• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

"NYC: More Black Babies Killed by Abortion Than Born " This is so sad

opendebate said:
Okay. I know that white people can join. Take this dude for instance.
Click to expand...

Good catch, but it's mostly beyond the point. Almost all organizations have rules in place to preserve the goals and character of the organization in order to prevent a highjacking from occurring. This was a favorite tactic of American Communist back in the 20-50s. They'd join an organization, scope it out, then they'd organize a mass enrollment where they constituted a majority of the members, call for elections, vote themselves into office, subvert the mission of the organization and reorient it towards some Communist mission and they'd deplete the resources of the organization and then abandon it.

I'm pretty sure that the NAACP has some provision in its charter to prevent the KKK from mass enrolling, taking over the NAACP and then spending the NAACP resources on KKK propaganda.

Christian groups on college campuses often admit people who are not Christian but who are curious or working towards adopting the faith. Same with Muslim groups, same with Mormon groups. What they object to, and what college administrator push on them, is to allow such people to lead groups and to change the mission of the group to be more inclusive.

The NAACP is not race-inclusive in its mission even though it admits some token whites either as spectacles, as supporters of the mission, or as some form of observer.
 
RiverDad said:
Good catch, but it's mostly beyond the point. Almost all organizations have rules in place to preserve the goals and character of the organization in order to prevent a highjacking from occurring. This was a favorite tactic of American Communist back in the 20-50s. They'd join an organization, scope it out, then they'd organize a mass enrollment where they constituted a majority of the members, call for elections, vote themselves into office, subvert the mission of the organization and reorient it towards some Communist mission and they'd deplete the resources of the organization and then abandon it.

I'm pretty sure that the NAACP has some provision in its charter to prevent the KKK from mass enrolling, taking over the NAACP and then spending the NAACP resources on KKK propaganda.

Christian groups on college campuses often admit people who are not Christian but who are curious or working towards adopting the faith. Same with Muslim groups, same with Mormon groups. What they object to, and what college administrator push on them, is to allow such people to lead groups and to change the mission of the group to be more inclusive.

The NAACP is not race-inclusive in its mission even though it admits some token whites either as spectacles, as supporters of the mission, or as some form of observer.
Click to expand...

It sounds like you/he are making an assumption then.

I don't really see how it's relevant anyway. This organization was created to provide assistance to a very targeted group and the needs of that specific group. If they "don't allow" white people to pursue leadership positions I really wouldn't care because they are a community service organization helping their members not a hate group seeking to do anyone harm. Equating it to the KKK is just a nutty deflection.
 
Last edited:
opendebate said:
Okay. I know that white people can join. Take this dude for instance
View attachment 67162433
How do you know that they are not allowed to run for leadership positions?
Click to expand...
I said nothing about members. I have been saying they are a racist organization.
period even their stated goal is racist
 
opendebate said:
It sounds like you/he are making an assumption then.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but votemout's point mostly stands. It is racist when a group discriminates based on race. You've just pointed to membership, but a group can discriminate on race by focusing on policy.

Your picture of the white NAACP member has a doppelganger - the black dudes who joined the KKK. Sure, they let these guys join, but are you going to argue that the KKK is now not racist?
 
opendebate said:
Mental Hygiene, that's where they scrub your mind erasing any trace of judgment or reason by forcing you to watch an endless loop of Rush Limbaugh. You come out with the functioning IQ of a new born baby
Click to expand...

Or listen to Obama read from TOTUS for 24 hrs straight... yeah, got the concept. You'd come out a registered Democrat. :lamo
 
Any bets this is some people's favorite part?

The report is entitled, Summary of Vital Statistics 2012 The City of New York, Pregnancy Outcomes, and was prepared by the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Office of Vital Statistics.
Click to expand...
 
Erod said:
They've been doing so well voting for your whore of a party.

It's damn near criminal what you've done to them.
Click to expand...

If blacks are voting democrat, then aren't they doing it to themselves?
 
RiverDad said:
Perhaps, but votemout's point mostly stands. It is racist when a group discriminates based on race. You've just pointed to membership, but a group can discriminate on race by focusing on policy.
Click to expand...

I don't think it does. I it as a matter of qualifications.

Unless you can provide evidence that they don't allow white people to apply for leadership positions this conversation is a waste of time.

White guy photo, fine. They still let white people join.
 
joko104 said:
This is common false outrage prolifers try to use, while their messages continue to condemn African-Americans as some OTHER people separate from white people you.

Do only black rappers have violence in their songs. No. BUT you ONLY hate and condemn black rappers.

Do only African-Americans have abortions? No. But you only condemn African-Americans.

