Jump to content

"Love One Another" v. "Black Lives Matter"


Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Calm said:

For accuracy...

Shootings are not the only method of police killings.

This site also includes beatings, tasers, etc. by year, by state, by race, on duty/off duty, whether officer was charged, gender:

https://mappingpoliceviolence.org

For 2019, for unarmed blacks (men and women) I believe there were 30 listed so far (may go up over time).

I still think this topic is far more complicated then a few stats selected, as if conveniently, to favor what's become a rather political issue (not meant in a condemning way here, since I too can only supply a few stats and draw a conclusion).  I linked John McWhorter earlier and I pointed out how BLM itself, and this massive political push, has become very religious-like.  One reason I'd maintain it's very religious is there is really no room to discuss reality and facts as a whole.  If people point out certain realities it is seen as racist, wherein the religious-like bullies come out to silence and shame.  

When people come by our house or walk past when they see our BLM signage and support, they think something other than about black lives counting, particularly if they disagree with me politically.  They think of politics and feel compelled to respond as if they are hurt by our support.  And the big issue is, they agree with the stated message--black lives do matter.  Of course they think Black lives matter.  The problem, as I see it is, we are simply fighting each other's dogma on this topic.  It is religion all over again.  There is little depth of consideration nor appeal to reality beyond that type of reality that suits one's agenda.    

As it is, more black people kill others than any other race in America.  It's an uncomfortable reality.  How is it that out of the 13 percent of our population we see more than 50% of the murders being committed?  The rate is astounding.  Pointing out the reality is uncomfortable.  We know the history, at least to some elementary level degree.  We know that there was slavery and that racism persisted, that policies were enacted and that the country was heavily segregated.  We can easily point out how the history has negatively carried on legacy of problems.  But its complicated.  Pointing out, btw, that most murders are committed by those who are black is also pointing out that most murder victims are black.  Its clearly frustrating to some that people read endorsement of ugly hideous racism into political opposition.  Its feeling, to me, exactly like religion telling people that "heretics" or "apostates" are evil or inspired by evil.  

For me why does McWhorter's point ring so clearly?  Because religion is near impossible to have a good honest, un-emotional discussion about.  BLM is about the same.  I support BLM because I maintain there is too much imbalance.  There is too much ugly legacy left over.  

Edited by stemelbow
Link to post
On 11/10/2020 at 6:44 AM, CV75 said:

I understand the sentiment. Is the concern that these protests do not qualify as news? Does the slant (often presented as "analysis" and "commentary" that is  countered by other ideologically-influenced news sources) alter the observation that law enforcement policy has a disproportionately negative effect on black citizens and communities?

Even watchdog journalism can be slanted, but is there any reason to think that government policy on a broader scale does not have a disproportionately negative effect on black citizens and communities?

Sorry to take so long to answer you. I've been busy. I think the news is slanted calling riots protest.

What government policies do you think have a negative effect on the black communities? My wife has it been a loan underwriter for 30 years until she retired. She always went out of her way to make sure that low-income and people of color could qualify for a home loan if at all possible. I personally just don't see government policies having a negative effect on any one communtiy intentionally.

 

Link to post
1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

I still think this topic is far more complicated then a few stats selected, as if conveniently, to favor what's become a rather political issue (not meant in a condemning way here, since I too can only supply a few stats and draw a conclusion).  I linked John McWhorter earlier and I pointed out how BLM itself, and this massive political push, has become very religious-like.  One reason I'd maintain it's very religious is there is really no room to discuss reality and facts as a whole.  If people point out certain realities it is seen as racist, wherein the religious-like bullies come out to silence and shame.  

When people come by our house or walk past when they see our BLM signage and support, they think something other than about black lives counting, particularly if they disagree with me politically.  They think of politics and feel compelled to respond as if they are hurt by our support.  And the big issue is, they agree with the stated message--black lives do matter.  Of course they think Black lives matter.  The problem, as I see it is, we are simply fighting each other's dogma on this topic.  It is religion all over again.  There is little depth of consideration nor appeal to reality beyond that type of reality that suits one's agenda.    

