DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Plane on November 11, 2008, 10:16:12 PM
-
... the group's leader, Raymond "Chuck" Foster, 44, shot and killed the woman Sunday after a fight broke out when she tried to leave.
"This is not what I would call an established Klan group," he said. "The Klan has a pretty high association with violence. Some of these guys are just crooks, sociopaths."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081112/ap_on_re_us/klan_slaying
Low brain power, not much hope for reform ,why is anyone intrested in these guys now?
-
Then why do we report on them? :o
-
you right
I never really hear much about them til now
I think this is a 3rd separate incident I hear this week
-
The KKK is the largest officially racist organization in the country. Why would they not be more active now, that the majority has rejected their basic principles? Previously, they could blame it all on the courts and the "pointy-headed intellectuals", but no longer, so they are throwing tantrums.
-
Then why do we report on them? :o
I don't know , I don't think this incident got much press.
When I was a kid they were still the invisible empire , now they are the gang that can't shoot straight.
I hope that what happened to the KKK can happen also to the Al Quieda , which has some simularity.
-
Then why do we report on them? :o
I don't know , I don't think this incident got much press.
When I was a kid they were still the invisible empire , now they are the gang that can't shoot straight.
I hope that what happened to the KKK can happen also to the Al Quieda , which has some simularity.
Acoording to what I hear, the KKK is itself in resurgence largely in your beloved bigoted South and a few other backward mostly Repud areas. This time it is largely due to the immigration issue.
The KKK Has Found a Rebirth Through Immigration Issues
By Christine Moers
On February 6, 2007, the Anti-Defamation League released a report showing "a surprising and troubling resurgence" of the Ku Klux Klan.
The resurrection of the Klan, whose numbers had taken a drastic hit in the 1990's, may be in part to hot topics of the past year such as immigration, gay marriage, and urban crime, the report says.
"Extremist groups are good at seizing on whatever the hot button is of the day and twisting the message to get new members, " Deborah M. Lauter, ADL Civil Rights director, said Monday.
Slogans such as, "Let's get rid of Mexicans'," were included in an anti-immigration rally last May in Alabama, according to the ADL document titled "Ku Klux Klan Rebounds."
Klan chapters have grown by 63 percent and hate groups by 33 percent, says Mark Potok, who tracks hate crimes and serves as director of the Southern Poverty Law Center.
The ADL report lists 19 states as having notable activity and growth in Klan chapters. Those states are Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and West Virginia.
While it is difficult to pinpoint specific numbers, Potok's group has located upwards of 150 Klan chapters numbering 8,000 members around the nation. Southern Poverty has also found at least 800 hate groups in existence.
The union between groups has been significant. For instance, in March 2006 several Klan groups met in Laurens, South Carolina, in conjunction with approximately 80 members of the National Socialist Movement. Their purpose was to discuss a cooperative effort among the various organizations.
Such groups saw a significant drop in members and leadership during the late 1990's. Many hit rock bottom around 2000, said Brian Levin, director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University, San Bernardino.
"Whenever you think the Klan is down and out, they find another way to reinvent themselves," he said of the current rebirth.
Among the use of immigration issues to spur growth and interest, the Klan has also shown creativity in their publicity tricks. Some teachers received racist fliers during Black History Month. The KKK is also using the internet to spread anti-Semitism and racism, including the internet-based radio station called "KKK Radio."
Today, white supremacists are making claims that it is immigration to blame, particularly Hispanics, for the ails of society such as a struggling educational system, unemployment and crime.
There are Latinos who are personally experiencing the effects. A Kansas family, only in the U.S. for a few weeks after moving from El Salvador, found a burning wooden cross in their front yard.
It was earlier last year when a Houston Latino teenager was brutally beaten and sodomized. She barely survived, but was able to recall that her attacker was screaming, "White Power!"
More resources
www.adl.org
-
Those states are Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and West Virginia.
That is disgusting.
Even in the northern states.
Those states are Arkansas, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Nebraska, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, , and West Virginia.
-
Blue states:
Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania.
-
Blue states:
Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania.
Blue states this time . Racist Repub states most of the time.
-
Blue states this time
And they turn blue at the same time of the KKK resurgence.
Coincidence?
-
Blue states this time
And they turn blue at the same time of the KKK resurgence.
Coincidence?
==================================================
The KKK represents a very small, but very adamant minority. They are reactionaries, and see the good ol' days passing them by, and want to return to those wonderful days of years gone by, when the n*ggers knew they was in their place, and them as didn't could be hung from trees as strange fruit. They see the mongrelization of America, and what is Obama but a walking example of this?
-
The KKK represents a very small, but very adamant minority. They are reactionaries, and see the good ol' days passing them by, and want to return to those wonderful days of years gone by, when the n*ggers knew they was in their place, and them as didn't could be hung from trees as strange fruit. They see the mongrelization of America, and what is Obama but a walking example of this?
Your analysis is probably right, however Knute seems to think that political affiliation seems to have some bearing on whether you are a member of the KKK or not.
I don't think it does. I would think economic class has more to do with it.
-
I would imagine that in the past election, there were very, very few Kluxers who voted for Obama. I doubt that the've ever heard of the Libertarians, so I imagine nearly all of those who voted, voted for for McCain. Perhaps Hillary might have gotten 1% more than Obama among this group had she been the Democratic nominee. Huckabee might have swung as much as 4%.
-
The KKK represents a very small, but very adamant minority. They are reactionaries, and see the good ol' days passing them by, and want to return to those wonderful days of years gone by, when the n*ggers knew they was in their place, and them as didn't could be hung from trees as strange fruit. They see the mongrelization of America, and what is Obama but a walking example of this?
Your analysis is probably right, however Knute seems to think that political affiliation seems to have some bearing on whether you are a member of the KKK or not.
I don't think it does. I would think economic class has more to do with it.
One thing for sure is that you wont find libs in the Klan , but I betcha there is a Repub or two ;). Besides we all know the Klan endorsed McCain.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ez2C4GwqE4[/youtube]
-
One thing for sure is that you wont find libs in the Klan
Perhaps not. But you will find plenty of dems.
-
(http://home.mchsi.com/~americanconservative/images/kkkbyrd.jpg)
-
One thing for sure is that you wont find libs in the Klan
Perhaps not. But you will find plenty of dems.
Only the lazy ones that neglected to reregister after they voted for Ronnie Alsheimers. Byrd actually expressed regret . You loonies never do.
-
You loonies never do.
Perhaps because the party of Lincoln has nothing to regret.
-
Perhaps because the party of Lincoln has nothing to regret.