Every message you have makes one thing clear. To you, African-Americans are OTHER people, not YOUR people, for YOU judge them collectively as if they are a completely different species. To you, African-Americans are 100% all some collective OTHER than you white people THEM.

For that reason, your messages are just what you see as a clever tactic that persuades no one and nothing else.
Click to expand...

Sez the poster who refers to 'profilers' in the opening line.

Define 'profilers,' please.

Is it THOSE PEOPLE who disagree with you?
 
RiverDad said:
You can't selectively define what racism means. Look again at the definition that votemout posted. Discrimination or prejudice based on race. Votemout's point is that a white person can't join NAACP and run for leadership because he is white. This means that the 2nd definition applies. NAACP discriminates based on race. This qualifies them as racist.
Click to expand...

Sorry to jump into the argument, but for you to be correct, you'd have to look at the definition of "discrimination" as well. What does the NAACP do that is based on prejudice against another race? They promote the interests of black people, agreed - but how do they "discriminate" against others?
 
opendebate said:
I don't think it does. I it as a matter of qualifications.

Unless you can provide evidence that they don't allow white people to apply for leadership positions this conversation is a waste of time.

White guy photo, fine. They still let white people join.
Click to expand...

So your argument is that the KKK is not a racist organization because they allowed some black men to join them. Are you sure you want to stand pat with that argument?
 
RiverDad said:
So your argument is that the KKK is not a racist organization because they allowed some black men to join them. Are you sure you want to stand pat with that argument?
Click to expand...

How is that anything close to what I said. It's pretty weak to mangle my words into something that suits you and then expect me to own it. Typical.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Sorry to jump into the argument, but for you to be correct, you'd have to look at the definition of "discrimination" as well. What does the NAACP do that is based on prejudice against another race? They promote the interests of black people, agreed - but how do they "discriminate" against others?
Click to expand...

Jump in, that's fine.

Votemout took the time to post a dictionary definition of racism. Here is what he posted

rac·ism (rā′sĭz′əm)
n.
1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.​

Either definition #1 or #2 can apply. Neither definition notes that either is dependent on meeting the criteria that you propose.

When NAACP supports policies which benefit black people and no other people, then they discriminate against those excluded. Support for Affirmative Action in college requires that whites be discriminated against. It's a zero-sum game.
 
opendebate said:
How is that anything close to what I said. It's pretty weak to mangle my words into something that suits you and then expect me to own it. Typical.
Click to expand...

Don't get all buttsore. The same principle is in play. Your claim is that if an racial organization admits a person of a different race then it cannot be racist. Well, both the NAACP and the KKK meet that criteria. You claim that this means that the NAACP is not a racist organization. Why then is the KKK if they meet the same criteria?
 
opendebate said:
I don't think it does. I it as a matter of qualifications.

Unless you can provide evidence that they don't allow white people to apply for leadership positions this conversation is a waste of time.

White guy photo, fine. They still let white people join.
Click to expand...

Good evening OD

Perhaps some people need to be reminded what NAACP stands for - National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. There are lots of people in America who are supportive of the goal of advancing the interests of colored people, even if they hate the outdated term "colored people". That is why the association has membership from all races and walks of life.

I'm not aware of any policy or practice of the NAACP that promotes or pushes for discrimination against non-blacks. Nor am I aware of any incidents where the NAACP has promoted prejudice against any other group or race.

There goals and policies are clearly for the advancement of the interests of black people in America - there's nothing discriminatory nor prejudicial about that and it is therefore in no way racist.
 
RiverDad said:
Don't get all buttsore. The same principle is in play. Your claim is that if an racial organization admits a person of a different race then it cannot be racist. Well, both the NAACP and the KKK meet that criteria. You claim that this means that the NAACP is not a racist organization. Why then is the KKK if they meet the same criteria?
Click to expand...

i never said that. and Buttsore really? How old are you.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Good evening OD

Perhaps some people need to be reminded what NAACP stands for - National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. There are lots of people in America who are supportive of the goal of advancing the interests of colored people, even if they hate the outdated term "colored people". That is why the association has membership from all races and walks of life.

I'm not aware of any policy or practice of the NAACP that promotes or pushes for discrimination against non-blacks. Nor am I aware of any incidents where the NAACP has promoted prejudice against any other group or race.

There goals and policies are clearly for the advancement of the interests of black people in America - there's nothing discriminatory nor prejudicial about that and it is therefore in no way racist.
Click to expand...

Hello CJ.

Thank you for summing that up so clearly.
 
RiverDad said:
Jump in, that's fine.

Votemout took the time to post a dictionary definition of racism. Here is what he posted

rac·ism (rā′sĭz′əm)
n.
1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.
2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.​

Either definition #1 or #2 can apply. Neither definition notes that either is dependent on meeting the criteria that you propose.

