Very good point, Purex. I tell my ESL students that Americans like to talk a lot and are basically open and friendly; many Americans are touchy-feely and don't think twice about touching someone on the shoulder when they're conversing. The students often come from repressed cultures where it is unthinkable to directly meet someone's gaze, or talk to someone without first being introduced, etc., etc. I had the hardest time with a Vietnamese student who wouldn't open her mouth to practice the 'r' and l' sounds let alone try to physically show her where her tongue sor lips should be, when I suddenly remembered that it is considered impolite to show people the inside of your mouth in Vietnam!
racism
- Thread starter billwald
- Start date
- Status
PureX--great anecdote.
What we rarely consider as Americans is how the rest of the world sees us. Seriously, we don't have a clue, a lot of the time, what they make of us, our culture, and the slights and unwitting insults they have to put up (part of the process of assimilation).
What we rarely consider as Americans is how the rest of the world sees us. Seriously, we don't have a clue, a lot of the time, what they make of us, our culture, and the slights and unwitting insults they have to put up (part of the process of assimilation).
Rolf Ernst
New member
Wickwoman--the Civil Rights Act was the precedent for much legislation. As a precedent in American law, it should have been termed for what it really was: The Group Rights Initiative.
People get away with speaking of the Civil Rights Act as if it pertained only to the social status of black Americans BUT they should not be allowed to do so. NO CLASS OF PEOPLE should have rights which they as individuals do not posses.
The Civil Rights Act was the beginning of the end for true individual rights. Therefore while for a few Americans it may have been a grand scheme, they have NO RIGHT TO INFLICT UPON AMERICA AS A WHOLE THE LOSS OF INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS WHICH INCREASINGLY BESET US.
People get away with speaking of the Civil Rights Act as if it pertained only to the social status of black Americans BUT they should not be allowed to do so. NO CLASS OF PEOPLE should have rights which they as individuals do not posses.
The Civil Rights Act was the beginning of the end for true individual rights. Therefore while for a few Americans it may have been a grand scheme, they have NO RIGHT TO INFLICT UPON AMERICA AS A WHOLE THE LOSS OF INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS WHICH INCREASINGLY BESET US.
Rolf Ernst
New member
Wickwoman--concerning your reference to Southern Baptists being for slavery. The implication is that Christians were for slavery which is not true. It also implies that the war for southern independence was fought to preserve slavery. Neither is that true.
wickwoman
New member
Dear Rolf:
The war was for states rights, the most crucial of which was the right to hold slaves.
Were Southern Baptists Christians? If yes, then some Christians believed slavery was Biblical. Southern Baptists were not the only "Christians" who believed slavery was Biblical.
Groups are made up of individuals. And the Civil Rights act is designed to proctect a certain kind of individual from being discriminated against as a result of their color. The grouping has nothing to do with group's rights. The grouping is for the purpose of pointing out what reasons are wrong for making certain decisions i.e., not hiring someone, where someone can sit on a bus, etc. A "protected class," which is the legal terminology, is nothing more than a way of describing who should not be discriminated against. It has nothing to do with taking away individual rights.
As for the loss of individual rights, I have not experienced that. Perhaps you could enlighten me as to what individual rights you have lost. The right to discriminate against a person on the basis of their color?
The war was for states rights, the most crucial of which was the right to hold slaves.
Were Southern Baptists Christians? If yes, then some Christians believed slavery was Biblical. Southern Baptists were not the only "Christians" who believed slavery was Biblical.
Groups are made up of individuals. And the Civil Rights act is designed to proctect a certain kind of individual from being discriminated against as a result of their color. The grouping has nothing to do with group's rights. The grouping is for the purpose of pointing out what reasons are wrong for making certain decisions i.e., not hiring someone, where someone can sit on a bus, etc. A "protected class," which is the legal terminology, is nothing more than a way of describing who should not be discriminated against. It has nothing to do with taking away individual rights.
As for the loss of individual rights, I have not experienced that. Perhaps you could enlighten me as to what individual rights you have lost. The right to discriminate against a person on the basis of their color?
Rolf Ernst
New member
Right, Granite. There are always preachers who will play to their hearers rather than give fair consideration to issues. How many preachers in Ky., Tn., and Mo. do you think preached against the harmful effects of nicotine?
But in general, it was Christendom which first struck out against the practice of slavery. Any good encylopedia probably has an article on William Wilberforce. However, in today's climate it is possible that information about him, a minister, gathering men of the church about him to pray regularly and specifically for an end to the practice of slavery might not be thought good to put in print; just as today also, people are always seeking a way to blame christendom for every ill.
But in general, it was Christendom which first struck out against the practice of slavery. Any good encylopedia probably has an article on William Wilberforce. However, in today's climate it is possible that information about him, a minister, gathering men of the church about him to pray regularly and specifically for an end to the practice of slavery might not be thought good to put in print; just as today also, people are always seeking a way to blame christendom for every ill.
wickwoman
New member
Yankee Christedom struck out against slavery. Good ole boys did not. And what value were slaves to New Englanders? Very little. However, it was big business in Alabama. We're not talking about a small disorganized offshoot of a major religion. We are talking about entire religious organizations officially taking a stand on the side of slavery.
