36
   

Is dating someone who's a different race okay?

 
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 04:04 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

David wrote:
No, no. . . I was referring to the information u gave me qua the rights of children
.

For a lawyer to ask for a run down of the commons and statutes laws concerning parents having control over their children is similar to a mathematician asking for proof that the sum of all the angles in a plain geometry triangle always equal 180 degrees and implying that there is some question about that being true.

What give with you David?

Hell what law school would not cover such a subject in the first year or so?
No, Bill. Its not like u (below your usually high standards)
to twist the question, substituting a DIFFERENT question,
so that u can give the answer that u wanna give.



This (from page 16) is the post (especially regarding your allegation
of a right to LOVE) to which I requested a reply:

OmSigDAVID wrote:

David wrote:
Americans shoud be courageous and stand up for their freedom.
When u were a boy in Pa.,
BillRM wrote:

Children have the rights to be love
So, according to u,
if a parent does not LOVE a child,
then he or she has VIOLATED a right of that child???
HOW can the child enforce that right, Bill?????
Please explain that.

Please also tell us the SOURCE
of that right, if u don't mind. I'd like to know that.
Is it set forth in a contract, or a statute or WHERE???



BillRM wrote:
and guided to successful adulthood
I don ' t remember being GUIDED. I found my own way to adulthood
and I decided how to be successful. Did my parents VIOLATE
my rights, by failure to guide???? (Note that I did not request nor expect any guidance.)
How coud I have enforced that right of guidance, if thay did not guide me enuf?? Please explain.






BillRM wrote:
by their parents without crazy people telling them on the internet to rebel from that guides long before they are able to stand on their own.
Please PROVE that what u have alleged is true, about those rights, if u don 't mind.
I will look forward, eagerly, to that information.





David

0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 04:24 pm
@BillRM,
David wrote:
No, no. . . I was referring to the information u gave me qua the rights of children.
BillRM wrote:
For a lawyer to ask for a run down of the commons and statutes laws concerning parents having control over their children is similar to a mathematician asking for proof that the sum of all the angles in a plain geometry triangle always equal 180 degrees and implying that there is some question about that being true.

What give with you David?

Hell what law school would not cover such a subject in the first year or so?
Bill, truely, I never heard of ANY law school
that claimed that any person (of any age)
has or ever had a legal right to be LOVED by anyone, which I what YOU explicitly alleged on page 16 Post: # 4,738,086 of this thread.

I am CALLING u on that, challenging u to PROVE
that there has ever existed the legal right to be loved that u have alleged.

In the past, u have ofen been very good
at proving the things that u have alleged. Let 's see u prove this.
I don 't think u can.





David
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 04:34 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:
Here is your information.......but why a lawyer would need it is beyond my understanding.




http://www.forensic-evidence.com/site/Police/school_4th.html

The common law did not confer many rights on minors. As the Court said elsewhere, “Traditionally, at common law, and still today, unemancipated minors lack some of the most fundamental rights of self-determination–including even the right of liberty in its narrow sense, i.e., the right to come and go at will. They are subject, even as to their physical freedom, to the control of their parents or guardians. When parents place minor children in private schools for their education, the teachers and administrators of those schools stand in loco parentis over the children entrusted to them. In fact, the tutor or schoolmaster is the very prototype of that status.” Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton, 515 U.S. 646, 654 (1995). And the power exercised by parents or by those who stand in their place (in loco parentis), like school officials, is not subject to the Fourth Amendment.
What u quoted appears to be NOT a holding, but only collateral comments by way of obiter dicta (not binding)
in a 4th Amendment search and seizure case on real estate owned by a school.

Note, incidentally, that we do not live in common law England
and this case does not purport (insofar as u have quoted it) to analyse how the advent of the US Constitution changed common law rights,
except concerning search and seizure on property not owned by the person whose property was searched and seized.





