It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

DOJ to white male bullying victims: Tough luck

page: 2
22
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 08:46 PM
link   
reply to post by SpeachM1litant
 


Bull? I have been a straight white person for my entire 27
Years and I get bullied and walked all over for simply being a good kind person.
I was bullied for being christian by supposed christians, I have been bullied for my name
I have been bullied for being calm and smart...

You name it. Bullying is just a fact of life for some of us and we shouldn't be
relying on the fed... We should be strong and vigilant for ourselves
And the future. the fed should worry about protecting our borders only.

I will help to defend the meek. Don't legislate to trap us good people into a corner.

take it learn from it grow strong and forgive peoples ignorance and weakness
Which comes from their family.




posted on Mar, 18 2011 @ 10:16 PM
link   
There wasting the tax payers time and money with more useless bills. Most of these kids are generally just uneducated whether rich or poor. Try investing more money into better education and the problem will go away i guarantee it. The problems i had when i was in school was entirely because of this. Why can i get along with educated black, hispanic, asian pick your race but i cant get along with the retard white hillbilly or the wanna be latino gangster.



posted on Mar, 19 2011 @ 12:12 AM
link   
I am a staunch social liberal (tree-hugger and all that) but I have always been against hate crime laws. I even chose this as a topic for a college finals essay. There is absolutely no evidence that hate crime laws deter such acts. I am mostly opposed to its apparent violation of the Constitution's equal protection laws. To say that any kid but a white kid has protection under the law from bullying is against the Constitution, imo.



posted on Mar, 19 2011 @ 12:24 AM
link   
A lot of Bullying is done for reasons other than denigrating the race, sex or sexual orientation of the target. A bill like this does little to help those who are bullied for the other reasons. Why are white males conveniently excluded from these protections?
edit on 19/3/2011 by Dark Ghost because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2011 @ 02:26 AM
link   
reply to post by dolphinfan
 


For the love of God, can someone just fire Holders ass and get him out. Everything he has touched has turned into a quivering mass of indecision.

Is it really that much to ask that our Attorney General actually do his job?



posted on Mar, 19 2011 @ 02:34 AM
link   
reply to post by James1982
 


You think it is ridiculous for the DOJ to be involved in school bullying. Really.

Why don't you ask parents whose kids have killed themselves because of school bullying?

School bullying is a huge crime and it leaves so many damaged people.

What about white computer nerd boys? They get bullied a lot.

I think the DOJ needs to include all races in there.



posted on Mar, 19 2011 @ 03:18 AM
link   
Isn't excluding caucasians, in itself a violation of federal law? Caucasian is a race, yet it is excluded soley because of its classfication.

I see bias, hypocracy, and gross incompetence.

aka Obama Administration.



posted on Mar, 19 2011 @ 04:20 AM
link   
Hmm...while it does seem unfair to say the least...in all honesty...If you're a white male growing up in the Western

hemisphere...You're on easy street man. Please.



posted on Mar, 19 2011 @ 04:24 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Irritation with the DOJ aside, the kids civil rights were not violated. He was assaultd, which is the jurisdicition of the local agencies. The FBI has no jurisidiction.

And I still maintain Holder needs to go.



posted on Mar, 19 2011 @ 08:13 AM
link   
reply to post by dolphinfan
 


My high school bully gave me plenty, it was a year and a half of pure hell.
I introduced him to his wife. His 40th anniversary is next year. "Revenge is
Mine, saith the Lord". Yeah? Flag and star. No prisoners.

"President of what?" Snake Pliskin



posted on Mar, 19 2011 @ 08:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jinglelord
Bullying is not a problem, bullying in school is a gift. It teaches kids strength, it teaches them how to prepare for the real world. If it becomes violent then local authorities can step in on assault and battery charges which are illegal across the board.


I'm going off-topic addressing your statement here a bit, but pardon me if I say you must not be a parent of a bullied child. I am. Bullying in schools today is not like it was when I was growing up, when you could actually put down a bully and the teachers would clap you on the back and say "good job", while sending the bully off to bad kid school. The teachers knew who the bad kids were and they only punished the aggressor in any fight.

While the teachers and staff still know who the problem children are, they are powerless to step in and do anything because today's pansy society says to turn the other cheek. My child is REQUIRED to be a punching bag because he will be suspended for defending himself. That's real winner of an idea: let's teach kids that you are to stand there and be pummeled, possibly broken, because "the bully is a person, too." My sig says it all: pity for the guilty is treason to the innocent.

