It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Kashai
Skin color has nothing to do with intelligence or behavior, it is simply a means related to survival (in regards to DNA] to deal with environmental conditions... Clearly there is an absurdity apparent, how is it possible that 36 million out of 313 million people are a majority in prisons? Especially given that the genome project identified skin color are one of the more irrelevant factors in the human condition (in relation to DNA components). There is absolutely no reason to suggest that simply based upon physical structure, that blacks should behave worst or for that matter better than any other race.
It must relate to how certain people are treated.....
agreed and it would be equally helpful if both ppl and da POTUS would stop with the race-based ANYTHING ... it's wrong, it's always been wrong and now is the worst time ever to implement more of it.
I just want people to stop ignoring history and getting offended if someone mentions it.
Originally posted by Honor93
reply to post by Kashai
i could give a rats pattuti what the Queen will or won't allow, this isn't England.
racism sponsored by our leaders is the worst form of racism, imho.
philosophy has everything to do with it as it is what influenced these opinions in the first place.
to my knowledge, DNA hasn't proven any such behavioral characteristics.
i think you are reaching for the stars there.
as i could be proven wrong, please provide links.
this is nothing but hyperbole you speak of ... as many of the regions of which you speak have not recovered from previous natural disasters.
and yes, i've survived my own ... 1977 Johnstown Flood (a historic one)
besides, since when are "christians" an individual ethnicity or a specific racial group in any way?
Originally posted by MidnightTide
reply to post by RealSpoke
Well, everyone should be able to acknowledge that slavery was part of United States history (regardless of what side you are on) that effects them to this day, but where do we go from there?
How do you erase the social and economical problems facing the African American community? To me, there is a blatant glorification of promiscuity, immorality, and criminality.....how to you combat something like that? This culture seems to embedding itself deeper and deeper into the black community every generation.
they DID keep the field even, we are ALL voluntary slaves now. only involuntary slavery/servitude were outlawed ... geez, i wonder why ?? it's just, much like then, some have cut their govt chains and prospered.
Originally posted by cenpuppie
reply to post by Honor93
Nah, i feel Realspook on this. Have you heard of a friend called Jim Crow laws, let's not forget Gerrymandering (but everyone does that) so lets take a look at Segragation, take notice that it lasted until 1964, oh yea.
So yea, the table was slanted, heavily to give Anglo-Saxons the advantage. That's how this generation was able to have what it haves. Have you ever wondered what America would be like it if, once slavery was outlawed, they kept that playing field even?
let's look at PA --> you know, that state that never endorsed slavery.
Not only was colonial Pennsylvania a slave-owning society, but the lives of free blacks in the colony were controlled by law. The restrictions had begun almost with the colony itself. After 1700, when Pennsylvania was not yet 20 years old, blacks, free or slave, were tried in special courts, without the benefit of a jury.
An Act for the better Regulation of Negroes" passed in the 1725-26 session, set especially high penalties for free blacks who harbored runaway slaves or received property stolen from masters. The penalties in such cases were potentially much higher than those applied to whites, and if the considerable fines that might accrue could not be paid, the justices had the power to order a free black person put into servitude
The 1780 act that abolished slavery in Pennsylvania freed no slaves outright, and relics of slavery may have lingered in the state almost until the Civil War. There were 795 slaves in Pennsylvania in 1810, 211 in 1820, 403 or 386 in 1830 (the count was disputed), and 64 in 1840, the last year census worksheets in the northern states included a line for "slaves."
At celebrations of Independence Day in the early 1830s, an author recalled years later, "part of the day's exercises which the boys took upon themselves was to stone and club colored people out of Independence Square, because ''n-word's had nothing to do with the fourth of July.' "
Free Negroes and Mulattoes cannot entertain, barter or trade with slaves or bound servants in their homes without leave and consent of their master under penalty of fines and whipping
(Sec VII) A minister, pastor, or magistrate who marries a negro to a white is fined £100
If a white cohabits under pretense of being married with a negro the white will be fined 30 shillings or bound out for seven years and the white persons children will be bound out until 31. If a free negro marries a white they become slaves during life. If a free negro commits fornication or adultery with a white they are bound out for 7 years. The white person shall be punished for fornication or adultery under existing law.
i know much more about this history than you do, heck i've lived it nearly 3 times longer
Race-based policies, both then and NOW are not how this country is supposed to be operating.
this is such bunk that it's difficult to decide where to start.
That culture started in the 90s with the emergence of gangsta rap. But it was different than it is today, simply because those guys started rapping so they wouldn't have to do that ish, that's why they made albums. Now it's a minstrel show. You have the rare outbreak talent, but now it's specially chosen and groomed individuals that perpetuate this lifestyle, simply because it sells, to white people!
hahaha, aren't you funny and this isn't the topic of this thread, either.
Heh heh.. no.
What a minute that's why the south seeded in the first place! All of the those new states where entering the Union, free states the majority if not all if i recall correctly and they knew if more antislavery states join the union then congress would have the veto power to outlaw slavery!
That's what was their concern was. Otherwise they would have to pay to have someone pick their crops, ha! They just get migrant workers now, cheaper