Pres. Oaks and "Black lives matter"

[Rain]

16 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

Where does it say requirement?  The quote in the article is, "We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages”. You may be referring to the the statement, "'We dismantle the patriarchal practice that requires mothers to work “double shifts” so that they can mother in private even as they participate in public justice work.  Where does the patriarchal practice "require" a mother to work two jobs? Where is that written and how is it enforced? How many mothers work in "public justice work"?  That sentence is so full of silliness that it becomes inapplicable to the majority of women. I think the easier sentence is, "We are against a women having to work outside the home and still take care of children and home when they return from their professional career. 

The reason that sentence is left out is because it does not specifically address the nuclear family, which the next sentence does. They treated the family unit as a separate topic and that is what critics are responding to. 

I bolded it for you.

[CV75]

12 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Thanks for your time, excellent points!  I hadn't thought of it that way. You are spot on! 

Thank you. It is interesting to me that President Oaks’ talk stimulated so much discussion on the pros and cons of BLM and Antifa than on what we can do to identify and change “systemic discrimination” as he put it, with all his examples pointing to policy. The discussion on law enforcement policies was a start. When it comes to what might be considered to be divine policy found in the scripture examples, he clarifies that “the reasons for His plan are not known or understandable to mortals.”

I might paraphrase that examples of systemic racism are not known or understood to white people who are racially socialized in an especially subversive way, that is, by a lifetime of indirect messages (“policy”) about what they are not (racial identity is a non-issue) and what other people are in connection with skin color. Some examples are the good and safe places to live; what to avoid recognizing, comparing or mentioning; media and entertainment portrayals, etc.

Since I'm an equal opportunity instigator, these same dynamics often play out within the black communities in relation to lighter and darker skin. There is always a pecking order, it seems.

Edited October 30, 2020 by CV75

[smac97]

Interesting article in The Federalist: 

These 12 Graphs Show Mask Mandates Do Nothing To Stop COVID

Lots of links.  Lots of graphs.  Lots of information that I think needs to be addressed.

I'm still complying with requests to wear masks, but I continue to have questions about their utility.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Rain]

12 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Interesting article in The Federalist: 

These 12 Graphs Show Mask Mandates Do Nothing To Stop COVID

Lots of links.  Lots of graphs.  Lots of information that I think needs to be addressed.

I'm still complying with requests to wear masks, but I continue to have questions about their utility.

Thanks,

-Smac

Did you mean to have this in a different thread?

Edited October 30, 2020 by Rain