David
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 05:45 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:

Note, incidentally, that we do not live in common law England


Speak for yourself matey. When did you start using the royal we anyway?
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 07:14 pm
@aidan,
aidan, I'm just curious about how you would feel if this girl wanted to date this boy mainly because of his skin color. I'm not saying that is the case, I'm just playing with a hypothetical in my mind.

Let's say this girl is a rebellious type who is always trying to assert her independence from her mother, or from what her mother wants her to do, or how her mother wants her to dress, or behave, etc. And she knows that her mother is a relatively conservative conformist type who would prefer that she dates boys from groups which are similar to her family--same religion, same socio-economic level, same neighborhood, similar family values, same ethnic/cultural background, and same skin color--because those shared similarities give this mother a feeling of familiarity and consequently increase her level of comfort about the kind of boy her daughter is dating. This mother doesn't dislike or mistrust people of other religions, socio-economic levels, cultural groups, or skin colors, she just doesn't know them well because she herself socializes mainly with people similar to herself on those dimensions because that's the social circle she moves in. So, she'd prefer that her daughter stuck to what she is comfortable with when deciding to date a boy.

This girl goes to a school where she can, in fact, find many potential dating partners who she might be attracted to, and like, and who could easily fit into the familiar parameters her mother prefers for her. But this somewhat rebellious girl decides to opt for the less conventional choice, partly just for the sake of being less conventional, but also to make a strike for independence. She knows this black guy who's very nice and she thinks it would be great, and cool, and unconventional, and liberated, and grown-up to date him--since most of the white girls in her school never dated any black guys--so, in effect, she'd sort of be using him, because of his skin color, to convey some sort of message about herself--and, besides, it would get her mother's goat, so that would be an extra bonus. She's not consciously aware of all of this, she just knows that the idea of dating this particular boy seems very exciting and different, and the more her mother seems to withhold her approval, the more determined she is to date him.

And, this girl might have made the same sort of decision, for the same sort of reasons, if that nice boy, instead of being black, was the only Muslim in a predominantly Christian school, and her mother was an evangelical Christian who preferred that her daughter date other Christians.

Would the fact that the girl's motive for wanting to date the boy was related to the fact of his skin color, and the sorts of reactions that might engender in others, and not just to his personal attributes, or his general physical attractiveness to her, change how you would see her, or her mother?



Eorl
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 07:51 pm
@firefly,
firefly wrote:

aidan, I'm just curious about how you would feel if this girl wanted to date this boy mainly because of his skin color. I'm not saying that is the case, I'm just playing with a hypothetical in my mind.


IMNSHO, If it was because she found that skin colour attractive it would not be a racist thing, if it was because she assumed something else was the case due to him being a member of a group with a particular skin colour, then it would be. (If she found him unattractive due to skin colour alone, also not racist.)

0 Replies
 
Chinspinner
 
  2  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 08:30 pm
In all honesty, different race, different sex, same race, same sex, and this sounds like holier than thou moronic bs, but genuinely fine with it. Edit: I really do not understand people who are not fine with it...
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 09:21 pm
@izzythepush,

OmSigDAVID wrote:
Note, incidentally, that we do not live in common law England
izzythepush wrote:
Speak for yourself matey. When did you start using the royal we anyway?
I 'm a Republican.
I consider this to be an American site,
with a few aliens hanging around.





David
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 09:22 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
A legal right to be loved?

I imply that is some manner?

You got to be kidding me as off hand I could see myself perhaps stating that all children have a birth right to be love or some such but how the hell do you get from such a statement to my claiming some legal doctrine?

Hell how would you even define love as a legal concept that could be enforce in a court of law?

You are being silly here.
Chinspinner
 
  0  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 09:22 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Don't give a toss what you consider it to be. This is liberal England and anything is acceptable.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 09:28 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
Note, incidentally, that we do not live in common law England


So you are stating that courts in the US at both the states and Federal level do not accept common laws on a daily basic?
Rockhead
 
  3  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 09:29 pm
@BillRM,
psssst.

bill...

you're doing it again.



