View Single Post
Old 04-07-2008, 09:24 PM   #210 (permalink)
pan6467
Lennonite Priest
 
pan6467's Avatar
 
Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by percy
I think you have a bone to pick somewhere about something eating inside you but are using this thread as a vehicle. No offence but that is the impression I get.
Not really, but perhaps. What eats at me is the hypocrisy. I once would have been one praising this black judge. But as I work in the inner city and become more exposed to areas I had never been exposed to and people I'd never been exposed to.... the view changes. You see white and black street people and they are just trying to survive. They all deserve the chance to better themselves and to get out of where they are.

Many look for excuses as to why they are where they are. Some of them are racist, some are conspiratorial, some are just out there. But the ones that don't look for excuses and believe in themselves make it.

I have seen neighborhood kids fighting gangs to keep out of them and go to college. I have seen men and women in their 20's get out of the negative mindset, that have stopped buying into it and have moved on.

But the ones that have stayed seem to live their lives in their excuse filled world.

It changes one's views and core beliefs when you spend the time and see what truly happens with people living in the inner city, high crime areas.

Quote:
I don't know how this comes back to some white judge but I'll give it a go. If a white judge did what this judge did,.. kick everyone and lecture black people, then is he a racist?

Again it all depends. If a white judge is stationed in a predominantly black area, has predominantly black people charged in front of him, and decides to take it upon himself to lecture only the blacks? Maybe so, maybe not.

If a white judge does the above in Vermont, a predominantly white state,...maybe yes, maybe not.
It comes down to the belief that some have that it's ok for a black judge to do this but not a white judge.

Like I said, this is a 2 pronged argument.

On the very top layer, the superficial we have should a judge be allowed to do this?

The deeper layer comes when those who say, sure he can do that... then say, but a white judge can't.

If this had been a white judge kicking non whites out, racism, prejudice and demands for his job would have been heard from Farrakhan/Sharpton to people in this very forum.

So that becomes a sign and symptom of a more serious problem that needs addressed, because it affects race relations and the continuing forward movement of our nation as a whole.

Double standards promoting racism/prejudice no matter how you look at it or what excuse you want to use still in the end are nothing more than hypocritical standards promoting racism/prejudice.

A female judge let's say does it. there would be some who would be ok with that but find it wrong if a male judge did it..... and so on.


Quote:
Pan one thing I think you fail to realize about this supposed notion of rampant racism, is that it isn't cultural, it's individualistic. Racism is a core belief that dominates a person's being and is unfliching regardless of company or consequence.
Racism maybe a harsh word. I am not the most eloquent and right chooser of words. But I do see it as racist. Just as if a female had done it... it'd be sexist in my eyes. It's definitively prejudicial in my eyes.

That judge has no right to segregate and separate and decide who he needs to give "special lectures" to from the bench. ALL people may have benefited and some in that select group may not have even wanted to be there and felt singled out themselves.

This judge said it was ok to separate races.... and he did it from the bench.

THAT IS WRONG.... there is no excuse for it at all.

Now, we have some that will argue a judge can do anything and ANY judge can do this and they'd be ok with it. OK. There's the superficial argument. It's plain and simple and I can grasp that argument and in the end be ok with that opinion.

Then we have those who make the excuses, "Blacks can do it because.... but no white judge can because....." and we have seen those arguments here on this board. They will come up with "well the black culture.... but the white culture...." and so on.

So then the argument becomes why would you promote a racist way of thinking? A very divisive, very unhealthy way of thinking?

Quote:
[But I see your point. In todays world if a white judge did what this black judge did, he would be labelled a racist, regardless, and only for trying to instill values in people who may or may not get it.

Unfortunately he would be labelled a racist by an ignorant society.
And that my friend is the problem I am having. Not so much the superficial because if you say you would allow all judges to do it.... I still would argue vehemently but I would see the merit in that side.

To say one can and one can't and he'd be racist.... boggles my mind I cannot grasp that idea being logical to anyone truly wanting racial harmony. This is something that I truly cannot let go. It's just so hypocritical and damaging to the country I love and am proud to have served and live in.

The country will never get better if we continue to allow this thinking to prevail and run cities, states and even the federal governments. We will eventually destroy all we have accomplished and this great nation with this thinking.

Quote:
Good thing oranges aren't green, or someone would accuse them of being apples
Ahhhh but oranges are green until they become orange.

PS I know I repeated myself in this but..... I answered it as honestly and as heartfelt as I could through this medium.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ratbastid
You know, you've been saying that this is "prejudicial" since the beginning. I'm still not clear what you mean.

Did he discriminate against the non-blacks by having them leave the courtroom? Did he discriminate against blacks by singling them out for a "come to Jesus" lecture? Something can't just BE prejudicial in the abstract, just because something happened that acknowledged the existence of race in a public building--it has to actually put somebody up and somebody else down. My question is: against whom exactly is it prejudicial? Because I'm not clear at all about that.

Let's see, a definition might give some focus to the question I'm asking here.

prejudicial, adj.

1. Detrimental; injurious.
2. Causing or tending to preconceived judgment or convictions

How EXACTLY is this detrimental, injurious, or causing or tending to preconceived judgment or convictions? I'm not saying it's NOT. It might be. I guess I'm saying that I'm no longer willing to take your assertion that it's prejudicial at face value. So supply us with some more of the logic that underlies your assertion, please. I can actually see how I would answer, if I were back in high school debate and assigned to argue your side, but I'm much more interested in your answer.

The judge obviously believed that whites could not benefit or were somehow not worth his speech.

A judge should show no favoritism nor bias of any sort towards anyone or group. This judge did. Most people respect judges because they are level headed and don't show bias from the bench. This judge did. If I were a white defendant and he had kicked me out simply because of my skin color, I'd have my attorney looking to sue in a heartbeat.
__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Last edited by pan6467; 04-07-2008 at 09:32 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
pan6467 is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360