Ustwo

Which was a greater trial for the white man....

White mans burden.

or

What mans guilt.

Tell me ratbastid as the great, great, grandchild of Irish immigrants who came to this country after the civil war, what do I owe?

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

ratbastid

You owe it to all Americans to provide them with equal opportunity. And that has NOTHING to do with your heritage or ancestors' provenance as Americans.

You're going to scream Socialism. But anything else has people cutting each other's throats on the streets.

Ustwo

Yes thats why I carry my shiv with me on my way home from work.

But what is equal opportunity?

Its a meaningless catch phrase until you define it.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

ratbastid

Why do I get the sense I'm being baited?

I guess we may not know what it looks like until we get there. For now, it means putting more resources into those who are getting less. Inner-city schools are one good example. Under-funded, under-staffed failure-factories. Those Americans deserve better. Go on, tell me they don't.

dc_dux

You owe it to yourself to understand that unlike your great, great grandparents who came here by choice, ancestors of most blacks were brought here in chains and treated as 3/4 person for 200+ years.

You owe it to yourself to understand that even with the passage of the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments to the Constitution after the Civil War, blacks were still denied equal rights....to jobs, to housing, to public facilities, to voting, to equal justice in the courts......You were alive when there were "whites only" signs across American and poll taxes in the South.

You owe to yourself to understand that it took another 100 years and additional laws, Civil Rights Act/Voting Rights Act in the 1960s, to address the unmet promises made by the US with the passage of those 19th century amendments. You were alive when there were "whites only" signs across America and poll taxes in the South. This is not ancient history

And you owe to yourself to understand why this history still touches blacks in America today AND that blacks in America today still face discrimination and racism based on the color of their skin and not the content of their character.

But I honestly believe Pan is the one who needs this understanding.

Pan......are you planning to answer my questions:

Did the judge violate any rights of those persons he tossed out?

Did he question the character of those he tossed out...or disparage them in any manner?

Was there harmful intent in what you describe as an "act of discrimination" towards those persons he tossed out?

Even without knowing intent, were the persons tossed out harmed in any way?

And what law was broken....what legal claims would you have to sue the judge?

I don't want any more excuses, any more bullshit, I want simple YES or NO (or the name of a law for the last question) answers.

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

percy

YES. And not just to Blacks. Anyone he or she see fit to single out and say it to in the courtroom. And if you think I am a racist because of it, then it is you with the problem.

I know what I am and who I am and I am not a racist. Do you know who you are? Maybe you don't and that is the problem.

Ustwo

You feel that way because of the following..

You might as well say we need prayer. There is no end goal to be defined until we get there, than we know we are there, because well we are there? Equal opportunity could be interpreted in so many ways and to such extremes its utterly meaningless. With equal opportunity there will still be rich and poor, still be lifes winners and losers, odds are you wouldn't know you were there when you were there because things would look the same.

Underfunded or poorly run? Failure factories due to teaching or failure factories due to the culture that surrounds them? When parents in these "failure factories" were to be offered vouchers to send their children to better schools who shot that down?

I am, of course, in an area with what are considered good public schools. I have told my wife when the time comes our children will be attending private schools, as I find even highly funded public schools to be inadequate mediocrity factories. My children will have a better opportunity than those students in their government run union controlled school, as 'good' as it is. Should that no longer be allowed? Should I as a parent not be allowed to spend more on my child?

I had to stop writing this to work, interestingly it involved this subject in conversation with a pro-union police officer. She is paying for her son to attend a Catholic school. She said it hurts every month they have to write the cheque but its worth it because he was so far behind in school and unused to discipline and homework. I said, isn't it funny that the Catholic schools do so much better than the public schools even on less money, she said 'well its because the teachers don't care'. Now I think thats being a little harsh, but it does illustrate the point that money isn't always the answer.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

ratbastid

I think I'd know equal educational opportunity when I see it. And I think you're trying like crazy not to deal with the meat of the question.