I bet you don't get invited to a lot of parties, huh...
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 09:45 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:
A legal right to be loved?

I imply that is some manner?
U certainly DID, and I am CHALLENGING u on it.
I know that u have proven in the past that u r an intelligent man,
but what u alleged is silly. I want u to either ` PROVE it,
or
to repudiate it and admit that there is not and never has been any such right.





BillRM wrote:
You got to be kidding me
No. I 'll copy and paste here what u said, on page 16, if it comes to that.





BillRM wrote:
as off hand I could see myself perhaps stating that all children have a birth right
to be love or some such but how the hell do you get from such a statement to my claiming some legal doctrine?
Its YOUR idea, on page 16 Post: # 4,738,086,
not mine. I DENY IT.





BillRM wrote:
Hell how would you even define love as a legal concept that could be enforce in a court of law?
I can 't think of any way.
I don't know of any love-o-meters.



Quote:
You are being silly here.
Its not MY idea, its YOURS. I am denying it.

I don 't question your ability to reason,
but when u get too excited u appear to subordinate competent logic to your emotions.





David

BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 09:49 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
No. I 'll copy and paste here what u said, on page 16, if it comes to that.


Please do so as I have no cue at the moment of what the hell you are talking about.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 09:52 pm
@BillRM,

Quote:
No. I 'll copy and paste here what u said, on page 16, if it comes to that.
BillRM wrote:
Please do so as I have no cue at the moment of what the hell you are talking about.
OK, but u can go to page 16 as easily as I can.





David
Rockhead
 
  3  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 09:55 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
or you two bozos could start a new thread about it...
Chinspinner
 
  0  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 09:57 pm
@Rockhead,
think the rednecks need to go back to moron county
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 09:57 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
OK, but u can go to page 16 as easily as I can
.

Sure I can but there is a good chance that I would not be able afterward to figure out what you think imply that there is a legal right to be love statement of mine.

0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 09:58 pm

Bill:
Here is my ANSWER and my CHALLENGE to u,
concerning your allegation of a juvenile right to be loved
( set forth now, for the second time ):

OmSigDAVID wrote:

David wrote:
Americans shoud be courageous and stand up for their freedom.
When u were a boy in Pa.,
BillRM wrote:

Children have the rights to be love
So, according to u,
if a parent does not LOVE a child,
then he or she has VIOLATED a right of that child???
HOW can the child enforce that right, Bill?????
Please explain that.

Please also tell us the SOURCE
of that right, if u don't mind. I'd like to know that.
Is it set forth in a contract, or a statute or WHERE???



BillRM wrote:
and guided to successful adulthood
I don ' t remember being GUIDED. I found my own way to adulthood
and I decided how to be successful. Did my parents VIOLATE
my rights, by failure to guide???? (Note that I did not request nor expect any guidance.)
How coud I have enforced that right of guidance, if thay did not guide me enuf?? Please explain.






BillRM wrote:
by their parents without crazy people telling them on the internet to rebel from that guides long before they are able to stand on their own.
Please PROVE that what u have alleged is true, about those rights, if u don 't mind.
I will look forward, eagerly, to that information.





David
Rockhead
 
  4  
Reply Fri 23 Sep, 2011 10:00 pm
@Chinspinner,
aren't you british?

you don't know redneck from red-eye gravy...
 

Related Topics

2016 moving to #1 spot - Discussion by gungasnake
Black Lives Matter - Discussion by TheCobbler
Is 'colored people' offensive? - Question by SMickey
Obama, a Joke - Discussion by coldjoint
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
The ECHR and muslims - Discussion by Arend
Atlanta Race Riot 1906 - Discussion by kobereal24
Quote of the Day - Discussion by Tabludama
The Confederacy was About Slavery - Discussion by snood
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 04/28/2024 at 05:18:02