RE: Should blacks get reparations?

RE: Should blacks get reparations? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

chiaThePet -> RE: Should blacks get reparations? (7/18/2009 7:23:31 AM)
Sure, why not. While we're at it, let's compensate all the illegals we failed to keep from entering the country, because now they're saddled with all the shitty jobs. Oo, oo, I know, all you can eat from Applebee's lunch menu from 11:00 to 2:00 Annnnnnnnnnd begin. chia* (the pet)

rulemylife -> RE: Should blacks get reparations? (7/18/2009 7:43:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Laws were violated to accomplish that interrment....no existing laws were violated to keep slaves in their chains.I don't see a legal precedent. No laws that I know of were violated, anymore than the laws detaining enemy combatants. In each of these cases laws were manipulated and twisted to justify a desired result. In each case these things occurred because the law was not clear enough in opposition to what was done. The point being do you want to take a moral position or a purely legal one? On the other thread you are arguing for affirmative action as a means to address past wrongs. Yet here you are arguing the opposite. I can argue both sides of this issue as I see merits in both viewpoints. I'm playing devil's advocate but I'm pretty surprised how one-sided the views have been. Especially considering your stance on affirmative action in the other thread. Myself, I see affirmative action as something that's causing far more of a fracture in our society than trying to correct a past wrong in one stroke if we had to decide between the two.

servantforuse -> RE: Should blacks get reparations? (7/18/2009 7:58:50 AM)
To those here that think reparations are in order, get out your own check book and write away. The rest of us are taxed enough already..

tazzygirl -> RE: Should blacks get reparations? (7/18/2009 8:20:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: Lorr47 quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife I read an article some months ago that convinced me that the American Japanese reparations were not a precedent. The payments were made to persons "in being" or basically the first generation survivors. Big difference. If you have a link I would like to read that. But when you say "big difference" I also think there is a big difference in the severity of the two situations. The internment of the Japanese lasted a few years while slavery in this country goes back to the earliest colonial settlements and was far more brutal. The precedent was the government acknowledging there was a wrong committed and a debt owed. quote: Also, every day claims are denied because a "statute of limitations" controls. All "statute of limitations have run many many many decades ago. I have been bound by the "statutes of limitations" in my life" and to my detriment. I am bound by the "statute of limitations" because I am white while others are not? Is that reverse racism? I think any argument trying to apply a statute-of-limitations here would be a stretch. The argument could be made but there is nothing anywhere that comes close to addressing it on-point. Besides, this is not likely to be decided as a civil action but as an act of Congress, if it ever comes to pass. If this happens, then it does set a precedent for every other oppressed race to demand reparation. Native Americans, Chinese, Irish who were treated deplorably when they came here, as well as the treatment of their indentured servitude. And it can go on and on and on. What states pay? Half werent even states when slavery was legal. How do you now prove who is a decendent and who isnt? Who is entitled? Who has to pay? Im sure some can prove their lines... some cannot. Bi-racial children were considered an embarrassment for so long... yet they existed. How do you find these? This proposal is so wraught with problems, its like trying to unravel an old afghan thats been patched and stitched without breakig any threads. We cant make up for the evils of our past. All we can do now is level the playing field and keep a vigilant watch to ensure it doesnt happen again.

Lorr47 -> RE: Should blacks get reparations? (7/18/2009 8:25:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: Lorr47 quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife I read an article some months ago that convinced me that the American Japanese reparations were not a precedent. The payments were made to persons "in being" or basically the first generation survivors. Big difference. If you have a link I would like to read that. But when you say "big difference" I also think there is a big difference in the severity of the two situations. The internment of the Japanese lasted a few years while slavery in this country goes back to the earliest colonial settlements and was far more brutal. The precedent was the government acknowledging there was a wrong committed and a debt owed. There is a big difference in the two situations. Find me a living person who was a slave. quote: Also, every day claims are denied because a "statute of limitations" controls. All "statute of limitations have run many many many decades ago. I have been bound by the "statutes of limitations" in my life" and to my detriment. I am bound by the "statute of limitations" because I am white while others are not? Is that reverse racism? I think any argument trying to apply a statute-of-limitations here would be a stretch. The argument could be made but there is nothing anywhere that comes close to addressing it on-point. Section 1983 actions etc. are subject to their own "statute of limitations." Bring your action under these statutes and you will get bounced out of Court on your head. You are asking for a gross perversion of the legal system with constitutional repercussions. Besides, this is not likely to be decided as a civil action but as an act of Congress, if it ever comes to pass. Have you ever considered that such a congressional act would be struck down under any number of "equal protection and due process" grounds. It would be the first time that I agreed with Roberts and Alito. Obama is a constitutional lawyer and there are fundamental reasons he is against it not the least of which is that the supreme court would tee it up and use a driver in reversing it..

slvemike4u -> RE: Should blacks get reparations? (7/18/2009 8:41:28 AM)
I don't know Rule.I myself see no problem with my stance on affirmative action....in light of my comments here on reparations.Of the former it is an attempt to help a segment of society gain their full measure of the fruits of our society,the latter seems to be unworkable at best and an opening of pandora's box at worst....