PureX
Well-known member
Most southern Christians believed that slavery was sanctioned by the bible and was even ordained by God. When the slave states were told that they could no longer engage in slavery they decided to succeed from the union rather than give slavery up because slavery was the economic engine of the southern economy and the slave states knew that the end of slavery would cause them great economic hardship.
I can't imagine why else you would think the south succeeded from the union, or how you imagine that all those slave-holding southern Christians were not in favor of slavery.
I'm not blaming christendom for EVERY ill (although I do blame it for a lot of problems). On slavery, though, wickwoman is right: by and large Southern Calvinists opposed abolition, Yankee Unitarians led the abolitionist movement. I don't think it was necessarily playing to the audience, either. These men and women genuinely supported slavery just as fervently as some opposed it.
Chileice
New member
Although I believe the SBC stand in those days was regretable, you might also recall that Southern Baptists made a formal apology for that stand a few years back. That doesn't undo the wrong, but you also have to be careful about painting today's group with yesterday's paint. I'm sure there are some who might still support slavery, but most S. Baptists I know, and I know a bunch, would decry such a stand and are sorry their forebears held it.
But you are right about one thing, we often take stands of pragmatism and then try to baptize them in some religious way to make them seem godly when we know down inside they are not.
wickwoman
New member
Dear Chiliece:
Point taken. I wasn't actually trying to make a point about Southern Baptists, though I could if I were feeling particularly venemous, but alas today I'm feeling generous. I was simply trying to be sure we represented the truth of the matter. Which, truthfully, I can't remember how I got started on the whole So. Baptist rant.
Point taken. I wasn't actually trying to make a point about Southern Baptists, though I could if I were feeling particularly venemous, but alas today I'm feeling generous. I was simply trying to be sure we represented the truth of the matter. Which, truthfully, I can't remember how I got started on the whole So. Baptist rant.
servent101
New member
Billybob
Anyways – if you need to know something that you are doing, that is giving you problems, something you may just have in your culture – like trans-fat … know what that is? Well avoid it – look it up on the internet for complete details… but the point – informing people and convincing them that their needs to be a change in their attitude and behavior, that they can contribute more to a functioning society, someplace that is better for everyone – this is a very rewarding endeavor – and one that takes years to perfect and no I am not
With Christ’s love
Servent101
to my statement
Anyways – if you need to know something that you are doing, that is giving you problems, something you may just have in your culture – like trans-fat … know what that is? Well avoid it – look it up on the internet for complete details… but the point – informing people and convincing them that their needs to be a change in their attitude and behavior, that they can contribute more to a functioning society, someplace that is better for everyone – this is a very rewarding endeavor – and one that takes years to perfect and no I am not
to my statement
as many people would rather change their neighbors than shoot them – and it is written,
– so how does one become a peacemaker? Well one has to want to be one first.
With Christ’s love
Servent101
servent101
New member
Wickwoman
And being a bleeding heart liberal – I allow you some slack, I am not going to condemn you for something you are aware of and trying to change, and good for you that you know how hard upbringing is to overcome, and to recognize. And yes, there are those who delight in their ignorance and they have only one way to learn, though, they too, if one is in the Spirit, can be talked to and reasoned with. One of the biggest reasons why I want to live a pure and holy life is so that I can be in the Spirit, and be lead to do and say what is beneficial to other people, though, as I watch and learn, their pain and anguish will lash out at me, if I approach them when not moved by the Spirit. \\ in real life I am much of a wimp, on the internet I can say more and be more outspoken, because there is less danger of receiving the wrath of those whom want to live in their ignorance, and in all honestly, often it is only by them swallowing their own puke, and becoming close to death, that they will learn, and this is by Divine Design, though if we are pure, we can do more to help them become self realized without the compounded pain that you talk about
With Christ’s love
Servent101
And being a bleeding heart liberal – I allow you some slack, I am not going to condemn you for something you are aware of and trying to change, and good for you that you know how hard upbringing is to overcome, and to recognize. And yes, there are those who delight in their ignorance and they have only one way to learn, though, they too, if one is in the Spirit, can be talked to and reasoned with. One of the biggest reasons why I want to live a pure and holy life is so that I can be in the Spirit, and be lead to do and say what is beneficial to other people, though, as I watch and learn, their pain and anguish will lash out at me, if I approach them when not moved by the Spirit. \\ in real life I am much of a wimp, on the internet I can say more and be more outspoken, because there is less danger of receiving the wrath of those whom want to live in their ignorance, and in all honestly, often it is only by them swallowing their own puke, and becoming close to death, that they will learn, and this is by Divine Design, though if we are pure, we can do more to help them become self realized without the compounded pain that you talk about
With Christ’s love
Servent101
>Yankee Christedom struck out against slavery.
After it was tried and failed for economic reasons. It was cheaper to hire free people, pay them starvation wages, and lay them off to starve in the off season. Much cheaper than feeding and housing slaves in a New England winter.
After it was tried and failed for economic reasons. It was cheaper to hire free people, pay them starvation wages, and lay them off to starve in the off season. Much cheaper than feeding and housing slaves in a New England winter.
:yawn: :drum:
- Status