=================
Of course it does. Nixon's "Southern Strategy" pandered to racists, as did Reagan's campaign making a huge whoop-dee-doo in the nasty little burg of Philadelphia, Mississippi, where the only distinguishing event in two centuries was the murder of Civil Rights workers by local Kluxer cops in 1980.
I doubt that Lincoln would have recognized the grotesque assortment of blundering dwees his party has become.
-
Yeah Nixon setting up affirmative action and the Philadelphia Plan was all about pandering to racists.
-
The Southern Strategy had nothing to do with Affirmative Action.
Like Reagan's pandering to the rednecks of Kluxertown, it was all about capturing the Wallace vote for the GOP.
-
I didn'thave a party or regional dig in mind when I started this thread , it certainly turned into one fast enough.
The KKK is a race themed organisation , it accepts the wealthy and the poor , the well educated and the poorly educated the northerner and the southerner.
The waning of Racism is the biggest reason for the waning of the KKK , it would not disappear if the South were evacuated or if we all became wealthy university graduates.
Government and non government watchdogs appropriately watch to keep them from getting away with crimes , and public disgust and ridicule reduces their appeal for even the stupid.
Pointing at a class or a region as being the natural home of the opprobrious organisation is dodging the truth , racism is home anywhere it finds welcome and that can be literally anywhere.
-
The Southern Strategy had nothing to do with Affirmative Action.
Or anything elese that Richard Nixon ever did, if there were any people who thought Nixon promised them smething in "code" then these same people must have felt betrayed .
-
It's always the same with these people. There are certain liberal orthodoxy that they simply can never be persuaded from. The whole George Bush is dumb thing. They say it about every Republican. Somehow it makes them feel superior, which is what they're really after anyway. They squat in their little hovels hating the world and anybody who's better off than they are. Calling people dumb eases their pain I guess.
They're little little Grinches.
(http://kindertrauma.com/images/movies/xmas/grinch.jpg)
-
Yes and the part that needs on explanation is the Re-election of Richard Nixon.
If he depended on the "southern Strategy" to get elected how did he get reelected after doing nothing for the cause of White supremicy?
-
If he depended on the "southern Strategy" to get elected how did he get reelected after doing nothing for the cause of White supremicy?
Apparently XO hasn't thought through his charges.
The southern strategy has more to do with the rise of the sunbelt and decline of the rust belt than any other motivation.
Follow the money.
-
If he depended on the "southern Strategy" to get elected how did he get reelected after doing nothing for the cause of White supremicy?
Apparently XO hasn't thought through his charges.
The southern strategy has more to do with the rise of the sunbelt and decline of the rust belt than any other motivation.
Follow the money.
Follow the bigotry when the racists of the north joined their southern soulmates.The sunbelt is about to sink again into it's fixated racism.
-
Follow the bigotry when the racists of the north joined their southern soulmates.The sunbelt is about to sink again into it's fixated racism.
Sounds like California, Didn't do too well with Prop 8 did you.
-
The CA Prop 8 amendment and the silly anti-gay amendment they passed here in FL are signs that people are not thinking in a logical way. These are nothing to be proud of, as they are restricting people who want nothing more than to be allowed the same rights as heterosexuals. Denying peope rights is never a good thing.
The thing they passed in FL states that no pair joined in a civil union has the rights of a husband and wife. I suppose the next thing these bigots have up their sleeve will be constitutional amendments criminalizing sodomy and gay cohabitation. Some of them would not be entirely satisfied until they have constitutional public stonings.
-
>> ... as they are restricting people who want nothing more than to be allowed the same rights as heterosexuals.<<
This is the wrongheaded thinking of the left. Homosexuals have EXACTLY the same rights as heterosexuals.
-
Follow the bigotry when the racists of the north joined their southern soulmates.The sunbelt is about to sink again into it's fixated racism.
Sounds like California, Didn't do too well with Prop 8 did you.
Californians are sometimes suckers for slick well-financed Mor(m)on campaigns. We do not relish in our prejudices like y'all. I am gratified that you needed to go so far off topic to say anything.
-
I find it curious strange that the Mormon Church is so eager to champion the joys of "one man, one woman", when it has been best known for its stand of "one man, as many women as we damn well please".
God is truly kind to the Mormons, though. When Mormon statehood was rejected by Congress over the issue of Mormon polygamy, the standing president of the LDS Church, who is also an elected prophet, declared that polygamy was out, monogamy was in, and *bing!* excess wives were ditched and Utah was admitted to the Union.
It would have been interesting had this issue been brought before the Supreme Court. Perhaps it was.
I don't see how a "strict constructionist" judge could find any way to ban Utah from statehood on the grounds that a lot of its people were polygamous. Any approval of monogamy or disapproval of polygamy that a Supreme might find would have to be found outside the Constitution, which makes no references to either.
-
Californians are sometimes suckers for slick well-financed Mor(m)on campaigns. We do not relish in our prejudices like y'all. I am gratified that you needed to go so far off topic to say anything.
I see where the Mormons are the favorite whipping boys of the oh so tolerant left in California, but i seem to have read that blacks and Hispanics also were overwhelmingly against gay marriage in the state and they vote as has been pointed out many times for the D beside a name.
-
Apparently the left is allowing far too many of their constituents venture off the reservation and start thinking for themselves. And to some, apparently they're too dumb & easily succumb to "slick ads"
-
The idea that somehow allowing gay people to marry will in any way affect the status of married heterosexual couples is just dumb. How could this be possible?
I am pretty sure that it is unlikely that even the most manly of wives will be mistaken for men, or the most prissy of men will be mistaken for women, just because the state allowed gay people to marry.
If it has something to do with the fact that God (as described in the OT of the Bible, especially) does not like homosexuals, then either these people should leave the punishment up to God, or strive to enact and enforce a Constitutional amendment against sodomy and cohabitation. I imagine that if the Constitution of the US were amended to allow public stonings, they could also have that as well. Might as well throw in a requirement to televise the stonings as well.
What it looks like is happening is that we are going to have some states where gay people can be married and can be treated as any married couple, and another set of states where the same individuals will not have their marriages recognized. Eventually this is going to result in a King-Hell Gay Dred Scott decision that will make no sense to anyone.
I see no reason for the Prop 8 or the FL amendment other than fanaticism, ignorance and spite.
-
Where Prop 8 went wrong (http://www.usatoday.com/life/people/2008-11-12-elton-john_N.htm)
-
This thing, Proposition 2, passed by 62+%, with 60% required:
"This amendment protects marriage as the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife and provides that no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized."
It means that no civil union of any two people of whatever sex, from whatever place, is valid in Florida. Or that's is what several experts have said.