Poor black people don't deserve your help, right? It wasn't your ancestors who made them that way. You happen to be a benefiting from a centuries-old culture of institutional racism, but that's pure coincidence. Nothing needs to change.

Is that REALLY what you're saying? I'm putting it like that because I don't actually think you're that heartless and selfish, and I want you to have the opportunity to see what it is you've said here, and comment on if that's really what you mean to say.

uncle phil

this thread is still alive?

__________________
"We were wrong, terribly wrong. (We) should not have tried to fight a guerrilla war with conventional military tactics against a foe willing to absorb enormous casualties...in a country lacking the fundamental political stability necessary to conduct effective military and pacification operations. It could not be done and it was not done."
- Robert S. McNamara
-----------------------------------------
"We will take our napalm and flame throwers out of the land that scarcely knows the use of matches...
We will leave you your small joys and smaller troubles."
- Eugene McCarthy in "Vietnam Message"
-----------------------------------------
never wrestle with a pig.
you both get dirty;
the pig likes it.

Ustwo

You can't even answer what equal opportunity is and you ignore that and basically attack me for not dealing with the meat of the question?

I fail to see how I am befitting from past racism in the least. I'm white, how did it help me? Was I better off than if I were born into a poor black family? Hell ya, I'm also better off than if I were born into a poor white family. My family has worked hard and stayed out of trouble for several generations, how they managed to benifit from racism is beyond me at this point. Did it help them somehow make it through the great depression? Did it help my grandfather on Iwo Jima? Did it help me get into schools where I needed higher grades than a minority to attend?

And further, despite your tone what you have basically said is the age old joke 'Did you stop beating your wife?' If I disagree with you, I must be a racist. Sorry but thats bullcrap.

The good intentions of the great society have led to greater poverty and failure than the racist policies that came before it. How much more good money do you think needs to be thrown after bad before you are willing to admit 'Ok money isn't helping'. Do you really think more black fathers will stay with their families if you increase funding to social programs and schools? That crime will go down if you give more 'help'? This has gotten worse and worse despite ever increasing spending, and I think that spending is to blame for much of it. I'm all for adequately funding schools, seeing that people get a chance, but where do you draw the line, how much will you let your guilt over the sins of long dead white men to haunt you enough to continue to destroy the black family to assuage your conscience? I'm putting it like that because I don't actually think you're that heartless and selfish, and I want you to have the opportunity to see what it is you've said here, and comment on if that's really what you mean to say.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

dc_dux

I dont doubt that you honestly believe this....of course, you dont have the facts to back it up.

I dont doubt that you equate a recognition of the gross injustices towards blacks in America for 200+ years as "white guilt"....of course, thats a cop-out.

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

pan6467

I know exactly who I am and I like myself. And no I am not a racist.

You don't fall into the category 2 part, you believe all judges have the right to do this..

As I have stated over and over .... double edged issue.

Is the scenario ok? And is it just a black judge doing this that's ok or would you be ok with a white judge doing it? What about a Jewish or Pagan judge?

And if you say only the black judge.... how is that not as discriminatory as someone saying only Pagan judges?

To me when you say one group can and others can't and make excuses why it is ok then it is hypocritical

I would argue many here see the double issue but refuse to acknowledge it.

You did, I respect that.

People want add more into all this, call me a tool (Yes, I saw that before ya (Roachboy) changed it.... nice personal attack for a mod.)

__________________
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?"

Willravel

Judging by your behavior as of late, you're in no position to pass judgment about personal attacks.

So Pan, plenty of people—myself included—have said that it would be okay if it were a white judge. What do you say to us? It seems that we don't view the judge as racist, nor do we fall under your label as being hypocritical.

silent_jay

Why not PM another mod if you have a problem with something a mod said to you? Seems the 'smart' thing to do. Makes more sense at least than pissing and moaning about and acting like a victim. Then again if you did that, you wouldn't be the center of attention, and you wouldn't get to martyr yourself in each and every thread you start. See pan that isn't a personal attack, that's a fact, go back and read your posts for the last few weeks and prove you haven't been seeing yourself as a martyr in every thread, I guarantee you can't prove it.

