Civil War as the beginning of Civil Rights, and it wasn't. Those who favored abolition to slavery, were NOT advocates of racial equality! They just weren't! And to continue pretending that this was the case, is simply ignorant of historical fact, and an insult to Civil Rights, in my opinion.

They were advocates of the first step toward racial equality and certantly some of them, if not the majority, belived that Black people were the equal of white people.
 
No one has advocated "separate but equal" unions among people. Is that your understanding of my CU proposal?
But THAT is what it is. I know that you and I both basically think that the government should get out of the marriage business altogether, but you and I also know they NEVER will. So in essence the CU becomes a separate but equal form or union. Lets them have all the trappings of marriage without the name, which is crap. As I have already pointed out, religious groups already "marry" same sex couples. IF that is the case then calling it marriage does not fly in the face of ALL relgious groups. For those that don't agree they don't have to marry anyone of the same sex, the UU's will take up that slack as well as Magistrates and JOP's.
 
The only point I saw you make, was that you apparently thought it was illegal for homosexuals to pledge their love before God. Or maybe, you thought these bonds had been outlawed or something? I just wanted to know where that was, and if it was a Democrat who initiated it?

I do apologize for my interjection of rationality and common sense changing the direction of the conversation, I know you were really counting on it continuing down the path of incompetent stupidity, and I hate I ruined that for ya!

"Standing before God" is another way of saying "married", but I guess expecting a knuckle-dragging, mouth-breather such as yourself to comprehend something so esoteric was a stretch.
 
Last edited:
Well they didn't disagree, did they? We certainly had a segregate society for 100 years, long after the days of the Quakers and Abolitionists! I don't know that I ever saw anything from either Quakers or Abolitionists which suggested blacks and whites were equal or should be considered equal in society. They opposed the enslavement of human beings, they felt they should be free, and in that sense, given equal consideration as fellow human beings, but none of them ever suggested they were equal to whites or advocated for such policies.

Here is where the modern day liberal nitwit, gets Civil Rights and the Civil War confused... the literally view the Civil War as the beginning of Civil Rights, and it wasn't. Those who favored abolition to slavery, were NOT advocates of racial equality! They just weren't! And to continue pretending that this was the case, is simply ignorant of historical fact, and an insult to Civil Rights, in my opinion.

You really are as dumb as they say, aren't you? YOU contradict YOURSELF in your own post brainiac!

What a chachi!
 
"Upon further consideration, I withdraw the remark in question and stand corrected, there certainly were people in 1864, who thought slaves were equal to whites." - Dixie, July 2006.


Some dogs never learn.... So we corrected him back in 06' and he is back with his old argument in 10'!
 
"They shoul be given equal consideration as fellow human beings, but none of them ever suggested they were equal to whites."

BULLSHIT, the reason for giving someone equal consideration as a human being is because they were equal....!
 
But here is the thing, no matter what way you wish to force society to act with regard to homosexuals, it will not change bigoted attitudes. Civil Unions provide everything a homosexual couple would need to be treated just as equally to straight or traditional married couples. The only aspect missing, is the usage of the word "marriage" which is a largely religious ceremonial event in America. Now you assure me it is not about taking any slap at religion, yet the problem can be resolved to the satisfaction of all parties, without usurping traditional marriage, and you refuse to listen. The only logical and rational conclusion, is that you want to attack religion and a religious tradition.

I have spoken out numerous times in favor of removing the gov't from the marriage scenario completely.


I also think its funny that you would demand that gov't not interfere with your religion, and yet you want the gov't to protect your religion and give its rituals a favored status.

Odd how that works, isn't it?
 
I have spoken out numerous times in favor of removing the gov't from the marriage scenario completely.


I also think its funny that you would demand that gov't not interfere with your religion, and yet you want the gov't to protect your religion and give its rituals a favored status.

Odd how that works, isn't it?

WEll put!
 
Originally Posted by Dixie:
The only point I saw you make, was that you apparently thought it was illegal for homosexuals to pledge their love before God. Or maybe, you thought these bonds had been outlawed or something? I just wanted to know where that was, and if it was a Democrat who initiated it?

I do apologize for my interjection of rationality and common sense changing the direction of the conversation, I know you were really counting on it continuing down the path of incompetent stupidity, and I hate I ruined that for ya!