-
If gay people want to get married, or get together, they should have a civil partnership. The word 'marriage,' I think, puts a lot of people off. You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships."
Elton John
-
Californians are sometimes suckers for slick well-financed Mor(m)on campaigns. We do not relish in our prejudices like y'all. I am gratified that you needed to go so far off topic to say anything.
I see where the Mormons are the favorite whipping boys of the oh so tolerant left in California, but i seem to have read that blacks and Hispanics also were overwhelmingly against gay marriage in the state and they vote as has been pointed out many times for the D beside a name.
Blacks and Hispanics just voted for it. The Mo(r)ons voted and funded Prop 8 .
-
Blacks and Hispanics just voted for it.
The level of involvement of these groups could very well depend on the pronouncements from the pulpit and on a more visceral level the street music.
Do rappers in general favor gay marriage?
-
>>Do rappers in general favor gay marriage?<<
LMAO
I often admire how you stick your finger in knutty's piggy little eye, but that was classic.
Bravo.
Shame though. He might not even get it.
-
Rappers, like redneck country singers, are not known for being geniuses. Most rap music can be characterized by the term "rhythmic bitching".
-
Apparently knute is privy to who actually did and did not donate $ in support of prop 8. FBI might want to check into that
-
I doubt the FBI would be interested. He is however, the poster child for the modern left.
-
Rappers, like redneck country singers, are not known for being geniuses. Most rap music can be characterized by the term "rhythmic bitching".
The point being that they can be as influential as a media buy, perhaps more so if they have a reputation for "keepin it real"
-
Blacks and Hispanics just voted for it.
The level of involvement of these groups could very well depend on the pronouncements from the pulpit and on a more visceral level the street music.
Do rappers in general favor gay marriage?
Probly not. They are about as lame as y'all except for this song which should have been Big O's campaign song
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=duY_GFccY78[/youtube]
-
>>Do rappers in general favor gay marriage?<<
LMAO
I often admire how you stick your finger in knutty's piggy little eye, but that was classic.
Bravo.
Shame though. He might not even get it.
You are such a kiss ass, Richiepoo
-
Probly not. They are about as lame as y'all except for this song which should have been Big O's campaign song
=========================================================
Right about now, the funk soul brudder, Check it out now, the funk soul brudder.
How is that "keeping it real"?
I don't see anything about that but inane lyrics and wacky scenes that have nothing to do with anything.
-
You have to get with Knutey concerning his song selection.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTCQSk2l8bc[/youtube]
-
You have to get with Knutey concerning his song selection.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTCQSk2l8bc[/youtube]
You are going pretty far back and dating yourself with this oldie. The fact is he was wrong. The revolution was televised when it finally happened. Electing even a moderate black man as Pres is about as revolutionary as the US gets.
-
The revolution was televised when it finally happened. Electing even a moderate black man as Pres is about as revolutionary as the US gets.
Silly boy!. The revolution has already happened.
Obama wouldn't have been under consideration if it hadn't.
-
Not meaning to nitpick XO... and realizing that you just pulled the first "rap" sounding thing that came to mind... but that's Fatboy Slim. Lily white UK DJ, and the music falls under Electronica/Techno. And I don't think that he ever for a second wanted to make any statement except... dance!
Probly not. They are about as lame as y'all except for this song which should have been Big O's campaign song
=========================================================
Right about now, the funk soul brudder, Check it out now, the funk soul brudder.
How is that "keeping it real"?
I don't see anything about that but inane lyrics and wacky scenes that have nothing to do with anything.
-
And now that damn song is stuck in my head! *Sigh*
-
The revolution was televised when it finally happened. Electing even a moderate black man as Pres is about as revolutionary as the US gets.
Silly boy!. The revolution has already happened.
Obama wouldn't have been under consideration if it hadn't.
Silly old man! The only revolution that occurred before this was your fascist "contract " with America which is what fucked everything up. The civil rights movement was a slow continuous and ongoing process. It is was a revolution.
-
And now that damn song is stuck in my head! *Sigh*
Oh, oh. They call those earworms and they can be quite dangerous.
http://kassady.buzznet.com/user/journal/1591251/ (http://kassady.buzznet.com/user/journal/1591251/)
-
Silly old man! The only revolution that occurred before this was your fascist "contract " with America which is what fucked everything up. The civil rights movement was a slow continuous and ongoing process. It is was a revolution.
Silly older man.
The seeds of the revolution started 230 years ago. It was improved upon 150 years ago, when ALL men were deemed equal. And then again when women were given the vote. Interestingly enough it was your party who resisted and rolled back some of the advances of the evolving revolution.
It is only fitting that your party nominated and elected the first black president. It shows you have caught up with the rest of us.
-
Silly old man! The only revolution that occurred before this was your fascist "contract " with America which is what fucked everything up. The civil rights movement was a slow continuous and ongoing process. It is was a revolution.
Silly older man.
The seeds of the revolution started 230 years ago. It was improved upon 150 years ago, when ALL men were deemed equal. And then again when women were given the vote. Interestingly enough it was your party who resisted and rolled back some of the advances of the evolving revolution.
It is only fitting that your party nominated and elected the first black president. It shows you have caught up with the rest of us.
Wow- You really are a reactionary to think that a 230 year metamorphosis counts as a revolution. Oh , I know , you are inventing your own reality again like y'all RW madmen.
Btw- Your "conservative" ilk fought this evolution every inch of the way .
-
Oh , I know , you are inventing your own reality again like y'all RW madmen.
Don't take my reality for it.
Ask an atheist how long revolutions take.
True, conservatives did try to block some of the advances made towards true equality. For a majority of the time they belonged to your party.
-
Oh , I know , you are inventing your own reality again like y'all RW madmen.
Don't take my reality for it.
Ask an atheist how long revolutions take.
True, conservatives did try to block some of the advances made towards true equality. For a majority of the time they belonged to your party.
Your senile spinning is now passe , dontchaknow? You always could turn a silk purse into a sow's ear.
-
Your senile spinning is now passe , dontchaknow? You always could turn a silk purse into a sow's ear.
Then i guess you have no valid counterpoints, as you have retreated into insult land.
BTW i thought you were quitting since Obama won.
Need some help?
-
The opposition to Prop 8 went wrong in several ways in CA, and the blame can be spread around quite evenly, even to the opponents of it and their choice in ads. Be that as it may, it was heartening to see that the youth vote was in opposition to Prop 8, by a margin of (roughly) 2:1. That enforces my belief that we will see equal rights, but it will take time, and probably a Supreme Court decision. Constitutional Amendments can be repealed, it's even happened at the Federal level, so I don't hold a lot of stock in that. Basically, I think that we (the gay community) need to sit back and take a moderate approach, and allow the effects of time and public favor roll in our direction. That some people don't "get" the need for equal rights isn't surprising, most of the people that I know that are against gay marriage aren't religious in any sense of the word, but it's an ingrained prejudice rooted in what was once an enforced societal control. It will take time to change that, and I think that we need to be patient.