MasterVlad1969 -> RE: Should blacks get reparations? (7/18/2009 8:47:35 AM)
don't think so,me or my family never owned anybody they have the same opportunity as anyone else that should be enough.

TheHeretic -> RE: Should blacks get reparations? (7/18/2009 8:58:34 AM)
An interesting argument about reparations is found in the link: the average African-American today has been estimated, in genetic terms, to be approximately 20 percent white – and much of that 20 percent includes the genes of the white slaveholders who originally owned his great-grandparents. By what logic do we pay reparations for slavery to those who, in all too many cases, are literally descendents of the actual slaveholders? I see the reparations idea as divisive and racist.

Arpig -> RE: Should blacks get reparations? (7/18/2009 9:00:38 AM)
No

SilverHairedTop -> RE: Should blacks get reparations? (7/18/2009 9:03:01 AM)
MasterVlad1969 I agree. Probably 85-90% of the people living in the U.S. today are descended from immigrants, after the Civil War, themselves. My family being one of these. We never owned any person and I see no reason I should have to GIVE money to someone who believes they have found a new cash cow.

LotusSong -> RE: Should blacks get reparations? (7/18/2009 9:04:25 AM)
I've been wondering- did us whities place an order for slave to be brought from Africa or did the Dutch traders have them and figured that the Americas were just new territory to sell their wares? In short, were they chosen for slavery or waws it just the culture and anyone would have been fair game? Was it a premeditated choice to single out the black race? Women have been enslaved far longer than any other group. Got a few sheckels for us?

servantforuse -> RE: Should blacks get reparations? (7/18/2009 9:09:57 AM)
Maybe Africa should be made to pay to. Some Blacks sold their own people to the Dutch traders..

rulemylife -> RE: Should blacks get reparations? (7/18/2009 9:21:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lorr47 There is a big difference in the two situations. Find me a living person who was a slave. Then let's take your argument a step further and ask why reparations were paid to the heirs of the Japanese-Americans that were interned. Many were not even born at the time yet it was deemed to have affected them, primarily economically, but was only carried on for a short period of time. So wouldn't it make sense that damages from a few hundreds years of slavery would carry on to several generations? quote: Section 1983 actions etc. are subject to their own "statute of limitations." Bring your action under these statutes and you will get bounced out of Court on your head. You are asking for a gross perversion of the legal system with constitutional repercussions. We are not talking about post-Civil War discrimination or legislation so I fail to see how this would be in any way applicable. quote: Have you ever considered that such a congressional act would be struck down under any number of "equal protection and due process" grounds. It would be the first time that I agreed with Roberts and Alito. You've mentioned constitutional repercussions and now equal protection and due process without any further elaboration as if it is an obvious fact. I don't see it. And I also don't see how these constitutional arguments would not have been made in the internment case. Where is the distinction?

ThatDaveGuy69 -> RE: Should blacks get reparations? (7/18/2009 9:22:44 AM)
I'm with HizGP. My gramdmother was a Cherokee who survived the Trail of Tears. Too bad for me she didn't leave a trail of paper (rim-shot!). It's a damn tough thing to prove-up when the only person who knew her history is long-gone. The blacks, Irish, Chinese, Mexicans, and everyone else who wants a big fat hand-out can all move to the back of the line. The people who were here on this land long before it was a country may step right up, the cashier will see you now. ~Dave

TurboJugend -> RE: Should blacks get reparations? (7/18/2009 9:23:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse Maybe Africa should be made to pay to. Some Blacks sold their own people to the Dutch traders.. And the Arabs. If you read about slavery...every one was doing it. In war...the captives became slaves which was normal. What we find sick now..was seen normal then. Even in Africa itself there was slave trade. http://autocww.colorado.edu/~toldy2/E64ContentFiles/AfricanHistory/SlaveryInAfrica.html Still doesn't justify what happened ofcourse. And propably the amount of humans shipped and the race issue..makes the Africa- America connection the worst. ps. IF you ever visit Amsterdam....you can see the old houses payed with the money earned. A black spot in hour history.

tazzygirl -> RE: Should blacks get reparations? (7/18/2009 9:26:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDaveGuy69 I'm with HizGP. My gramdmother was a Cherokee who survived the Trail of Tears. Too bad for me she didn't leave a trail of paper (rim-shot!). It's a damn tough thing to prove-up when the only person who knew her history is long-gone. The blacks, Irish, Chinese, Mexicans, and everyone else who wants a big fat hand-out can all move to the back of the line. The people who were here on this land long before it was a country may step right up, the cashier will see you now. ~Dave It is hard, Dave, but not impossible. Census reports are used to verify lines. Bibles are also utilized. It took my parents 10 years to do thier search, The intenet was a god send to help them complete it.

