Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Calzaer · 06-23-2003, 11:26 PM

I was going to say something along the lines of "Yes, Americans DO have the right to riot, since it's a form of political rebellion against a corrupt government, and the Bill of Rights was crafted especially to cater to the right of the populace to rebel... as well as several founding father quotes that also convey that idea."

Unfortunately, I think I'd get flamed, so I'm going to sit in the corner and watch this turn into some stupid "race" thing when it should be a socioeconomic and/or unequal protection thing.

Derec · 06-23-2003, 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Loren Pechtel
The reason for it is that drinking age 21 cuts down the number of drunk drivers on the road.

Does it really? Any reliable statistics? Maybe between countries with lower drinking ages and USA. Also what about people 21 and older who drink and drive?
Young people need to be tought responsible use of alcohol, instead of prohibiting and tabuizing it outright.
Restricting the rights of a whole demographics to marginally increase safety (if at all) is not a good tradeoff. If we want to curb drunk driving than drinking responisbly should be advocated, not making drinking illegal.

UMoC

Derec · 06-23-2003, 11:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Calzaer
I was going to say something along the lines of "Yes, Americans DO have the right to riot, since it's a form of political rebellion against a corrupt government, and the Bill of Rights was crafted especially to cater to the right of the populace to rebel... as well as several founding father quotes that also convey that idea."

If the rioters restricted themselves to destroying their property and property of other willing participants then you would have a point.

When they start attacking other people and destroy their property it violates their rights from the BoR. So it is neither morally right nor legal.

UMoC

conkermaniac · 06-23-2003, 11:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by UglyManOnCampus

When they start attacking other people and destroy their property it violates their rights from the BoR. So it is neither morally right nor legal.

UMoC

Yes I agree that the riots were wrong, but to portray the blacks as savages with nothing better to do but to cause trouble is also wrong.

Derec · 06-24-2003, 12:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by conkermaniac
Yes I agree that the riots were wrong, but to portray the blacks as savages with nothing better to do but to cause trouble is also wrong.

Agreed, but exactly who did any such thing?

UMoC

conkermaniac · 06-24-2003, 12:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by UglyManOnCampus
Agreed, but exactly who did any such thing?

UMoC

I kinda got that impression as I read that article. It seemed to ignore the point that there were many past injustices committed against these blacks.

Conker

kaii2 · 06-24-2003, 02:45 AM

Let's look at some real issues. Blacks lag behind in pretty much every way imaginable in this country. You name it they're at the bottom. Unless you want to count sports or something. I know that that sounds really racist, but it's the truth. I firmly believe that ending the patronizing and equally racist government programs would be the best thing that America could do for Black people long term. Blacks have every opportunity today to do well, yet they lag behind. Even Blacks from wealthy families have lower test scores than their white counterparts. Unlike most Americans, I don't believe that Blacks are genetically inferior. (If America didn't truly believe this, they wouldn't treat Blacks like they are retarded). Before the civil rights movement, Blacks were controlled by the government. Now 30 years later, they are still controlled. All I want is for the government to take it's stinking hands off of them. It was the problem then and it's still the problem now.

Monkeybot · 06-24-2003, 05:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by livius drusus
Compared to the reasons white people riot, such as beer, or possibly the high cost of snack foods, I'd say the people of Benton Harbor have a far clearer understanding of what matters in life.

Ooooooh.... great point, livius. My university had some pretty severe group violence going on my freshman year after we WON a basketball game against our longtime rival. Bonfires, property destroyed, students running amok...

Lestat de Lioncourt · 06-24-2003, 07:05 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by UglyManOnCampus
The point Lestat is making is simply this: It was not a race issue, it was made such by the rioters and race-baiters.
It was simply a criminal fleeing from the police and getting his ass killed, not an instance of police brutality or otherwise unfair treatment towards or anything like that.

Thank you!

Lestat

Lestat de Lioncourt · 06-24-2003, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by smugg
Oh, and, Lestat, the Watts riots were not 'after Rodney King'. Get an encyclopedia or take a class why don't you?

My my, aren't we the pretentious one

I'm fully aware of the Watts riots of 65. Of course it happened long before King. I was merely killing two birds with one stone by referring to 'Watts' in that statement seeing as they occurred in virtually the same area (i.e., Los Angeles). The underlining point being "deja vu," which obviously went over your head...and you have the audacity to tell me to get an encyclopedia or take a class

Oh, and as for your ignorant reparations comment I'll leave you with this quote:

"In the 36 years since the passage of the original Civil Rights Act of 1964, trillions of dollars in federal transfer payments, welfare payments, racial job quotas, and race-based federal contract guarantees have already been paid to so-called "historically disadvantaged minorities" in the U.S.

With all these preferential programs and dollars, why haven't the so-called "disadvantaged minorities" been able to compete in American society by now? It is because Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and Kweisi Mfume preach "perpetual victimhood" to their skin-deep followers."

---Editor, Adversity.net

Lestat

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-23-2003, 11:26 PM	#31
Calzaer Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Ohio Posts: 2,762	I was going to say something along the lines of "Yes, Americans DO have the right to riot, since it's a form of political rebellion against a corrupt government, and the Bill of Rights was crafted especially to cater to the right of the populace to rebel... as well as several founding father quotes that also convey that idea." Unfortunately, I think I'd get flamed, so I'm going to sit in the corner and watch this turn into some stupid "race" thing when it should be a socioeconomic and/or unequal protection thing.

06-24-2003, 02:45 AM	#37
kaii2 Banned Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Beijing Posts: 147	Let's look at some real issues. Blacks lag behind in pretty much every way imaginable in this country. You name it they're at the bottom. Unless you want to count sports or something. I know that that sounds really racist, but it's the truth. I firmly believe that ending the patronizing and equally racist government programs would be the best thing that America could do for Black people long term. Blacks have every opportunity today to do well, yet they lag behind. Even Blacks from wealthy families have lower test scores than their white counterparts. Unlike most Americans, I don't believe that Blacks are genetically inferior. (If America didn't truly believe this, they wouldn't treat Blacks like they are retarded). Before the civil rights movement, Blacks were controlled by the government. Now 30 years later, they are still controlled. All I want is for the government to take it's stinking hands off of them. It was the problem then and it's still the problem now.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.