An aside to sirs: the point that XO made regarding the Florida law was the point that I was trying to make, and why I'm beginning to see the pro's of arguing in support of "gay marriage". As you know, I'd support an alternative that supports civil unions with equal rights, but the laws in both FL and AZ (from what I understand) ban anything that gives anything close to equal rights re: marriage to same sex couples. That makes it harder for me personally to compromise and kind of pushes me into taking a hard line position that I personally don't like taking.
-
And I thoroughly respect your POV and position, Fat, albeit with a disagreement disclaimer. I was listening to an anti-8 supporter, pretty much argueing with a radio host (Larry Elder, who incidentally also voted against prop 8 ), going off on this Civil Rights tangent, when it isn't at all. It's a moral tangent, an/or a cultural tangent, though I understand the tact in trying to claim it a civil rights issue.
When Larry asked him what he'd want to tell the listeners who were in support of prop 8, he largely echoed your comments, Fat. Then Larry simply asked if he still got all the equal rights he was just claiming to want, in a Domestic Partnership, under California Law, and he conceded, well...yea.
That summed it up pretty well for me
-
That makes it harder for me personally to compromise and kind of pushes me into taking a hard line position that I personally don't like taking.
I don't understand why lawmakers overreach their mandate.
-
This might be a better choice. Good thing Barry put down the pipe or he might be singing, " I was gunna run for president .... :D
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=305vRNoofr8[/youtube]
-
Being as I am not gay, I don't care much whether the state approves a Civil Union which has all the elements of a marriage, ot they just approve Lesbian and gay marriages. The opposition favors neither, and many, if not most, would favor bringing back the anti-sodomy, anti-cohabitation laws under which Abraham Lincoln and his roomie could have been jailed for sharing a bed.
Amendment 2 here in Florida was, I understand, heavily funded by the Republican National Committee. I personally got three mailings from the pro-amendment people and only one from those who were against it. The justification for the RNC spending so much on it was to get out the vote, especially in favor of the Diaz Balart brothers (Fidel's first wife's nephews, really) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinan, another Cuban. They managed to hold onto their seats, the Diaz-Balarts with a huge smear campaiugn against Raul Martinez, the mayor of Hialeah.
I STILL fail to see why anyone heterosexual could possibly believe that a officially recognizing gay couples would change their own marriages in any way.
-
Call it whatever you want. Civil Unions, Domestic Partnership, narriage, just don't call it marriage. I STLL fail to see why this compromise has no traction with the rabid anti-8 contingent, though I do have my assumptions
-
How does calling it "marriage" make it more unacceptable?
Many marriages are not performed by a religious institution, and that does not seem to make Christian or Jewish weddings any less sacred to those who chose that path.
-
How does calling it "marriage" make it more unacceptable?
Because marriage is between a man and a woman. You want something between a man and a man or a woman and a woman, simply call it something else
Again, you and your side demonstrate zip effort to compromise on this cultural & moral issue, which presents this whole arguement, not so much of about trying to supposedly facilitate equal rights, (that domestic partnerships & civil unions already can do), but to mandate an acceptance of what many consider an immoral lifestyle choice, with the attachment of marriage to the union.
Your true colors are unfortunately showing there, Xo
-
The state simply needs to get out of the marriage business. Period.
-
The opposition to Prop 8 went wrong in several ways in CA, and the blame can be spread around quite evenly, even to the opponents of it and their choice in ads. Be that as it may, it was heartening to see that the youth vote was in opposition to Prop 8, by a margin of (roughly) 2:1. That enforces my belief that we will see equal rights, but it will take time, and probably a Supreme Court decision. Constitutional Amendments can be repealed, it's even happened at the Federal level, so I don't hold a lot of stock in that. Basically, I think that we (the gay community) need to sit back and take a moderate approach, and allow the effects of time and public favor roll in our direction. That some people don't "get" the need for equal rights isn't surprising, most of the people that I know that are against gay marriage aren't religious in any sense of the word, but it's an ingrained prejudice rooted in what was once an enforced societal control. It will take time to change that, and I think that we need to be patient.
An aside to sirs: the point that XO made regarding the Florida law was the point that I was trying to make, and why I'm beginning to see the pro's of arguing in support of "gay marriage". As you know, I'd support an alternative that supports civil unions with equal rights, but the laws in both FL and AZ (from what I understand) ban anything that gives anything close to equal rights re: marriage to same sex couples. That makes it harder for me personally to compromise and kind of pushes me into taking a hard line position that I personally don't like taking.
I don't like you r strategy , mostly because it might work.
I would much rather see violent protest and lawsuits , use the courts to fight the people , make the struggle an institution itself.
The origional goal might just get lost in the shuffle.
-
I don't like you r strategy , mostly because it might work.
I would much rather see violent protest and lawsuits , use the courts to fight the people , make the struggle an institution itself.
The origional goal might just get lost in the shuffle.
[/quote]
Sure let the straights beat up and kill the Gays like usual- Right , Plane?
-
Sure let the straights beat up and kill the Gays like usual- Right , Plane?
Seems to people spoke at the ballot box, and some people seem to be having a hard time with the results.
-
Seems to people spoke at the ballot box, and some people seem to be having a hard time with the results.
It happens. See the US Civil War.
-
It happens. See the US Civil War.
Of course it does. See the last 8 years.
-
Again, you and your side demonstrate zip effort to compromise on this cultural & moral issue, which presents this whole arguement, not so much of about trying to supposedly facilitate equal rights, (that domestic partnerships & civil unions already can do), but to mandate an acceptance of what many consider an immoral lifestyle choice, with the attachment of marriage to the union.
Your true colors are unfortunately showing there, Xo
====================================
I am proud that my true colors involve equal treatment for everyone, regardless of the antiquated religious bigotry of people who want to force inequality on others.
The government has no business enforcing morality in sexual matters between consenting adults. No one is trying to make the churches marry anyone, after all.
The state does have an obligation to provide marriages. As I said, I am all for calling it civil unions or whatever to assuage the stupid religious bigots, but the passage of Amendment 2 in FL shows that said ignoramuses want no rights at all for gays and lesbians. Civil Rights should not be subject to a vote, anyway. It might make sense to some to prevent morons from voting, and requiring an IQ test, but no one has advocated that.