As it is, more black people kill others than any other race in America.  It's an uncomfortable reality.  How is it that out of the 13 percent of our population we see more than 50% of the murders being committed?  The rate is astounding.  Pointing out the reality is uncomfortable.  We know the history, at least to some elementary level degree.  We know that there was slavery and that racism persisted, that policies were enacted and that the country was heavily segregated.  We can easily point out how the history has negatively carried on legacy of problems.  But its complicated.  Pointing out, btw, that most murders are committed by those who are black is also pointing out that most murder victims are black.  Its clearly frustrating to some that people read endorsement of ugly hideous racism into political opposition.  Its feeling, to me, exactly like religion telling people that "heretics" or "apostates" are evil or inspired by evil.  

For me why does McWhorter's point ring so clearly?  Because religion is near impossible to have a good honest, un-emotional discussion about.  BLM is about the same.  I support BLM because I maintain there is too much imbalance.  There is too much ugly legacy left over.  

Did they fight back with their blue lives matter sign? I've see signs like that in neighborhoods so it made me think about it. Nothing wrong with either, but you're so right, it's political, just like mask wearing.

Link to post
1 hour ago, rodheadlee said:

Sorry to take so long to answer you. I've been busy. I think the news is slanted calling riots protest.

What government policies do you think have a negative effect on the black communities? My wife has it been a loan underwriter for 30 years until she retired. She always went out of her way to make sure that low-income and people of color could qualify for a home loan if at all possible. I personally just don't see government policies having a negative effect on any one communtiy intentionally.

No problem, I hope you’ve been well.

I don't think discrimination has to be intentional to make it problematic.

While intentional discrimination can be traced back in US history (slavery and Jim Crow laws), and discriminatory (both intentional and not) personal/popular attitudes (“informal policies”) persist despite improvements in such policy (the various Civil Rights Acts), here are two examples of current policies that make no reference to race but have major disproportionate effects by race. I think intention is arguable and ultimately irrelevant, so let’s assume these two examples are not intentionally discriminatory.

1. The Fair Housing Act was passed in 1968, but our neighborhoods are still very much segregated by race and ethnicity (with black people / people of color disproportionately represented in high-poverty census tracts). As many formal barriers to residential integration were lifted, they were replaced with less obvious and seemingly race-neutral methods of keeping black people out of predominantly white neighborhoods. So, overt discrimination has declined, but exclusionary zoning policies (requirements for minimum lot size, single residence per lot, minimum square footage, costly building codes, etc.) make it difficult for lower-income residents (read* “black”) to live in many suburban and gentrified urban (read* “white”) communities and enjoy the associated educational, employment and other opportunities. The law permits realtors / property managers to steer black people away from white neighborhoods, and actually to show them a smaller selection of homes and apartments than white people.

*Note: I say, “read” because the racial disparities have been measured as well as taken to be generally accepted assumptions.

2. As somewhat alluded to throughout this thread, law enforcement policies criminalize behaviors in a way that disproportionately affects people of color. Federal guidelines impose substantially more severe penalties for the use of crack than for powder cocaine, two forms of the same drug, but crack is used more by the socioeconomically disadvantaged (read “black”). And then there are the arrest and sentencing disparities that follow suit.

  • Like 2
Link to post
On 11/10/2020 at 3:53 PM, pogi said:

"Just talk" is not how the law works.  There is threat of actually penalty, by force if necessary. 

I suppose the difference then between us/mortal men and our Father in heaven is that our Father doesn't penalize us but rather doesn't consider us to be worthy of particular blessings when we don't comply with the laws upon which particular blessings are predicated, whereas we/mortal men do penalize people when they don't do what we want them to do.  From our Father's perspective, unless we comply with the laws of the gospel we are already destined to suffer as Satan in Hell, so it's not as if he is going to send people to Hell just because they didn't accept the gospel.  Very similar concepts but still completely different.

Link to post
3 hours ago, rodheadlee said:

Sorry to take so long to answer you. I've been busy. I think the news is slanted calling riots protest.