__________________
Absence makes the heart grow fonder

roachboy

pan, darling, i used the word "fool."

i took it down not because i am a mod and not because i care what you think at this point, but because i decided the response was stronger without it.

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

powerclown

It's a non-sequitur, as I've never - and will never - own a slave.

Most whites are not even guilty of any real crime against Blacks. My ancestors didnt do squat against Blacks. While they were working on plantations, my ancestors were poor peasants in Ukraine. Then when they got here, they had to work under terrible conditions in the coal mines of Pennsylvania; and my great-grandfather was even killed in an industrial accident.

So, what exactly do I have to be guilty of? Im proud of my ancestors, as any decent person should be. They were hard-working and didn't own slaves.

To attack an entire race and its heritage over the actions of a few is the epitome of bigotry. Liberals would never tolerate the same kinds of accusations and slanders if directed at anyother race. Please note the irony.

In fact if any group has suffered more in America is recent times, it's working class whites, or as Ruy A. Teixeira calls them, "America's Forgotten Majority".

dc_dux

I havent seen any attacks on your ancestors or anyone elses.

What has been attacked (I would prefer to say addressed) is the 200+ years (heritage?) of systemic institutional discrimination and racism....that still have carry-over effects.

Why is that so hard to understand?

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

pan6467

hat's true and we had a decent discussion.

But if you go back and read through there were those that stated no a white judge can't do this..... that is the underbelly no one wants to acknowledge is racism, well at least those who support that belief.

So if I over and over again state if you say all judges can, I have issues with it but I can respect your opinion..... and you and I, and others and I, had a good debate on that aspect. Where I stated I just feel it's the wrong venue, an abuse of power, I feel it was prejudiced and that all could have benefitted and so on.... but that is MY OPINION and I am allowed to have it and to speak on it, last time I looked.

That's the easy part, the superficial part, that everyone wants to focus on.

It's the underbellied second part that is the problem no ne truly wants to discuss.

That is how can you say one group can do this but another can't? That promotes racism/sexism/discrimination in and of itself.

There are people who have posted that they wouldn't approve of a white judge in this situation but it is ok for a black judge. Then they come up with bullshit reasons why this hypocrisy is ok and should be ok.

It's not ok. My argument is if you say it is ok for one group then support any group that does this. We cannot pick and choose who we allow to do what, especially in court, especially with judges.

Now, why would the second part offend you so much that you feel the need to keep attacking me (1st paragraph is a lecture aimed at me not the topic.)

So no, if that doesn't make sense and what I have spent 6 pages arguing doesn't make sense then this country is in serious trouble. Because in the end, you allow one group to do it and not another.... then you build up barriers, resentments and prejudices and that will never allow races/religions/sex/etc to become equal.

But people will read into it what they want to get out of it, twist meanings to get what they want, call me a "fuckin tool" (I saw what I saw RB, Mr. Mod), tell me to shut the fuck up and whatever..... but they refuse to truly acknowledge what they approve of is just as wrong and as detrimental to society as anything.

But that is my opinion and I am allowed to have it.

__________________
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?"

dc_dux

Pan.....does all that BS mean you arent planning to answer my questions?

Did the judge violate any rights of those persons he tossed out?

Did he question the character of those he tossed out...or disparage them in any manner?

Was there harmful intent in what you describe as an "act of discrimination" towards those persons he tossed out?

Even without knowing intent, were the persons tossed out harmed in any way?

And what law was broken....what legal claims would you have to sue the judge?

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

pan6467

I have answered those a few times.

Did he break a law? I don't know what laws there are for cases like these. But I do believe that it was unethical,

Did he do this with malicious intent? Don't truly know the intent. But the action IMHO was prejudicial, court is not the place, being a judge in court is an abuse of power.