The rightwing is just being hateful here.
-
It happens. See the US Civil War.
Of course it does. See the last 8 years.
Seems like a lot of people had problems with the last 8 years of Bushidiocy.
(http://www.northernsun.com/images/thumb/0204.jpg)
-
(http://)
-
Again, you and your side demonstrate zip effort to compromise on this cultural & moral issue, which presents this whole arguement, not so much of about trying to supposedly facilitate equal rights, (that domestic partnerships & civil unions already can do), but to mandate an acceptance of what many consider an immoral lifestyle choice, with the attachment of marriage to the union. Your true colors are unfortunately showing there, Xo
====================================
I am proud that my true colors involve equal treatment for everyone, regardless of the antiquated religious bigotry of people who want to force inequality on others.....The rightwing is just being hateful here.
Thanks for continuing to not just continually misrepresent the so-called rightwing's hate, but in reinforcing the intolerance of the so-called party of tolerance
-
Re: Prop 8
There must have been a few Democrats also voteing in favor , elese the measure would have ridden in on BHO coattails.
-
Thanks for continuing to not just continually misrepresent the so-called rightwing's hate, but in reinforcing the intolerance of the so-called party of tolerance
Sorry bozo, the Republicans financed the homohaters. Intolerance of intolerance is tolerance.
-
>>Sorry bozo, the Republicans financed the homohaters. Intolerance of intolerance is tolerance.<<
The left just doesn't want the people to decide things for themselves. The people be damned. And really, it's obvious which group is the most intolerant. It's not the right who's forcing things down the counties throat.
-
The people be damned. And really, it's obvious which group is the most intolerant. It's not the right who's forcing things down the counties throat.
The Essence of Amendment two was intolerance. Creeps who voted for it are intolerant. They wish to deny rights to others that will not affect them in any way.
Again, the homohaters are telling gays that they can't be married. Again, tolerance is good. Intolerance of intolerance is good.
And, once more, the Republicans funded Amendment 2. It is they who are intolerant.
-
(http://)
I and most other sane Americans would much prefer giving up working than thinking, I think. I have given up working already and you apparently have given up both.
-
Thanks for continuing to not just continually misrepresent the so-called rightwing's hate, but in reinforcing the intolerance of the so-called party of tolerance
Sorry bozo, the Republicans financed the homohaters. Intolerance of intolerance is tolerance.
I see that your misrepresentations hold no bounds. You'll note no advocation of stoning, or beating, or even preventing equal rights which Domestic Partnerships provide. You see actual compromise from this side, thus hardly the act of intolerance. You, OTOH, simply keep providing hateful hyperbole, with insults to boot, minus any effort at compromise. Party of tolerance, my ass
-
I and most other sane Americans would much prefer giving up working than thinking,
Most jobs require thinking.
Even McDonalds.
-
Intolerance is leaving a baby to die because it survived an abortion. Intolerance is forcing kindergarten students to read books about homosexuals. Intolerance is forcing communities to remove Nativity scenes. Intolerance is removing prayer from school. Intolerance is not excepting the will of the people of this country and sending powder in envelopes to Mormon churches. Intolerance is homosexuals desecrating a Communion hosts in Catholic churches. Intolerance is assaulting Conservative speakers on college campuses.
That's what intolerance is. It's not using the system to create a law accepted by the majority of any particular state. The left in this country is becoming increasingly dangerous. They will not except the will of the people are are stealling an election in Minnesota.
That's intolerance, and it won't be long until something will have to be done about it. America will not be stolen by reprobates and power hungry thieves bent on destroying America as she has been known since her inception.
-
Does intolerance include a Catholic priest refusing to allow Obama supporters to participate in communion?
-
Depends on the basis of the refusal now, don't it. If it's purely due to being a supporter of candidate X, then yea, and pretty childish on the Priest's part. I would recommend that those supporters find a new parish, unless of course the goal is to make news vs growing in their faith
-
>>Does intolerance include a Catholic priest refusing to allow Obama supporters to participate in communion?<<
Source?
-
I and most other sane Americans would much prefer giving up working than thinking,
Most jobs require thinking.
Even McDonalds.
Not in everyones case. I can think of a current lameduck Pres that never boyered to think
-
I can think of a current lameduck Pres that never boyered to think
You contradict yourself. Didn't you just post the excerpt from the Woodward book?
-
Does intolerance include a Catholic priest refusing to allow Obama supporters to participate in communion?
That is probly good advice , but as a decree it is absolutely unenforceable.
Should someone enter into communion with a congregation that they do not agree with on a very important point?
If Abortion is as bad as Catholics think it is (I agree on that one) then supporters of Abortion need to gain absolution for this support before attempting communion.
But ...
There is no need for Preists to enforce anything , Jesus will simply not be in communion with people who are wrongly attempting to be so.
-
I can think of a current lameduck Pres that never boyered to think
You contradict yourself. Didn't you just post the excerpt from the Woodward book?
That wasnt thinking. Look at what happened.
-
>Does intolerance include a Catholic priest refusing to allow Obama supporters to participate in communion?<<
Source?
=========================
Do questions require a source? How about rhetorical questions? Why?
-
I see that your misrepresentations hold no bounds. You'll note no advocation of stoning, or beating, or even preventing equal rights which Domestic Partnerships provide. You see actual compromise from this side, thus hardly the act of intolerance. You, OTOH, simply keep providing hateful hyperbole, with insults to boot, minus any effort at compromise. Party of tolerance, my ass
What actual compromise? Amendment 2 states that nothing except marriage can be treated as marriage, even between two heterosexual people.
Why do you think I somehow represent the Democratic Party? Have I even made such a claim?
Again, intolerance is intolerance. To say that mass intolerance of the public is somehow tolerant is just silly.
-
That wasnt thinking. Look at what happened.
According to Woodward the decision to invade wasn't made until early 2003, weighing evidence from advocates and cautionary types.
Just because you disagree with the decision does not in no way mean that thought was absent in the making of that decision.
You really need to start applying consistency and logic to your debate, else why bother coming.
Are you up to it?
-
I see that your misrepresentations hold no bounds. You'll note no advocating of stoning, or beating, or even preventing equal rights which Domestic Partnerships provide. You see actual compromise from this side, thus hardly the act of intolerance. You, OTOH, simply keep providing hateful hyperbole, with insults to boot, minus any effort at compromise. Party of tolerance, my ass
What actual compromise?
The one that instead of completely being against any and all homosexual relationships, both legally & morally, that civil unions are a compromise. A compromise that allows precisely the same rights as a married couple, and what supposedly the anti-8 folks want.