What government policies do you think have a negative effect on the black communities? My wife has it been a loan underwriter for 30 years until she retired. She always went out of her way to make sure that low-income and people of color could qualify for a home loan if at all possible. I personally just don't see government policies having a negative effect on any one communtiy intentionally.

BWAHAHAHAHHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! LOL!!!!!

RpaLC87-SDH5fdWoTFwuYlGEWfE8Vi_OpgKq-FD2

I appreciate your desire to see the good in people and institutions but it is going way too far. If you want a more personalized example for this board imagine someone saying the bolded in regards to the Missouri Extermination Order.

If you want some light reading on the subject enjoy: https://www.amazon.com/Color-Law-Forgotten-Government-Segregated/dp/1631494538/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=the+color+of+law&qid=1605208562&sr=8-1

Or look up Romney's dad who tried to work against discriminatory housing laws with Vice President Agnew's support until Nixon shut him down.

Have a good laugh at a Supreme Court decision that struck down laws in the 1900s forbidding Blacks from living in certain neighborhoods not because it was discriminatory against them but because it hindered white property owner's ability to sell their property. We got rid of explicit racism (mostly) so now it is hidden in other forms. You have gated all-white communities with strict laws about who can move in. You still to this day have campaigns designed to drive minorities out of "good" neighborhoods and of course you have some people trying to make political hay about racial equality rules causing the destruction of the suburbs.

I get wanting to believe racism is over. I do. It is just not and pretending that governments and people have gotten beyond it is exacerbating the problem.

  • Like 1
Link to post
15 hours ago, Vanguard said:

By now we're all familiar with the WaPo stats indicating that in 2019 about 10-20 unarmed black men were shot and killed by police officers. This number includes those men who brandished what was thought to be a firearm. When accounting for this, the number goes well into the low single digit range of Black men shot and killed who were without a firearm on their person and who did not provoke a lethal response from the police department. This in my estimation is far from a genocide on black men and especially when you consider the 10s (100s?) of millions of police contacts made each year. So much of the reporting and the response from a significant segment of the public over the past year disregards this context. Additionally and as I'm sure we're in agreement on, in those incidents when black men were literally in possession of a lethal weapon, the police are usually accused of irresponsible behavior if not outright racism. In other words, the accusations are context-less (read: Michael Brown).

BLM and other like-minded organizations have affirmed this alleged wanton killing of black men by police officers is so egregious that the number would qualify as genocidal. This is their affirmation. If it is yours, then it is incumbent on you to show the stats of such a claim. At that point we can discuss context further. What is your position?  

 

Quote

The Post’s database documents fatal police shootings that have happened since Jan. 1, 2015. The Post said its team relies “primarily on news accounts, social media postings and police reports” in addition to its own reporting.

This data does not include “deaths of people in police custody, fatal shootings by off-duty officers or non-shooting deaths.”

The Post’s data shows police fatally shot 13 unarmed Black men in 2019, five more people than Kirk claimed. Also, police fatally shot an unarmed Black woman, Atatiana Jefferson, 28, on Oct. 12 in Fort Worth Texas. But the Post's database covers only shootings. It does not include deaths caused by beating, tasering or vehicles. George Floyd died in police custody after a police officer knelt on his neck for several minutes, which would not have been included in the Post’s data set.

The Post regularly updates the database as information about cases is released, so it’s possible it showed eight unarmed Black male deaths instead of 13 at the time Kirk posted the video. It’s also possible the number will continue to rise as more information about deaths in 2019 comes to light.

Mapping Police Violence, a crowdsourced database that includes deaths by vehicle, tasering or beating in addition to shootings, estimates 25 police killings of unarmed Black men in 2019.  USA Today

 

Edited by Thinking
Link to post
6 hours ago, stemelbow said:

I support BLM because I maintain there is too much imbalance.  There is too much ugly legacy left over.  

And how can you maintain your position without facts and statistics?

Clearly the movement isn't all about dogma. 