/TOA



posted on Mar, 19 2011 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by catwhoknowsplusone
reply to post by James1982
 


You think it is ridiculous for the DOJ to be involved in school bullying. Really.

Why don't you ask parents whose kids have killed themselves because of school bullying?

School bullying is a huge crime and it leaves so many damaged people.

What about white computer nerd boys? They get bullied a lot.

I think the DOJ needs to include all races in there.


The kids killed themselves because they weren't given the proper love and strength and wisdom from their parents.

IT ALL goes back to the family.



posted on Mar, 19 2011 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by dude69
Hmm...while it does seem unfair to say the least...in all honesty...If you're a white male growing up in the Western

hemisphere...You're on easy street man. Please.


BULL.

Stop you're selfish judgmental crap. "You don't know what I been through! More than you!"

Not one person on this planet knows fully what another has been through.

Dang spoiled, unwise people.



posted on Mar, 19 2011 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Old American

Originally posted by Jinglelord
Bullying is not a problem, bullying in school is a gift. It teaches kids strength, it teaches them how to prepare for the real world. If it becomes violent then local authorities can step in on assault and battery charges which are illegal across the board.


I'm going off-topic addressing your statement here a bit, but pardon me if I say you must not be a parent of a bullied child. I am. Bullying in schools today is not like it was when I was growing up, when you could actually put down a bully and the teachers would clap you on the back and say "good job", while sending the bully off to bad kid school. The teachers knew who the bad kids were and they only punished the aggressor in any fight.

While the teachers and staff still know who the problem children are, they are powerless to step in and do anything because today's pansy society says to turn the other cheek. My child is REQUIRED to be a punching bag because he will be suspended for defending himself. That's real winner of an idea: let's teach kids that you are to stand there and be pummeled, possibly broken, because "the bully is a person, too." My sig says it all: pity for the guilty is treason to the innocent.

/TOA


Completely know how you feel.. except that if you are the target, you are being tested for your patience. Not your heroics.

If you see someone else getting hurt, you should ALWAYS defend the weaker.

Governments should but out, I agree, but dont turn your child into an ego-maniac one day.

That's what happens to most people who put down their bully instead of actively forgiving in the process.

Unless your life is one the line, take the hit and laugh about it. No one child is more important than the other... they have so much growing and changing to do.



posted on Mar, 19 2011 @ 09:24 AM
link   
reply to post by TarzanBeta
 


whatever
edit on 19-3-2011 by dude69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 19 2011 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by TarzanBeta
Unless your life is one the line, take the hit and laugh about it. No one child is more important than the other... they have so much growing and changing to do.


One hit? Maybe. But it's never only one. It wasn't when I was bullied, and it isn't now. When a bully knows you won't defend yourself they'll keep going until someone stops him or you have been put down. Then they'll start it up again. When it was me, I finally adopted the "meet force with overtly unequal force". I wasn't bullied again after 7th grade. Kids now get to lose school days and learning opportunities when they decide to stop getting beaten every day. That equitable, right?

/TOA



posted on Mar, 19 2011 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by totalmetal

Originally posted by SpeachM1litant

Originally posted by totalmetal

Originally posted by SpeachM1litant
Christian, White males don't have to worry to much, they aren't on the recieving end of bullying too often, but I'm sure if they were racially or sexually discriminated against they would also be included.


Where'd you get that factoid from? I'm not trying to be rude or anything, but from what I've seen it can't be true. Bullying happens to everyone.


Sorry, I meant racial and sexual discrimination. Not bullying per se.


White males do undergo racial discrimination. It's more common than you may think. Some people call it reverse racism, but it's just regular racism... I've been through it myself... In fact I was once in a place where I was literally surrounded by racism against whites, some of it even perpetuated by other whites.


Anti-White racism is nothing short of an epidemic these days.
Why is it that so many people absolutely refuse to acknowledge its existence AT ALL?



posted on Mar, 19 2011 @ 11:32 AM
link   
A number of replies in this post are missing a huge point -

The Civil Rights Act does not protect only blacks. It protects ALL races. All races, creeds, and religions. Go back and read it. No where does it say "only blacks".

Go to the source, oh naysayers and detractors, and tell us what part of this effort you have a problem with: The Civil Rights Division Releases Anti-Bullying Video as Part of National “It Gets Better” Project or It Gets Better

I can't see ANYWHERE in these press releases the statement that "no white males" will be protected.