You, on the other hand continue to demand full support of your position, complete with the idiotic hyperbolic claims of hate if one doesn't support your my way or the highway mentality.....ironically the very epitome of intolerance
Then again, it's not "equal rights" at all, that's at the core of this issue. If it were, civil unions & domestic partnerships pave that argument. Nope, as you've so transparently alluded to, it's about demanding that homosexuality be accepted as something perfectly normal, to any and all others, who may believe differently, since its perfectly acceptable to you. "Equal rights" and "Civil Rights", are merely catch phrases of protection from criticism, to the real agenda. Thanks for your sharing, though
-
Ever since the beginning of the human race, there have been homosexuals, both Lesbians and gays. Homosexuality is ENTIRELY normal behavior for homo sapiens. Upon occasion, some religions have decided that some Supreme Being up in the sky does not like it, and they have persecuted homosexuals and driven then underground, just as the Pol Pot government persecuted people who were literate, or the Holy Mother Church persecuted those who thought the Earth revolved around the Sun, instead of vice-versa.
As I said, I am not gay, and I have no objections to civil unions or whatever being established. I am not insisting that a gay civil union be called a marriage, but those who do have a very good point in the statement that equal means equal.
But that is clearly NOT what fanatical bigots like the people to wrote Florida Amendment 2 will accept: they would really prefer that homos would go back underground where they were forced to lurk in the 1950's. I bet you'd like that as well, 'cause you somehw think Jesus told you that gays were sinful and all of us would be collectively punished for tolerating them.
Again, my opinions are my own. I am not representing any party here, just common sense and fairness.
Face it, you and your ilk are just haters. Adam already loves Steve and lies with Steve and they can move in right next door to you or me or anyone. It would not change a single thing in your bleak little life if Adam married Steve, not even if your own daughter caught the bouquet.
Face it: you are a hater.
-
>>Does intolerance include a Catholic priest refusing to allow Obama supporters to participate in communion?<<
Source?
Certainly. I don't ask hypotheticals very often.
SC priest: No communion for Obama supporters
By MEG KINNARD ? 3 days ago
COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) ? A South Carolina Roman Catholic priest has told his parishioners that they should refrain from receiving Holy Communion if they voted for Barack Obama because the Democratic president-elect supports abortion, and supporting him "constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil."
The Rev. Jay Scott Newman said in a letter distributed Sunday to parishioners at St. Mary's Catholic Church in Greenville that they are putting their souls at risk if they take Holy Communion before doing penance for their vote.
"Our nation has chosen for its chief executive the most radical pro-abortion politician ever to serve in the United States Senate or to run for president," Newman wrote, referring to Obama by his full name, including his middle name of Hussein.
"Voting for a pro-abortion politician when a plausible pro-life alternative exists constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil, and those Catholics who do so place themselves outside of the full communion of Christ's Church and under the judgment of divine law. Persons in this condition should not receive Holy Communion until and unless they are reconciled to God in the Sacrament of Penance, lest they eat and drink their own condemnation."
During the 2008 presidential campaign, many bishops spoke out on abortion more boldly than four years earlier, telling Catholic politicians and voters that the issue should be the most important consideration in setting policy and deciding which candidate to back. A few church leaders said parishioners risked their immortal soul by voting for candidates who support abortion rights.
But bishops differ on whether Catholic lawmakers ? and voters ? should refrain from receiving Communion if they diverge from church teaching on abortion. Each bishop sets policy in his own diocese. In their annual fall meeting, the nation's Catholic bishops vowed Tuesday to forcefully confront the Obama administration over its support for abortion rights.
According to national exit polls, 54 percent of Catholics chose Obama, who is Protestant. In South Carolina, which McCain carried, voters in Greenville County ? traditionally seen as among the state's most conservative areas ? went 61 percent for the Republican, and 37 percent for Obama.
"It was not an attempt to make a partisan point," Newman said in a telephone interview Thursday. "In fact, in this election, for the sake of argument, if the Republican candidate had been pro-abortion, and the Democratic candidate had been pro-life, everything that I wrote would have been exactly the same."
Conservative Catholics criticized Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry in 2004 for supporting abortion rights, with a few Catholic bishops saying Kerry should refrain from receiving Holy Communion because his views were contrary to church teachings.
Sister Mary Ann Walsh, spokeswoman for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, said she had not heard of other churches taking this position in reaction to Obama's win. A Boston-based group that supports Catholic Democrats questioned the move, saying it was too extreme.
"Father Newman is off base," said Steve Krueger, national director of Catholic Democrats. "He is acting beyond the authority of a parish priest to say what he did. ... Unfortunately, he is doing so in a manner that will be of great cost to those parishioners who did vote for Sens. Obama and Biden. There will be a spiritual cost to them for his words."
A man who has attended St. Mary's for 18 years said he welcomed Newman's message and anticipated it would inspire further discussion at the church.
"I don't understand anyone who would call themselves a Christian, let alone a Catholic, and could vote for someone who's a pro-abortion candidate," said Ted Kelly, 64, who volunteers his time as lector for the church. "You're talking about the murder of innocent beings."
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j-epjBHqtK6FvYWhAwBzReQHZytAD94EBKDO0 (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j-epjBHqtK6FvYWhAwBzReQHZytAD94EBKDO0)
Now about my question....
-
Has Obama ever committed an abortion? In the US today, abortion is left to the states, so it would seem that denying communion to Obama voters would be a bogus proposition. If you voted for McCain, the same fetuses would still be aborted by the same people as if you had voted for McCain.
Why can't they just blame the women who have abortions and their doctors?
Every state allows some clearly legal murderers go free, because of technicalities. Some of those murderers commit more crimes, including murders, and yet we do not hear the Holy Mother Church refusing communion to judges who let said murderers off, or people who elected the officials who allowed this to happen.
Presumably, God knows everything, anyway. Why can't the Church just let God do all the punishing? Could it be that they think that if a priest gives communion to an Obama voter God will be fooled and will not punish him for this lapse of proper behavior?
-
In the US today, abortion is left to the states
Are you sure about that statement?
-
Are you sure about that statement?
e
In the US today, abortion is left to the states
=========================================
For all practical purposes, the state can make abortion a very difficult procedure. I believe that there was either only one clinic in all of South Dakota still performing abortion or none at all. They do this by requiring all women wishing an abortion to view an ultrasound, to listen to all the various alternatives to abortion, and to wait a specified number of days.
-
Ever since the beginning of the human race, there have been homosexuals, both Lesbians and gays. Homosexuality is ENTIRELY normal behavior for homo sapiens.