"Standing before God" is another way of saying "married", but I guess expecting a knuckle-dragging, mouth-breather such as yourself to comprehend something so esoteric was a stretch.


AWWWWWWWW! Where'd the Master Debater go?!? We were just getting warmed up!
 
Of course, these very words from the late Democrat George C. Wallace, are inflammatory and racist, in context of today's American society. We hear them, and we cringe in discomfort, as the obvious racial bigotry shines through, and we have to do something to help us cope with the guilt of knowing a white man ever even uttered these words! So we canonize Wallace as a southern racist bigot, who just didn't get it. In fact, anyone who "supported segregation" is tarnished and scorned, because we have to find a way to excuse ourselves for the truth.

The truth is, we began life in a segregated society at the end of the Civil War. For an entire century, our society was indeed segregated, adopted and maintained segregationist policies, and supported continued segregationist policies in every phase of government, which was completely controlled by whites. We were segregationists through the end of the 1800s, into the 1900s, through two world wars... we sent black soldiers to fight and die for America, and returned them home to sit on the back of the bus. We did this in the South, North, East and West! There was nowhere we didn't practice segregation and discrimination against black Americans! This WAS the law!

When we hear Liberals speak today, of political pasts... we often hear "he supported segregation!" As if, 'segregation' were this obscure radical idea some southern rednecks adopted, and wanted to impose on the rest of the free and uninhibited, open-minded people of America! As if some Bubba had said, ya know what'd be a good idear, if we segregated them ni**ers from the whites! To hear liberals speak of it, that is what you would think Segregation were all about! They fail to comprehend that we lived in a completely segregate society! We had lived in it for 100 years! It was the way things were!

People who were "supportive of segregation", were merely supporting the popular status quot, what had always been the practice, what society had accepted and maintained for 100 years! To not support segregation policy, was radical! THAT was the radical view, THAT was viewed as being controversial. What's more, blacks were not a factor in getting elected, so the politicians would have been politically stupid NOT to support segregationist policies! The truth, as ugly as it may be, is that every politician prior to 1965, is responsible for supporting segregationist policy, because they DID! Repeatedly! For a century, every president, every Congress, and every Judge they appointed, upheld and maintained a system of complete and total segregation in America!

This FACT and TRUTH needs to be realized and understood by ALL! Because, frankly, we are in danger of losing focus on the magnitude of Civil Rights. Does it not bother black people, that Liberals have perverted the meaning of "segregation" into a petty insulate retort thrown at Republicans to convey a sense of racism which doesn't exist? Is it not important they have somewhat marginalized Civil Rights, and made it far less historically significant, in order to politicize conservatism? This would really bug me if I were a black American.

Abraham Lincoln, The Great Emancipator, did not make blacks and whites equal in society, in fact, Lincoln opposed the very idea of it, (see: Lincoln/Douglas debates), so as great as his achievements are, Lincoln was also a staunch segregationist. So were all the presidents to follow, including the beloved liberal FDR! They ALL supported and condoned a policy of complete segregation across America!

The segregation prior to 1964 has ended. The wall will never go up again! Blacks are now a vital part of the political process, as well as those who support black interests. Civil Rights was indeed significant in changing the politics of America forever, and it has been monumental in doing so! Some people like to pretend it was always this way, except for a brief period in the mid 60s, when racist rednecks wanted to segregate society, and the Great Liberals stood with the blacks to defeat them!

TLDR
 
I have spoken out numerous times in favor of removing the gov't from the marriage scenario completely.


I also think its funny that you would demand that gov't not interfere with your religion, and yet you want the gov't to protect your religion and give its rituals a favored status.

Odd how that works, isn't it?

I don't have a religion, I am a spiritualist. I just understand the problem and how we effectively solve the problem, which I am willing to do. You, are not!

Again, you insist you have advocated for my solution, yet you continue to insist on fighting a ridiculous battle against religious beliefs. What purpose does that have, other than your desire to attack religion? Can you explain that, or not? Because, so far, all you are doing is crowing out of both sides of your mouth. You either support a resolution that works for everyone, or you want to keep the issue ignited in controversy and on the table of debate, unresolved. You really can't have it both ways, you can't solve the problem while perpetuating an argument for the problem.
 
Back
Top