Thomas wrote:Bi-Polar Bear wrote:Make it illegal to breed within your race for 10 years and then there will be only one race.
Sounds good. When can I expect you to divorce Squinney and set a good example?
our breeding years are over friend.... but I would support it in my cubs.....and besides..... I made my intermingling with other races contribution many times for many years as a younger Bear :wink:
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:I made this suggestion years ago at Abuzz and I still stand by it.
Make it illegal to breed within your race for 10 years and then there will be only one race.
But then it won't be rebelling when white teenage girls from the suburbs date black guys. They'll have to find another outlet.
And I'm kind of following your rule already, except for the actual breeding part.
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:I made this suggestion years ago at Abuzz and I still stand by it.
Make it illegal to breed within your race for 10 years and then there will be only one race.
And a lot of women will look like Mariah Carey. where's the down side?
You had me until the Mariah Carey thing.
In the private sector, anyone should be able to exclude anyone for any reason from anything they so desire...no matter how idiotic, or insane.
No left handed people in my restaurant....fine.
No blondes can fly on my airline...fine.
No Scottish people allowed in my store...fine.
No Star Wars fans allowed to ride my rollercoaster...fine.
No one over six feet tall is allowed to buy tools in my hardware store....fine.
This is America, you have the right to screw yourself any way you so choose, if disenfranchising large portions of your potential cliental turns you on...go for it.
But the instant you take the first cent from the "people"...me, you...all the other insignificant tax payers....you lose this ablility to pick and choose. Not only in business or in organizations, but in "government" itself....especially in government itself....from a small town municipality to the Supreme Court, and all points between, you can not deny access anywhere to anyone for any reason, period. We have added a few amendments to our constitution concerning this exact issue....most notably the 13th, 14th, 15th and 19th....and in time we will probably add another.
If someone were to push the point, perhaps the right guy, with the right connections to the ACLU, could take the members of the black caucus to task, and get a court ruling in favor of an open membership. But should they? Maybe we owe these guys...oh let's say 60 years of retaliatory bigotry, would that square it....or 80...100... Or how about a title of Honorary Brother for those denied admittance...not actually making them a full fledge member but more along the lines of ..."I can't go in the meeting room with you guys, but I've got your back out here in the hallway...guys...can you hear me thru the door....I'm down with OPP!.....Word!...sigh"
Is the black only, black caucus legal...no...do I as a white person...a white American feel offended, or slighted in any way because this organization is allowed to exist in a very important, not to mention highly profiled branch of our government....no. Because I do, believe it or not understand their point, or at least enough of if, to give them a little elbow room. {see quote at bottom
So good of you that you can "give them a little elbow room".
Highest kudos.
In this article, the white congressman says he never applied for admission, and that he wasn't denied membership.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16812597/
Why would a white guy want to be in the Black Congressional Caucus? I mean, he's not, well, black and stuff..
the whole idea seems to me kinda bizarre, more of a deliberate point-scoring provocation thing than anything.. useful.
If there'd be a Women's Caucus, would you guys be demanding the right of men to join?
nimh wrote:If there'd be a Women's Caucus, would you guys be demanding the right of men to join?
I would be demanding that congress not permit such a caucus in the first place. I would demand the same for any caucus founded on race, ancestry, or any other feature that you cannot acquire if you want to.
I would have nothing against an equality caucus addressing the same problems as the black caucus, the Hispanic caucus, and your hypothetical women's caucus. But, of course, only if everyone who wishes to advance equality can join it.
Thomas wrote:nimh wrote:If there'd be a Women's Caucus, would you guys be demanding the right of men to join?
I would be demanding that congress not permit such a caucus in the first place. I would demand the same for any caucus founded on race, ancestry, or any other feature that you cannot acquire if you want to.
I would have nothing against an equality caucus addressing the same problems as the black caucus, the Hispanic caucus, and your hypothetical women's caucus. But, of course, only if everyone who wishes to advance equality can join it.
Would you also have all men live in harmony, with goodwill toward all and enmity toward none?
And a chicken in every pot?
snood wrote: Would you also have all men live in harmony, with goodwill toward all and enmity toward none?
And a chicken in every pot?
Let's just say I would not oppose the existence of a congressional caucus dedicated to these purpuses.