Link to post
9 hours ago, stemelbow said:

I still think this topic is far more complicated then a few stats selected, as if conveniently, to favor what's become a rather political issue (not meant in a condemning way here, since I too can only supply a few stats and draw a conclusion).  I linked John McWhorter earlier and I pointed out how BLM itself, and this massive political push, has become very religious-like.  One reason I'd maintain it's very religious is there is really no room to discuss reality and facts as a whole.  If people point out certain realities it is seen as racist, wherein the religious-like bullies come out to silence and shame.    

I’d say it is religious- (rather, ideological-) like, and probably even deeper than that for most people, because racial (and the other side of the same coin, non-racial) socialization runs so deep. Blacks are socialized to be aware of the disadvantages and dangers imposed by their skin color, and to navigate a system devised by whites. Whites are socialized to deny their race because that would expose the moral problem of their inherited security and advantage accumulated at the expense of those who were brought into the system to support it and then prevented from sharing it.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
3 hours ago, pogi said:

And how can you maintain your position without facts and statistics?

Clearly the movement isn't all about dogma. 

Are those things really necessary to maintain a position?... some people may not even bother to ask.

Link to post
6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

BWAHAHAHAHHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! LOL!!!!!

RpaLC87-SDH5fdWoTFwuYlGEWfE8Vi_OpgKq-FD2

I appreciate your desire to see the good in people and institutions but it is going way too far. If you want a more personalized example for this board imagine someone saying the bolded in regards to the Missouri Extermination Order.

If you want some light reading on the subject enjoy: https://www.amazon.com/Color-Law-Forgotten-Government-Segregated/dp/1631494538/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=the+color+of+law&qid=1605208562&sr=8-1

Or look up Romney's dad who tried to work against discriminatory housing laws with Vice President Agnew's support until Nixon shut him down.

Have a good laugh at a Supreme Court decision that struck down laws in the 1900s forbidding Blacks from living in certain neighborhoods not because it was discriminatory against them but because it hindered white property owner's ability to sell their property. We got rid of explicit racism (mostly) so now it is hidden in other forms. You have gated all-white communities with strict laws about who can move in. You still to this day have campaigns designed to drive minorities out of "good" neighborhoods and of course you have some people trying to make political hay about racial equality rules causing the destruction of the suburbs.

I get wanting to believe racism is over. I do. It is just not and pretending that governments and people have gotten beyond it is exacerbating the problem.

Some towns here in Texas still have parades where citizens march with Confederate flags and honor Confederate generals while the community cheers them on. I’m sure that kind of behavior makes people of color feel oh so welcome and safe - not.

Edited by Peacefully
  • Like 1
Link to post
6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

BWAHAHAHAHHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! LOL!!!!!

RpaLC87-SDH5fdWoTFwuYlGEWfE8Vi_OpgKq-FD2

I appreciate your desire to see the good in people and institutions but it is going way too far. If you want a more personalized example for this board imagine someone saying the bolded in regards to the Missouri Extermination Order.

If you want some light reading on the subject enjoy: https://www.amazon.com/Color-Law-Forgotten-Government-Segregated/dp/1631494538/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=the+color+of+law&qid=1605208562&sr=8-1

Or look up Romney's dad who tried to work against discriminatory housing laws with Vice President Agnew's support until Nixon shut him down.

Have a good laugh at a Supreme Court decision that struck down laws in the 1900s forbidding Blacks from living in certain neighborhoods not because it was discriminatory against them but because it hindered white property owner's ability to sell their property. We got rid of explicit racism (mostly) so now it is hidden in other forms. You have gated all-white communities with strict laws about who can move in. You still to this day have campaigns designed to drive minorities out of "good" neighborhoods and of course you have some people trying to make political hay about racial equality rules causing the destruction of the suburbs.

I get wanting to believe racism is over. I do. It is just not and pretending that governments and people have gotten beyond it is exacerbating the problem.

I guess, but the thing is it's not like that in So Cal. When we bought a new house in a cul de sac our immediate neighbors were black. We had Bible study together with one couple and partied with the other couple. This was way back in 1978. I'm certain we haven't gone backwards. 