When NAACP supports policies which benefit black people and no other people, then they discriminate against those excluded. Support for Affirmative Action in college requires that whites be discriminated against. It's a zero-sum game.
Click to expand...

The NAACP does not believe that black people have different human character or ability or that black people are superior to others - part one of the definition does not apply.

The NAACP does not discriminate against nor promote prejudice against people of other races - support of the advancement and betterment of the lives of one group is not, by definition, support of the disadvancement and worsening of the lives of other groups.
 
Smartmouthwoman said:
Sez the poster who refers to 'profilers' in the opening line.

Define 'profilers,' please.

Is it THOSE PEOPLE who disagree with you?
Click to expand...

Everyone on the forum knows what "Prolifer" means.You spelled it wrong too. Maybe you should read a little of the forum.
 
RiverDad said:
The exist polling from the 2008 Presidential election showed that more racists voted FOR Obama than voted for McCain.
Click to expand...

How did the exit pollsters determine the voters were racists?
 
opendebate said:
i never said that.
Click to expand...

The NAACP advocates for policies which help black people. Some of those policies are race-neutral in language but race-specific in effect and so they have spill-over beyond the black community - policies like expansion of welfare. Other policies that they favor actively harm white people while benefiting black people - policies like affirmative action, hiring quotas, support for small minority owned business programs.

Some NAACP policies work to actively harm whites. This is exactly what the KKK does with respect to blacks.

What is it that you disagree with?
 
Moot said:
How did the exit pollsters determine the voters were racists?
Click to expand...


The asked the voters if the race of the candidate was the primary reason that they voted for the candidate of their choice. More Obama voters voted for Obama BECAUSE he was black than voted for McCain because he was white. Judging a person, not as an individual, but as a racial symbol of some kind is a racist act. It dehumanizes people.
 
RiverDad said:
The NAACP advocates for policies which help black people. Some of those policies are race-neutral in language but race-specific in effect and so they have spill-over beyond the black community - policies like expansion of welfare. Other policies that they favor actively harm white people while benefiting black people - policies like affirmative action, hiring quotas, support for small minority owned business programs.

Some NAACP policies work to actively harm whites. This is exactly what the KKK does with respect to blacks.

What is it that you disagree with?
Click to expand...

First of all you can't legitimately compare those organizations without looking like a spokesperson for the KKK so unless you have a white sheet hanging in your closet you might want to nip that one in the bud.

An organization such as the NAACP that seeks to level the playing field by assuring fair representation and opportunity in schools or in the work place is not targeting white people. Whites may have their advantage reduced indirectly by those efforts but that's different.
 
CanadaJohn said:
The NAACP does not believe that black people have different human character or ability or that black people are superior to others - part one of the definition does not apply.
Click to expand...

Either definition applies. Think about it.

You can be a racist for having a prejudice based on race WITHOUT that prejudice being based on the belief spelled out in definition #1.

The NAACP does not discriminate against nor promote prejudice against people of other races - support of the advancement and betterment of the lives of one group is not, by definition, support of the disadvancement and worsening of the lives of other groups.
Click to expand...

Sure it is, when it gets to specifics. If they have an airy goal - all blacks, and all people for that matter, should be free to strive to their highest potential - then that's not racist. It becomes racist when they translate that goal into policies specifics which mandate that less qualified blacks be admitted in place of more qualified whites, or that a small minority owned business be granted government contracts even if other businesses submit more favorable bids. Now we're talking zero-sum choices - what one party gets, the other party is denied.
 
RiverDad said:
Good catch, but it's mostly beyond the point. Almost all organizations have rules in place to preserve the goals and character of the organization in order to prevent a highjacking from occurring. This was a favorite tactic of American Communist back in the 20-50s. They'd join an organization, scope it out, then they'd organize a mass enrollment where they constituted a majority of the members, call for elections, vote themselves into office, subvert the mission of the organization and reorient it towards some Communist mission and they'd deplete the resources of the organization and then abandon it.

I'm pretty sure that the NAACP has some provision in its charter to prevent the KKK from mass enrolling, taking over the NAACP and then spending the NAACP resources on KKK propaganda.

Christian groups on college campuses often admit people who are not Christian but who are curious or working towards adopting the faith. Same with Muslim groups, same with Mormon groups. What they object to, and what college administrator push on them, is to allow such people to lead groups and to change the mission of the group to be more inclusive.

The NAACP is not race-inclusive in its mission even though it admits some token whites either as spectacles, as supporters of the mission, or as some form of observer.
Click to expand...

I see little difference in your description of the NAACP and the tea party.

Conservatives feel threatened when minorities try to organize themselves or try to speak with one voice. Hence, the relentless attacks on their organizations and community leaders.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom