|
Post in Forums
Create a Profile
Upload Pictures
|
Keep a Journal
Meet Friends
It's FREE!
|
|
Sign Up!
|
Forum Index > News & Politics > Racism | >> does the rights guaranteed by the constitution only for white people? | | |
|
arrowinore
General 298 points


36/F/The Valley, Oregon Join Date: Feb 2008 | Ok ok, every one back into their corners, here's my opinion. I think that the time has come, most definetly, to re-write the constitution to fit the times. It was a great and very substantial paper, BACK THEN. Now? Not so much. It is out dated, and personally, badly written. There are too many areas where modern lawmakers can read into it what ever they want and deface the 'old laws and rules'. Hmmmm, reminds me of another famous writen word that was read into too much, and still causes much grief, but than this is just my opinion right...)for what it is worth, I am white, but am also looking at moving out of the US in the next 5-7 years.I am not leaving because I may hate the US, but because I m bored with the same-old same-old "white boy nation" it had become. but 'All be bock'...
 "We're all really smart kids, we're just stuck in a really stupid world." my pal Tauri on a drunkin evening back in 1988... | | |
|
jonnythan
Twinky 91958 points


27/M/NY, New York Join Date: Aug 2005 | arrowinore said: Ok ok, every one back into their corners, here's my opinion. I think that the time has come, most definetly, to re-write the constitution to fit the times. It was a great and very substantial paper, BACK THEN. Now? Not so much. It is out dated, and personally, badly written. There are too many areas where modern lawmakers can read into it what ever they want and deface the 'old laws and rules'. Hmmmm, reminds me of another famous writen word that was read into too much, and still causes much grief, but than this is just my opinion right...)for what it is worth, I am white, but am also looking at moving out of the US in the next 5-7 years.I am not leaving because I may hate the US, but because I m bored with the same-old same-old "white boy nation" it had become. but 'All be bock'...
So.
What sections are badly written, and how could they been written better?
 "Passion threatens the complacent and fills them with fear. Fear of the new, the deep, and the different. We, on the other hand, seek it out. Endlessly, joyously... and aggressively." | | |
|
notca
Über-Commander 157 points Deleted


71/NA/, Join Date: Apr 2008 | Not at all. It doesn't matter what the laws and traditions were based on. It only matters that they worked well. If they happened to be based on Christianity, that's just how it is.
As for having to give up our freedom of public religious symbalism, that is very unfair when you consider that all religions other than Christianity are allowed that freedom.
It doesn't offend the majority of Christians if other cultures wear turbans, burkas, or carry daggers. Why then does Christianity offend those religions?
I don't understand how anyone can be offended by someone else's religion.No one is trying to convert or asking them to join in Christian celebrations. So why can't they just practise their various religions and leave Christianity alone?
When I was in elementary school there were Protestants, Catholics and Jews in the class. The majority were Protestants. There were probably a few aetheists too, for all I know. When the Lord's Prayer was recited every morning those who didn't believe in it just didn't participate. They didn't protest, and who did it hurt?
When we travel to another country, we stand respectfully when their national anthem is played. Out of respect. It's all a matter of respecting the beliefs and traditions of others. When I go to a function in a church of another faith, I don't participate in their rituals but I don't cause a fuss either.
Then there's the hate laws that rankle so many people.
What this means is that if a person broke into my house, stole all my money and beat me up, he might (and I DO mean might!) get a jail sentence. Chances are it would be the minimum allowed, and he would be out after serving 1/3 of his sentence. If the person broke into the house of a minority family across the street, stole from them and beat them up he would get a mandatory sentence with no early release. Now is that fair? Is my safety and well-being not just as important as the minority family?
I believe the focus should be on the crime committed, not on why it was committed or who it was committed against. | | |
|
moonscar
Meister 1320 points


14/M/Albany, New York Join Date: May 2008 | iliterate_enginere said: no offense but I think you're full of sh*t. Whites have less rights than any other ethnic group in the U.S. b/c of all the racism and "civil rights" stuff. If a white person does any type of crime against person of minority ethnicity, then it's considered a hate crime, but not the other way around. Whites have to be perfectly politically correct when referencing an ethnic minority, while a black person can freely call us "crackers" and such. Spanking kids for white people is practically considered abuse now, but not for minorities.
Pardon Me but I think that your post is a load of s**t. A lot of whites always try to play off the fact that they have it good by making claims such as yours. Face it, the country is practically run by Caucasians. Whites have the most rights by far. Like for example how Black people get longer sentences for crimes that whites would. A black guy would go to jail for 35 years for killing 1 person and a white would go for 23 years for killing 2 people. I know this isn't the case all the time but by far there are a lot of incidents where whites get the slip. On top of that a lot of minorities are still discriminated against in jobs. How is it that whites don't have as much rights when you practically run the country? I mean we all know that blacks do not have more rights than whites and if you think they do then you have been on Mars for the past 300 years or so. It is still the same system today. Face it whites are more privileged in a lot of things due to their past of being on top in the country. Like I said this isn't the case all the time but just the fact that your trying to claim that whites are not as privileged in America is just a joke.
Also When you say that blacks can call whites crackers. Most people who do that are the gangster types. The reason why it may be ok is because the term " Cracker" doesn't go back to slavery." Still i know that is no excuse to use the term " Cracker" in the negative way. What you say isn't true though, a lot of blacks get shunned by their peers for saying the word "cracker." There are some that think it's ok but they are just as ignorant as any other prejudice people. I Know what your saying though. It seems more ok for them but like I said. You would seem more racist if you called them a nigger because the term " Nigger" has more of a history to it. I still think Saying either one is wrong though.
Besides most young racist get their hate towards blacks from the gangster type blacks who think they are tough. Every racist I talked too always refer black people to crime which isn't right because that only comes from a group of blacks who choose to do the wrong thing. It's not like they became that way on their own though. Segregation and separation over time forced blacks to form their own communities " Ghettos" which contributed to the crime they did do to poverty..... | | |
Top
|