I understand the police Thing too. I used to have hair almost down to my waist and got pulled over frequently for driving while being a hippie. You just got to do what they say and everything will be cool. Back when we used to be hippies it was a felony to possess marijuana so it was no like thing.

Link to post
23 hours ago, Calm said:

Doesn't have to be hate or love...lots of other motivations in there, good and bad.  There are also numerous people involved. I think it unwise to judge either police or BLM as monolithic. 
 

When the shooting occurred in Provo. one leader of the march was on tape talking about the shooting as if it was a good thing imo, he would be able to get many more down to protest while another not only encouraged the protestors to disperse peacefully, but worked to get witnesses to report to the police what they saw or recorded. 

And please don't feel you need to defend yourself...I am just presenting another way to look at this...how I see it, I don't require anyone else to agree with me, as nice as that would be.

Thanks cal. Much appreciated.

 

Edited by 3DOP
Link to post
3 hours ago, Peacefully said:

Some towns here in Texas still have parades where citizens march with Confederate flags and honor Confederate generals while the community cheers them on. I’m sure that kind of behavior makes people of color feel oh so welcome and safe - not.

I'm not sure what that means.  I'm from Texas. Towns named after Confederate generals.  I think it is a natural attempt to stick it to the man rather than be racist. 

Link to post
2 minutes ago, Bob Crockett said:

I'm not sure what that means.  I'm from Texas. Towns named after Confederate generals.  I think it is a natural attempt to stick it to the man rather than be racist. 

I’m also born and raised in Texas. Not sure what you mean.

Link to post
1 hour ago, Peacefully said:

I’m also born and raised in Texas. Not sure what you mean.

My mother's explanation for the Civil War was that it was not about slavery but about states' rights. Most folks in the south believe that canard today. The glorification of the Civil War today is not about slavery.  Or so the warped thinking goes. 

Link to post
57 minutes ago, Bob Crockett said:

My mother's explanation for the Civil War was that it was not about slavery but about states' rights. Most folks in the south believe that canard today. The glorification of the Civil War today is not about slavery.  Or so the warped thinking goes. 

Oh yes, I used to be from the states’ rights school of thinking. “The Lost Cause” as it were. My thinking has changed dramatically over  the years. The war was about holding onto our “peculiar institution” plain and simple, and should not be glorified, but rather studied so it never happens again. Put the statues of Confederate leaders where they belong - in museums, and use their stories as a cautionary tale. Retire the stars and bars. It shouldn’t be displayed any more than the Nazi flag should be displayed. How can our black brothers and sisters ever feel at home in a land where we still hold onto these vestiges of oppression? 

Edited by Peacefully
  • Upvote 2
Link to post
11 hours ago, Peacefully said:

Some towns here in Texas still have parades where citizens march with Confederate flags and honor Confederate generals while the community cheers them on. I’m sure that kind of behavior makes people of color feel oh so welcome and safe - not.

I know, it is a national embarrassment. Why so much honor for traitors? Where are the Benedict Arnold parades? Why does the Confederacy get a pass?

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
11 hours ago, rodheadlee said:

I guess, but the thing is it's not like that in So Cal. When we bought a new house in a cul de sac our immediate neighbors were black. We had Bible study together with one couple and partied with the other couple. This was way back in 1978. I'm certain we haven't gone backwards. 

I understand the police Thing too. I used to have hair almost down to my waist and got pulled over frequently for driving while being a hippie. You just got to do what they say and everything will be cool. Back when we used to be hippies it was a felony to possess marijuana so it was no like thing.

It being okay in one area does not mean it was okay everywhere. Also, I doubt you got the full “black guy” treatment while being a hippie. Not all cops even do it but a disgustingly high number do.

Link to post
6 hours ago, Bob Crockett said:

My mother's explanation for the Civil War was that it was not about slavery but about states' rights. Most folks in the south believe that canard today. The glorification of the Civil War today is not about slavery.  Or so the warped thinking goes. 