And we thank you for that OPINION. You'll get back to us when you actually have some scientific FACT to back that up
As I said, I am not gay, and I have no objections to civil unions or whatever being established.
Good for you. So, let's compromise and work on the "whatever" vs insisting it be called marriage. You game or are you intolerant?
Face it: you are a hater.
Face it: you are a liar
-
For all practical purposes, the state can make abortion a very difficult procedure. I believe that there was either only one clinic in all of South Dakota still performing abortion or none at all. They do this by requiring all women wishing an abortion to view an ultrasound, to listen to all the various alternatives to abortion, and to wait a specified number of days.
I believe states can regulate medical procedures. To the best of my knowledge no state can ban an abortion.
-
Good for you. So, let's compromise and work on the "whatever" vs insisting it be called marriage. You game or are you intolerant?
Oh, just fine with me. Except fr the singular detail that there is very little we can do about this.
I am not of the opinion that either of us have the power or authority to enact or enforce legislation.
================================
You seem to hate people who simply want to officially acknowledge their love for one another. Why should they be denied this? What possible harm could it do to you?
-
You seem to hate people who simply want to officially acknowledge their love for one another. Why should they be denied this? What possible harm could it do to you?
Why does disagreeing with the use of the term "marriage" in any civil contract Adam and Steve choose to officially acknowledge their relationship equate to hate?
-
So, let's compromise and work on the "whatever" vs insisting it be called marriage. You game or are you intolerant?
Oh, just fine with me. Except fr the singular detail that there is very little we can do about this. I am not of the opinion that either of us have the power or authority to enact or enforce legislation.
So, why do you vote?? Your single vote can do very little, so why vote? ::)
You seem to hate people who simply want to officially acknowledge their love for one another. Why should they be denied this? What possible harm could it do to you?
And that would be some more examples of your hyperbolic misrepresentations. Last I checked, I already gave my ok for it, it's called civil unions, or domestic partnerships, or whatever else you want to call it, so the LYING in claiming my denying it and hating gays is yours, and yours alone
-
>>Does intolerance include a Catholic priest refusing to allow Obama supporters to participate in communion?<<
Source?
It's quite true, Rich. I'll have to look it up again, but I read about it in detail, including interviews with the priest. More specifically, it isn't just about Obama, but voting for anyone who supports abortion to the extent that he does.
I think the action is questionable, and I'm trying to imagine how many people are going to be in the confessional for absolution for their voting choices. But from a very orthodox point of view, and strictly from the viewpoint of dogma alone, the priest has a point.
-
>>Does intolerance include a Catholic priest refusing to allow Obama supporters to participate in communion?<<
Source?
It's quite true, Rich. I'll have to look it up again, but I read about it in detail, including interviews with the priest. More specifically, it isn't just about Obama, but voting for anyone who supports abortion to the extent that he does.
I think the action is questionable, and I'm trying to imagine how many people are going to be in the confessional for absolution for their voting choices. But from a very orthodox point of view, and strictly from the viewpoint of dogma alone, the priest has a point.
I wonder if this is related to his vote against a measure that would have required doctors to save the life of a baby who survived an abortion?
-
>>Does intolerance include a Catholic priest refusing to allow Obama supporters to participate in communion?<<
Source?
It's quite true, Rich. I'll have to look it up again, but I read about it in detail, including interviews with the priest. More specifically, it isn't just about Obama, but voting for anyone who supports abortion to the extent that he does.
I think the action is questionable, and I'm trying to imagine how many people are going to be in the confessional for absolution for their voting choices. But from a very orthodox point of view, and strictly from the viewpoint of dogma alone, the priest has a point.
I wonder if this is related to his vote against a measure that would have required doctors to save the life of a baby who survived an abortion?
Most definitely.
-
I believe that there was either only one clinic in all of South Dakota still performing abortion or none at all. They do this by requiring all women wishing an abortion to view an ultrasound, to listen to all the various alternatives to abortion, and to wait a specified number of days.
This site advertises three. (http://www.abortion.com/abortion_clinics_state.php?country=United%20States&state=South%20Dakota) I'm sure there are more that are not listed here.
-
>>COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) ? A South Carolina Roman Catholic priest has told his parishioners that they should refrain from receiving Holy Communion if they voted for Barack Obama because the Democratic president-elect supports abortion, and supporting him "constitutes material cooperation with intrinsic evil."<<
This priest is wrong, and I'm sure he's hearing about it from his Bishop. What the CHURCH actually said was politicians like Kennedy, Kerry and Biden should be denied the sacrament because of their support for abortion. It said nothing about voting for Barry. Nothing intolerant there. If you want to call yourself a Catholic you should obey the rules, otherwise find a nice Protestant church or start your own.
So one priest doesn't change the fact that the left is exceedingly intolerant. Much more so that the right.
-
>>I think the action is questionable, and I'm trying to imagine how many people are going to be in the confessional for absolution for their voting choices. But from a very orthodox point of view, and strictly from the viewpoint of dogma alone, the priest has a point.<<
Very questionable. As I said, one priest doesn't carry the wait of the Church. Father Flager is a perfect example.
It's really very simple. You don't see Conservatives assaulting liberal speakers on campuses. You don't see Conservatives outlawing certain kinds of speech or thoughts. You don't see Conservatives calling for the murder of Cindy Shemale like some radio host in San Fran did to Joe the Plumber.
The left is goose stepping it's way to a totalitarian state. They're stealling an election in Minnesota just like they did in Washington State. They attempting to overturn the will of the people in Californian, and you can be sure it won't stop there.
-
I believe that there was either only one clinic in all of South Dakota still performing abortion or none at all. They do this by requiring all women wishing an abortion to view an ultrasound, to listen to all the various alternatives to abortion, and to wait a specified number of days.
This site advertises three. (http://www.abortion.com/abortion_clinics_state.php?country=United%20States&state=South%20Dakota) I'm sure there are more that are not listed here.
Only one of these sights is in SD:
South Dakota Abortion Clinics
Sioux Falls
Sioux Falls Clinic
6511 West 41st Street
Sioux Falls, South Dakota 57106
(605) 361-5100
Missoula
Blue Mountain Clinic
610 N. California St
Missoula, Montana 59802
(800) 727-2546 (406) 721-1646
www.BlueMountainClinic.org (http://www.BlueMountainClinic.org) Visit Mini Site
Wichita
Women's Health Care Services - Late Term Abortion
5107 East Kellogg
Wichita, Kansas 67218
Please look deeper than the superficial fact and try to grasp some underlying truth for a change.
-
Sorry.
However, Planned Parenthood shows two abortion clinics in the state. (http://www.plannedparenthood.org/mn-nd-sd/15574.htm)
In addition, doctors can provide "morning after" pills in their office, and hospitals can also perform the procedure.