Did he hurt anyone? I don't know an one that was in that court, but personally I would have felt discriminated against. If I had been one that stayed, I would have felt singled out, especially if it were my first time and my crime was a low misdemeanor that I challenged.

We need to ask ourselves, could everyone have benefited from his "lecture"? I would think so.

What grounds do I have to sue? I'd sue on the grounds of discrimination. Would I win? doubtful, but perhaps laws that would make this illegal would be passed.... maybe not.

This goes for ANY group. That is my belief. This is the superficial argument.

What do you think about the underbelly argument? Why do some believe it is ok for one group but not another to do things like this, when it is just as prejudicial as anything? If you are truly fighting racism, how can you support a black judge doing this but not a white judge?


In the end, people can be pro this action for ALL. That's one argument.... I am against the action period. But I can see both sides.

But when people say one group can and one can't and give some bullshit excuse..... then I can't see anything there but a prejudiced wolf in sheep's clothing. That person may truly believe it is ok..... but to me it's the worst form of prejudice.

There I answered your questions.... even tho, I have been saying the same basic things for the past 5 pages..... but that's ok.

BTW you didn't read any of the post above you did you.... because looking this one over and comparing my post above you...... they are almost identical.

__________________
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?"

dc_dux

So you "DONT truly KNOW the intent"

You "DONT KNOW anyone that was in that court" so you DONT KNOW if his actions hurt anyone.

Since you DONT KNOW who he tossed out...you DONT KNOW if they would have benefited from his lectures.

And you DONT KNOW if any laws were broken or laws under which you could sue for discrimination.

But YOU KNOW the judge is a racist.

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Willravel

dc_dux

Prejudice: an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

mixedmedia

Beluga whale! awwwww....

What?

__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

pan6467

Well, I'm not going to call the judge a liar, so I must defer to what he states was his intent.

No, I don't know anyone personally, but I know and have been going by the report (and as far as I can tell it is a true report).

Again, the report made it very clear who he tossed out and whom he though would benefit.... This came from the judge himself.

Laws don't have to be broken in order to sue. One can sue just about anyone in this country, it's all a matter of finding the right attorney who will take your case.

Ethics aren't laws in most cases, they are rules governing your profession. You get punished for ethical violations from the board of your profession (like mine would be the chemical dependency board).... those penalties can be minor from fines to major like losing licenses. Judges, I am sure have ethics that govern them and I'm sure a judicial review that watches them. Just as lawyers do.

If judges do not, may I recommend that maybe we get some in place.... it may also cut down on he discriminatory sentencing we hear about.

But you focus on the 1st argument.... not the second. So I assume, you believe, it is ok for ANY judge to throw out anyone and keep a select group only in his courtroom?

You do right?

If a white/Hispanic/gay/Jewish/Pagan/etc judge did this it would be ok with you????? Right? You're not just saying this is acceptable because this judge is black right?

I mean if the OP had been a white judge doing this and I ranted how racist and wrong I believed it to be (which I would have)...... you'd still hound me for 6 pages telling me it was ok?

Right?

Now, then we're clear on the superficial argument. And there is no underbellied argument because ALL judges have the right to select groups to have "talks" with in their courtroom and can kick everyone else out, in your opinion.

Cool. That was easy.

I have my opinion you have yours. That didn't really need to go 6 pages.

Unless you truly believe that one group is allowed to do this and the other can't. then you need to defend that with more than "It's a culture thing and blacks understand and can do this but whites can't." Then we have that issue to deal with.... the one no one wants to deal with.

I guess I was truly pwned there..... how dare I have standards and expect my government and judges to act in ethical ways.

__________________
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?"

Jinn

pan, have you ever personally heard a judge voice his or her personal opinion after rendering an official judgment?

Do you have a problem with a judge doing that, if they don't ask anyone to leave first?

As a perfect example, I had a judge say the following to me:

"In light of your agreement with the district attorney, this court finds that you are guilty of XXXX, and sentences you to 24 hours of community service and a XXXX class. "

"And personally, I think you've gotten off very easy here. You could've been charged with far more serious things, and I think you owe the officers here an apology at the very least. I think you've got a lot of maturing to do, and I hope that you do it quickly because I don't want to see your face in here again."

The second half wasn't his "official" ruling, it was his personal opinion. It was embarrassing, and if he had said it to me in private, I would've preferred it.

I find no problem with what he did, and I would've think that anyone should be offended if he asked them to leave so he could deliver his "personal opinion" to me in private.

It is because of this personal memory that I find it hard to see this story in any other light.

__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel

pan6467

I have no problem with your scenario. I believe it can be very helpful, as you demonstrate. He does it in front of everyone, shows no prejudice (especially if he has a history of this) and perhaps the embarrassment of everyone else in court seeing it may have done more to challenge the behavior than if he would have done it one on one with you (which needless to say, I would have disagreed with.)

I don't think clearing out everyone is necessary or is within his scope to do so.

I do however, as I have said over and over, believe kicking everyone out except a certain group is unethical, should be illegal, prejudicial and racist (in this case), had it been a male/female it would have been sexist and so on.

What people here don't seem to understand is that in this part, of the argument, race/sex/ethnicity/etc doesn't matter to me. Wrong is wrong.

When it becomes ok for a judge to separate and kick people out except of one persuasion but other judges of other types, they argue cannot

Then it becomes another issue.

I think people are either not wanting to argue the dark underbelly argument.. because it is hypocritical or they are somehow wanting to combine the 2 issues.

Seeings how I have separated the issues over and over..... I don't see how they could combine the 2.

__________________
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?"

Jinn

When I think of prejudice, racism and sexism I think of things that cause actual harm to the effected individual. I guess I don't see how someone is harmed by being asked to leave a courtroom so that the judge can address a defendant or defendants personally. Courtrooms regularly ask the media to leave for certain parts, and I don't think they're being discriminated against.

It's not like he was giving something of tangible value that the excused parties were missing out on. I don't think I'm discriminating when I decide who I will and will not give advice to?

What is the tangible harm to those who left? How were they hurt?

__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel

pan6467

See to me, prejudice/racism/sexism etc.... aren't just physical harm but mental and in cases like the OP, are treated differently.

What was the harm it making someone sit in the back of the bus or drink from a different fountain etc? but it was WRONG and we made laws, rightfully so, to make sure that doesn't happen anymore.

No physical harm at all, but it comes down to the mental harm and the harm that you are being treated differently.

Now in this case, where the judge is basically saying the whites and everyone except blacks won't get anything out of what he is saying.... is to me no different than asking someone to sit in the back of the bus or drink from a different fountain.

He prejudged that only a certain group would benefit. Plain and simple. Again to me that is WRONG, in the courtroom and in that position.

Again, if he wants to do that outside of his courtroom and position and as a private citizen in a townhall somewhere.... that is his freedom to do so.

But people here want to make it something more and try to pwn me and try to make me something, or read into this as something that it is not. This is superficial argument

If I say I hate all pink polka dotted people, but I have never hurt one physically.... it doesn't make me less prejudiced or racist does it?

The media is different.... people have the right to privacy, rape victims have the right to anonymity, and so on.

__________________
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?"

Jinn

That's where I disagree. I don't think there's anything wrong with prejudice.

There's a big difference between prejudice, which is pre-judging someone or something based on an arbitrary characteristic, and discrimination, which actually disadvantages those being prejudged. These words are used so interchangeably tbat you could likely find definitions for each that overlapped each other, but there is a distinction for me between believing certain types of things and people will follow predictable patterns based on previous experiences with those types of things or people (natural human behavior), and discrimination, which is using that belief in such a way that it hurts someone else.

To build a case that this is not just prejudice (which I think is okay) and actual discrimination, you'd have to demonstrate disadvantage.

__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel

pan6467

And that is probably why we disagree n the superficial argument.

We look at what prejudice is in differing ways.