Yeah, it was a myth. The “winners write history” thing is not always true. When someone brings up the war being about state’s rights I give them the speeches of the founders of the confederacy and encourage them to sit down and read the Confederate Constitution. The latter has no allowances for state’s rights beyond the US constitution except for a weird bit about their federal government not making improvements designed to facilitate commerce in any state (except for nautical ones) and requiring the President and VP to be from different states. There was no provision for secession which would have seemed very pressing if the prime goal was state’s rights considering how the Confederacy came to be.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
11 hours ago, rodheadlee said:

I guess, but the thing is it's not like that in So Cal. When we bought a new house in a cul de sac our immediate neighbors were black. We had Bible study together with one couple and partied with the other couple. This was way back in 1978. I'm certain we haven't gone backwards. 

Something to consider here is to compare the neighborhood's physical and demographic situation (including race and socioeconomics) in relation to other neighborhoods.

Link to post
On 11/12/2020 at 8:37 AM, stemelbow said:

I still think this topic is far more complicated then a few stats selected, as if conveniently, to favor what's become a rather political issue (not meant in a condemning way here, since I too can only supply a few stats and draw a conclusion).  I linked John McWhorter earlier and I pointed out how BLM itself, and this massive political push, has become very religious-like.  One reason I'd maintain it's very religious is there is really no room to discuss reality and facts as a whole.  If people point out certain realities it is seen as racist, wherein the religious-like bullies come out to silence and shame.  

When people come by our house or walk past when they see our BLM signage and support, they think something other than about black lives counting, particularly if they disagree with me politically.  They think of politics and feel compelled to respond as if they are hurt by our support.  And the big issue is, they agree with the stated message--black lives do matter.  Of course they think Black lives matter.  The problem, as I see it is, we are simply fighting each other's dogma on this topic.  It is religion all over again.  There is little depth of consideration nor appeal to reality beyond that type of reality that suits one's agenda.    

As it is, more black people kill others than any other race in America.  It's an uncomfortable reality.  How is it that out of the 13 percent of our population we see more than 50% of the murders being committed?  The rate is astounding.  Pointing out the reality is uncomfortable.  We know the history, at least to some elementary level degree.  We know that there was slavery and that racism persisted, that policies were enacted and that the country was heavily segregated.  We can easily point out how the history has negatively carried on legacy of problems.  But its complicated.  Pointing out, btw, that most murders are committed by those who are black is also pointing out that most murder victims are black.  Its clearly frustrating to some that people read endorsement of ugly hideous racism into political opposition.  Its feeling, to me, exactly like religion telling people that "heretics" or "apostates" are evil or inspired by evil.  

For me why does McWhorter's point ring so clearly?  Because religion is near impossible to have a good honest, un-emotional discussion about.  BLM is about the same.  I support BLM because I maintain there is too much imbalance.  There is too much ugly legacy left over.  

There is no way to communicate that African Americans (or minorities in general) suffer disproportionate mistreatment in the United States without offending almost everyone. They have tried many different approaches and they all failed to get by the real problem with the discussion: https://www.amazon.com/White-Fragility-People-About-Racism/dp/0807047414/ref=sr_1_3?dchild=1&keywords=White+fragility&qid=1605278250&sr=8-3

There is no rhetorical way around it. The very problem existing hurts people’s feelings.

Edited by The Nehor
  • Upvote 3
Link to post
16 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

There is no way to communicate that African Americans (or minorities in general) suffer disproportionate mistreatment in the United States without offending almost everyone. They have tried many different approaches and they all failed to get by the real problem with the discussion: https://www.amazon.com/White-Fragility-People-About-Racism/dp/0807047414/ref=sr_1_3?dchild=1&keywords=White+fragility&qid=1605278250&sr=8-3

There is no rhetorical way around it. The very problem existing hurts people’s feelings.

True.  But it's not just white fragility.  It's fragility all around.  To point out that murderers in this country are far and away disproportionately black is too an uncomfortable truth that only offends almost everyone.  Pointing out the black on black murder is an offense, as well.  Those murder rates change, I'd wager, as soon as we dispel the perception of imbalance (not that there is not imbalance).  Preaching a religion of anti-racism might contribute though, so I maintain.  

Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...