Black Lives Matter—Do You Agree With Their Philosophy? (page 16)

Anna Marina

Supremacism is the supremacy of one particular group.

Parents are supreme over the life of their unborn child. Hope none of the rioters support abortion.

How's this for a slogan :-

Millions Once Living Will Never Be Born - All Lives Matter.

The Mosaic Law has been done away with and grace through Jesus Christ is available but for the record, the Ultimate Supreme One has not granted the right to take the life of an unborn baby of any colour to anyone:-

(Exodus 21:22-25) . . .If people are fighting and hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise.

Quetzal

@simon

So yes, institutional racism existed until the late 60s and as a result, welfare policies were designed with a racist background.

if these policies where designed with a "racist background", how else should this be understood? I am just quoting what the OP stated.

No. While laws existed that targeted race and denied rights based on race, then there was institutional racism. Literally, it was in the institutions.

If you have racist laws, it is part of your system and part of your institution. There is no point in trying to sugar coat it.

I don't have to point to it, you already did

phoenixrising

There is no institutionalized racism. If anyone is so stupid as to think that these riots were sparked by some cop committing a crime is not smart enough to hold his own milk money. The socialist and communists and others such as Muslims like Ilhan Omar and AOC and the rest of the fools are on the look out for anything they can spin into tearing down America. The lie is being pushed by the fake news. No you have cops on their knees washing some terrorists feet in NC. If I were on the force I would tell them to F off and quit. Have some dignity you idiots.

Simon

Simon, how do you interpret the stats that Quetzal cited?

I interpret the fact that a group that makes up 13% of a total population accounts for +50% of something can be considered "disproportionate".

If we said 13% of a scout group ate over 50% of the cake, I wouldn't imagine it meant everyone had an equal share. Because that would be retarded. The 13% had way more than their fair share wouldn't you agree?

How about if 13% of the police force accounted for more than 50% of black deaths in custody, would you honestly argue that this didn't mean something? Of course you would be arguing that.

The way to tell if you are honest about stats or biased in how you interpret them is to reverse the numbers or the application and see if you still believe the same thing or suddenly want to change how they are interpreted.

Simon

If you have racist laws, it is part of your system and part of your institution. There is no point in trying to sugar coat it.

I don't have to point to it, you already did

Are we living in 1960 or in 2020? Stop wasting everyone's time with gibberish.

Still-out

Thank you for explaining how you'd interpret the stats, Simon.

I'll assume the rest of the "you" statements in your post aren't meant for me.

Quetzal

@phoenixrising

If anyone is so stupid as to think that these riots were sparked by some cop committing a crime is not smart enough to hold his own milk money

I think a lot of people will agree with you that the riots are a sign of deeper issues. The unfortunate killing of the guy is just a trigger.

If I were on the force I would tell them to F off and quit. Have some dignity you idiots.

This makes you sound like an Armchair Export

coalize

Simon

If we said 13% of a scout group ate over 50% of the cake, I wouldn't imagine it meant everyone had an equal share. Because that would be retarded. The 13% had way more than their fair share wouldn't you agree?

You can conclude nothing in fact!

Was the cake the only thing on the table?

Perhaps the 87% another scout ate 100% of the sausage, and it was just the cake left for the 13%! And finally, the 13% ate far more less than the 87%...

As I said before, with only one variable, you can't explain a statistic! Never!

redvip2000

To say that 13% commit 50% of murder is to lump me and the millions of other law abiding black citizens into your murder percentage. Do you not see the statistical fallacy?

Seems you don't understand that statistics don't care about individuality. Statistics is about numbers. The numbers you mentioned are not a fallacy in any way. That's how statistics work.

If say, the numbers say that jihadists are 100% muslim, it does not mean that 100% of muslims are jihadists.

redvip2000

Anyway, the stats of crime in every single country in the world show clearly that crime rate is linked by a very high correlation coefficient to the poverty and not the ethnicity

Every single country in the world is not the US. Why is it that the people insist on trying to ignore the differences between communities and people. It is exactly THAT that prevents the type of introspection that can drive change. Somehow people think that using this type of obfuscation makes them some sort of equality crusader.

The most dangerous areas in each state of the United States are usually black communities. Poverty plays a role but it does not explain it. There are plenty of poor people in the US that not criminals.

It is well known that the driving force for this phenomenon is the breakdown of the family structure in the black community, which started in the 1960's due to government policy. Why not just be honest about this and try to effect change, instead of trying to be a pseudo super hero for the oppressed?

Black Lives Matter—Do You Agree With Their Philosophy?

Share this