One can prejudge someone or something based on an arbitrary characteristic and give more rights/liberties/leeway/etc to the group they favor and not think it derogatory or wrong. But in the end it is.

That can lead to the underbelly argument.

How can one say it is ok for the black judge to do this but not a white judge?

What would the difference be?

Why are you giving one group a pass but not another?

It may seem trivial, but if you do not stop it in the trivial stages.... it can grow to be a huge problem.

I believe this is a huge problem in this country right now. That we are allowing groups to do things we wouldn't allow others to do because we don't want to look like we're prejudiced.

We are on the road from one extreme and seem to be passing the point where positive solutions can be had to another extreme that is just as wrong and as detrimental and evil as the one we came from.

__________________
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?"

mixedmedia

How can you even say this with a straight face? You know, I'm trying to stay out of these threads because of my 'personal involvement' with your 'damage'...but how the fuck can you say something like this with a straight face?

I am all too ready to discuss the gradations in what I will call 'present day reality vs. collateral damage & associated gripes' in dealing with race relations, but how can you even start with a mindset like this??

Total denial, total negation of what are the very real, present, effective after-effects of our own history. That history that is just as much our own as the progression of democracy, independence, women's rights, minority rights - every good thing we have done. Those things do not wipe out the reality for millions of Americans who are telling you differently. Get over yourself and YOUR white guilt. All they want is fucking acknowledgment. Is that really, really so hard to give??

We still have a lot of work left to do. Are you prepared for it, pan? Or are you only willing to fork out your declaration that 'all is well'?

And do me a favor, try to answer me without bringing up white people and pagans, okay? Thanks.

__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

pan6467

We do have an extreme amount of work to do. BUT IMHO we cannot do that as long as we treat one group different than another.

How long do we pay for the past before we have paid too much?

Why not look to the past, understand that it is over and find ways to positively move forward TOGETHER and not in a state of guilt or anger or hate.... but move forward in ways of understanding, love and compassion FOR ALL?

Again, to ME there is no difference in different drinking fountains and the back of the bus as there is in what this judge did.

He separated groups. Whatever the reason in his position and in the courthouse he had no right to...IMHO. IT was no different than different drinking fountains and the back of the bus. BOTH CASES ARE SERIOUSLY WRONG.

But like I keep saying, I can understand the arguments "for" and I can respect those.

It's the dark underbelly (which is a different but tied to this argument). I can't agree with, respect or understand in anyway shape or form.

__________________
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?"

mixedmedia

I'm sorry, this will be the last thing I address to you on this thread, but this sounds like a whole bunch of nothing.

Whether we like it or not, we do not have the say in where the damage begins and ends. We are dealt the lot of dealing with it. In my opinion, if we are not up to dealing with it - with acceptance, tolerance, understanding...we will never get past the point where a judge feels it is necessary to single out his own race for curative reprimands. It's like we don't want to address the very real impulses that led this judge to act the way he did. It just seems like total denial of what we all know is going on.

And to judge him for it, is just...on the internet, nitpicking - but in the bigger picture, irrational - to insert a self-preservative statement where none deserves to be. This is how it seems to me. And, it seems, to a lot of other people, as well.

The real issue is so much bigger than whether you feel like you are getting the significant attention you feel you deserve as a white person. I mean, think about it. What particular hardship in regards to your race have you faced in trying to go about your daily life? What psychological deterrents have prevented you from pursuing whatever you want based on your race, not to mention all the other anxieties we face simply by being human?

I think you diminish the after-affects of centuries of discrimination because you simply don't want to deal with it. But 'dealing with it' is the most significant step to countering it. Because once you do that, you can just concentrate on reality and how you, as an individual, can contribute to countering that ongoing anxiety. Forget guilt, forget resentment, forget your own exculpation. Once you just accept the reality, then and only then can you truly start forgetting the past. I'm absolutely convinced that acceptance is the only way we will get past this. There is no denying the collective experience of millions of Americans. Just get over it.

__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

pan6467

That's your belief and opinion. Mine is that the time to come together and find out why a judge feels that separating is ok.