What I did see in the original source (Washington Times) and from the OP is a overblown and yes, RACIST reaction to the inclusion of the "Civil rights Act" in this DOJ effort. Apparently anything that mentions the Civil Rights Act is to be viewed as EXCLUDING all white males.

If you have that much of a problem with the Civil Rights Act go back and review your history, especially of the antebellum south and the Jim Crow laws afterward.

Even though the Civil Rights Act was created to put an end to black oppression, the language of the act ensures that ALL people, black, white, Indian, gay, lesbian, Catholic, Jewish, etc., etc., etc., are protected.


If you see this "It gets better" DOJ effort to end school bullying as racist, then that's a reflection on you, my friend.

Personally I think school bullying should be dealt with at the local level. But we should realize not all schools/districts can deal with problems like this, especially if the bullying appears to be more culturally ingrained and institutionalized.



posted on Mar, 19 2011 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Blackmarketeer
 


You are incorrect. The Civil Rights Act is landmark legislation because it is based upon the premise that the US society was inherently racist and that blacks were systematically being denied access to the benefits of society. The act gave blacks federal standing under the act to seek remedy for matters of discrimination. In so doing, blacks were categorized as a protected class of citizens. Over time other groups have been added as classes of citizens protected under the act. Women, elderly (over 40), sexual minorities, religious minorities and via the ADA, disabled people. All of these folks can seek a federal remedy under the act. Non-protected citizens can not.

For example were a black owner of an apartment complex refuse to rent to a non protected individual, that individual can seek remedy under state and local law but he has no standing in federal court under the civil rights act. Were the matter reversed, the black can first seek remedy through those same courts and if unsuccessful can seek federal assistance in the matter. He can seek federal assistance because he has standing under the act where as the non protected individual does not.

This is the case because at its core, the act is predicated on the assumption that certain folks need special assistance to battle the institutional injustices within the society. The act expressly excludes non-protected citizens.

Therefore by indicating that they will institute this anti-bullying law under the unbrella of the civil rights act, by definition means that the federal government will not pursue cases brought by unprotected citizens. By designing the act in this matter, they are legally unable to pursue those cases because nonprotected individuals have no standing.

The only unprotected group of people in this country are again, white, straight, Christian, under 40 males. Interesting that a law that was meant to provide a remedy for minorities now excludes a minority, but thats how it works.



posted on Mar, 19 2011 @ 01:12 PM
link   
It's you who don't understand the Civil Rights Act.

Protected class does not mean specific non-white races are protected while whites are not.

Here is a breakdown on what the "protected classes" are:


Protected class is a term used in United States anti-discrimination law. The term describes characteristics or factors which can not be targeted for discrimination and harassment. The following characteristics are considered "Protected Classes" and persons cannot be discriminated against based on these characteristics:

* Race - Federal: Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Civil Rights Act of 1866
* Color - Federal: Civil Rights Act of 1964
* Religion - Federal: Civil Rights Act of 1964
* National origin - Federal: Civil Rights Act of 1964
* Age (40 and over) - Federal: Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967
* Sex - Federal: Equal Pay Act of 1963 & Civil Rights Act of 1964
* Familial status (Housing, cannot discriminate for having children, exception for senior housing)
* Sexual orientation (in some jurisdictions and not in others)
* Gender identity (in some jurisdictions and not in others)
* Disability status - Federal: Vocational Rehabilitation and Other Rehabilitation Services of 1973 & Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
* Veteran status - Federal Vietnam Era Veterans Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974
* Genetic information - Federal: Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act


From wikipedia

So "race" is a protected class, in other words you can't discriminate based on race.
"Color" is another protected class, you can't discriminate against someone based on their color.
Whites are a race and a color just as blacks are.

Age is another protected class, you can't discriminate against anyone older than 40 just because of their age.
Sex, another protected class, you can't discriminate against someone based on their sex.

Your claim that anyone who is a white male under 40 is not a "protected class" is utter nonsense. They fit 3 of those classes (race, color, and sex) right off the bat, and possibly more if they happen to be disabled, of a specific religion, gay, or even a veteran.

It seems to me you have a gross misunderstanding of what the Civil Rights Act is, and are transferring that misunderstanding into an attack on this DOJ program to stop or discourage school bullying.

Based on the Civil Rights Act and the DOJ's program "It gets better", a white kid who has gender issues being bullied by jocks would be protected. A white jock in a largely black school would be protected. A black kid bullied by white skinheads would have the same level of protection as a white kid bullied by crips or bloods.
edit on 19-3-2011 by Blackmarketeer because: (no reason given)







 
22
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join