JonnieBoy -> RE: Should blacks get reparations? (7/18/2009 9:38:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThatDaveGuy69 I'm with HizGP. My gramdmother was a Cherokee who survived the Trail of Tears. Too bad for me she didn't leave a trail of paper (rim-shot!). It's a damn tough thing to prove-up when the only person who knew her history is long-gone. The blacks, Irish, Chinese, Mexicans, and everyone else who wants a big fat hand-out can all move to the back of the line. The people who were here on this land long before it was a country may step right up, the cashier will see you now. ~Dave The Irish should claim their reparations from the "British Monarchy" ... and charge 900 years interest [sm=evil.gif][sm=evil.gif][sm=evil.gif] Pirate

rulemylife -> RE: Should blacks get reparations? (7/18/2009 10:12:54 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic An interesting argument about reparations is found in the link: the average African-American today has been estimated, in genetic terms, to be approximately 20 percent white – and much of that 20 percent includes the genes of the white slaveholders who originally owned his great-grandparents. By what logic do we pay reparations for slavery to those who, in all too many cases, are literally descendents of the actual slaveholders? I see the reparations idea as divisive and racist. Yeah I saw that. I posted the article because I thought it fairly represented both sides of the issue but I thought it was the weakest part of his anti-reparation argument. Despite the Thomas Jefferson-Sally Hemings story, it is debatable how many of these relationships were consensual. If not outright rape it is hard to argue there was not an element of coercion, even indirectly. So his argument boils down to not rewarding those who are descendants of slaveholders when that choice was made by the slaveholder.

Lorr47 -> RE: Should blacks get reparations? (7/18/2009 10:30:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: Lorr47 There is a big difference in the two situations. Find me a living person who was a slave. Then let's take your argument a step further and ask why reparations were paid to the heirs of the Japanese-Americans that were interned. Many were not even born at the time yet it was deemed to have affected them, primarily economically, but was only carried on for a short period of time. So wouldn't it make sense that damages from a few hundreds years of slavery would carry on to several generations? No. In addition to resolving disputes, the legal system places a great deal of weight on "finality." The statute of limitations deal with finality. Under your reasoning nothing is ever final. Since you are throwing the system's rules to the winds, how often are we going to allow these suits in the future? Each time a descendant of a slave is born, another law suit accrues since nothing is ever final by your reasoning. quote: Section 1983 actions etc. are subject to their own "statute of limitations." Bring your action under these statutes and you will get bounced out of Court on your head. You are asking for a gross perversion of the legal system with constitutional repercussions. We are not talking about post-Civil War discrimination or legislation so I fail to see how this would be in any way applicable. Well pick a cause of action, tort or contract, and someone will point out the applicable statute that bars your action. quote: Have you ever considered that such a congressional act would be struck down under any number of "equal protection and due process" grounds. It would be the first time that I agreed with Roberts and Alito. You've mentioned constitutional repercussions and now equal protection and due process without any further elaboration as if it is an obvious fact. I don't see it. And I also don't see how these constitutional arguments would not have been made in the internment case. Where is the distinction? It is obvious. The arguments probably were not made because the class was defined; the time was relatively short; many living persons actually remembered the matter; there was plenty of evidence showing the who, when and where; the cost outlay was known and finite; and a brain dead senile president presided over the bill's passage. In this case, I am appalled by the prospect of all the claims that will be filed from overseas? I am against foreign aid in the first place and the prospects of going on and on are horrific. Evidence is long passed resurrecting. "Yes, I am only 10% black but I have these nightmares, pay me." All the reasons for the existence of the statutes of limitations and laches apply. You speak in terms of the Japanese matter as being almost a binding precedent. Have you ever tried to work an estopple on the federal government? Also perhaps we could argue diminished capacity given that Reagon was president.

BlackKnight -> RE: Should blacks get reparations? (7/18/2009 10:35:11 AM)
How about the Irish and Chinese who were indentured servants? Indentured servitude is worse than slavery! the slave owners had to feed, clothe house, and provide a basic medical care, or else loose money. with indentured servitude you had to, by law, work, and could be beaten, but your life was on you for a pay of few cents a week, not enough to provide the necessities of life. Back in the 1890's the president provided reparations to the black people with welfare. Gave them a hand out, which is why they're still expecting a handout. when the welfare was given there was no reason to strive to merge with society, to do better, to be equals, they were superior, got money for their ancestry. all other 'peoples' rising from their 'slavery' have risen to be equals without a handout. of course this country believes in giving handouts to newcomers who move here, and start a business, but that is a different argument... I'm tired of everyone else getting handouts!! Where's mine?

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875