We need to find solutions not just let bullshit build up and go to another extreme.

I truly do not care what you "think" my motivation is.

My motivation is that I am tired of race/sex/religion/sex orientation/etc being a problem, but every time I turn around there are stories like this that separates a group again.

It's time we figure it out and stop the pussy footing around. We are all on this planet for a reason, we do not need to be separated into groups and treated differently by the group we are in.

We need to grow up, accept the past, learn from the past and find ways to make a better tomorrow FOR ALL... not just select groups while others can get off freely or be excused because of something that happened in the past.

Keep reliving the past opening the wounds and not letting them heal.... they'll keep festering with infection and disease.

But I guess that's too racist to understand.... to small minded to understand.... I guess I just don't get it.

__________________
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?"

mixedmedia

Also, let's just give up the illusion that this man, this judge, was discriminating against white people and not instead just giving forgiving these young men, criminals, from humilation in front of everyone in the courtroom that day. Facts. Reality. They are our friends.

What you're 'tired of' couldn't be more irrelevant.

I already went back on my own word and addressed you again, but unless you can talk to me with real words, ideas, heart...don't bother. Wait till the next person comes along.

__________________
Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus
PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

pan6467

I'll have my opinion you have yours..... neither will change the world... only accomplishment and we end up disliking each other because of the other's IDEAS and OPINIONS.... aw well. If you're so small minded to not look at what I am saying and instead put some other meaning into it.... so be it.

IMHO, it was a racist, prejudicial move by the judge.

BTW, I don't tell you how to do anything YOU don't tell me what I need to do, dictate to me ANYTHING, unless I screw up here and it is as a mod.

BTW... do you think this action is OK for ALL judges or just select groups of judges?

__________________
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?"

SecretMethod70

Back when I was in high school, I used to think that the mere fact some tests asked about my sex and race was a bad idea, and I thought merely acknowledging those things in such a manner reinforced the idea that there were differences between the sexes and races. I believed that one of the first steps toward ending sexism and racism was to stop focusing on and acknowledging these things as identities. Basically, I thought that we needed to start ignoring the fact that some people are black and some are white and some are asian and some are women and some are men, because it was only when we learned to lump everyone together into being "people" that anyone will be truly equal.

Then I grew up.

Aside for being utopian, that viewpoint also ignores the reality that the past informs the future. Which is why, as many have tried to point out in this and other threads, equal and fair are often two different things. Personally, I'm more interested in having a fair country than an equal country.

That's about all I intend on saying right now though. As I said in my one other post in this thread, I think it's a waste of time to participate in these threads. I think pan (and others, but especially pan) is literally incapable of comprehending my, and others, point of view. So, it's not worth the energy to try.

(Incidentally, research is increasingly showing a biological component to political inclinations and worldviews. I'm not interested in fighting with biology over the internet. Not when it's been shown over and over again that the words aren't even being comprehended, let alone doing any convincing.)

One other side note: the "I'm entitled to my opinion defense" is extremely tired. People have opinions about whether or not Britney Spears makes good music. Whether or not black people in America have the same opportunities as white people, and whether or not there are aspects of our society that prevent black people from being as successful as other races in America are not matters of opinion. Nor is the definition of prejudice (as dc_dux so kindly provided).

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

host

It's extremely graphic, in some of the other pics, they display what happened to the driver. DO NOT LOOK!

<img src="http://www.snopes.com/photos/gruesome/graphics/drunkdrive3.jpg">

Really....I mean it!!! Don't click on this link, capisci ?
http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=9959&page=2

ratbastid

pan, your underbelly was SOUNDLY addressed by roachboy pages and pages and pages ago, and despite many requests to do so, you never replied to it. You're still stomping around as if nobody's responded to you.

In high school debate, roachboy would ask the judge to "carry across" that argument, which means basically that you'd ceded that point.

I've said it before, and I mean it this time: I'm DONE HERE. Far as I'm concerned, this conversation is OVER.