-
However, Planned Parenthood shows two abortion clinics in the state.
In addition, doctors can provide "morning after" pills in their office, and hospitals can also perform the procedure.
=====================
The point was that states can make abortions a very difficult affiar if they want to, and this is what they have done in South Dakota. In addition to this, there was an amendment that would have ended abortion there proposed not long ago. I am not sure what happened to it.
-
So one priest doesn't change the fact that the left is exceedingly intolerant. Much more so that the right.
I wasn't aware we were playing the left off against the right.
Here are a few more examples.
After Obama's win, white backlash festers in US
By Patrik Jonsson
In rural Georgia, a group of high-schoolers gets a visit from the Secret Service after posting "inappropriate" comments about President-elect Barack Obama on the Web. In Raleigh, N.C., four college students admit to spraying race-tinged graffiti in a pedestrian tunnel after the election. On Nov. 6, a cross burns on the lawn of a biracial couple in Apolacon Township, Pa.
The election of America's first black president has triggered more than 200 hate-related incidents, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center ? a record in modern presidential elections. Moreover, the white nationalist movement, bemoaning an election that confirmed voters' comfort with a multiracial demography, expects Mr. Obama's election to be a potent recruiting tool ? one that watchdog groups warn could give new impetus to a mostly defanged fringe element.
Most election-related threats have so far been little more than juvenile pranks. But the political marginalization of certain Southern whites, economic distress in rural areas, and a White House occupant who symbolizes a multiethnic United States could combine to produce a backlash against what some have heralded as the dawn of a postracial America. In some parts of the South, there's even talk of secession.
"Most of this movement is not violent, but there is a substantive underbelly that is violent and does try to make a bridge to people who feel disenfranchised," says Brian Levin of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University, San Bernardino. "The question is: Will this swirl become a tornado or just an ill wind? We're not there yet, but there's dust on the horizon, a swirling of wind, and the atmospherics are getting put together for [conflict]."
Though postelection racist incidents haven't posed any real danger to society or the president-elect, law enforcement is taking note.
"We're trying to be out there at the cutting edge of this and trying to stay ahead of groups that are emerging," says Special Agent Darrin Blackford, a spokesman for the Secret Service, which guards the US president.
"Anytime you start seeing [extremist propaganda] floating around, you have to be concerned," adds Lt. Gary Thornberry of the Oklahoma Highway Patrol, a member of the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force. "As far as it being an alarmist situation, I don't see that yet. From a law enforcement point of view, you have to be careful, because it's not illegal to have an ideology."
After sparking conflict and showdowns in the 1990s ? think Ruby Ridge, Waco, the Oklahoma City bombing ? white supremacist and nationalist groups began this century largely splintered and powerless. Though high immigration levels helped boost the number of hate groups from 602 in 2000 to 888 in 2007, key leaders of such groups had died, been imprisoned, or were otherwise marginalized.
But postelection, at least two white nationalist websites ? Stormfront and the Council of Conservative Citizens ? report their servers have crashed because of heavy traffic. The League of the South, a secessionist group, says Web hits jumped from 50,000 a month to 300,000 since Nov. 4, and its phones are ringing off the hook.
"The vitriol is flailing out shotgun-style," says Mr. Levin. "They recognize Obama as a tipping point, the perfect storm in the narrative of the hate world ? the apocalypse that they've been moaning about has come true."
Supremacist propaganda is already on the upswing. In Oklahoma, fringe groups have distributed anti-Obama propaganda through newspapers and taped it to home mail boxes. Ugly incidents such as cross-burnings, assassination betting pools, and Obama effigies are also being reported from Maine to Alabama.
The Ku Klux Klan has been tied to recent news events, as well. Two Tennessee men implicated for plotting to kill 88 black men, including Obama, were tied to the KKK chapter whose leader was convicted in a civil trial in Brandenburg, Ky., last week, for inciting violence. The murder last week in Louisiana of a KKK initiate, allegedly killed after trying to back out of joining, came at the hands of a new group called Sons of Dixie, authorities say.
"We're not looking at a race war or anything close to it, but ... what we are seeing now is undeniably a fairly major backlash by some subset of the white population," says Mark Potok of the Southern Poverty Law Center's Intelligence Report in Montomgery, Ala. "Many whites feel that the country their forefathers built has been ... stolen from them, so there's in some places a real boiling rage, and that can only become worse as more people lose jobs."
In an election in which barely 20 percent of native Southern whites in Deep South states voted for Obama, the newly apparent political clout of "outsiders" and people of color has been unnerving to some.
"In states like Mississippi, Louisiana, and Alabama, there was extraordinary racial polarization in the vote," says Merle Black, a political scientist at Emory University in Atlanta. "Black Americans really do believe that Obama is going to represent their interests and views in ways that they haven't been before, and, in the Deep South, whites feel exactly the opposite."
But for nonviolent secessionist groups like the League of the South, the hope is for a more vigorous debate about the direction of the US and the South's role in it, says Michael Tuggle, a League blogger in North Carolina.
Mr. Tuggle says his group isn't looking for an 1860-style secession but, rather, a model that Spain, for one, is moving toward, in which "there's a great deal of autonomy for constituent regions" ? a foil to what is seen as unchecked, dangerous federal power in Washington.
"To a lot of people, the idea of secession doesn't seem so crazy anymore," says Tuggle. "People are talking about how left out they feel, ... and they feel that something strange and radical has taken over our country."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20081117/ts_csm/aaryan_1 (http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20081117/ts_csm/aaryan_1)
-
Sorry, not even close. The actions of a "few high school" students and imaginary racists pales in comparison to what elected officals are doing. The article also says these aren't actions, and it's all speculation.
Keep trying.
-
You seem to hate people who simply want to officially acknowledge their love for one another. Why should they be denied this? What possible harm could it do to you?
Why does disagreeing with the use of the term "marriage" in any civil contract Adam and Steve choose to officially acknowledge their relationship equate to hate?
alot of deflection and avoidance of your query there, BT
-
The actions of a "few high school" students and imaginary racists pales in comparison to what elected officals are doing.
======================================
What are "elected officals" doing?
-
The Censorship Doctrine. Hate Crimes. Forcing cities to remove Nativity scenes.
As I said, intolerance from the left dwarfs any by the Right.
-
Elected officials are committing hate crimes?
Where? When?
What "Censorship doctrine"?
If you think a Nativity scene is needed, put one on your own property. Why should a city government put up religious symbols with taxpayer's money?
-
You play dumb very well.
-
Whie you need no thespian abilities whatever.