It's Martin Luther King Day, so I would just like to take this opportunity to express my gratitude for everyone who participated in the Civil Rights movement, and the various other cultural revolutions in the 60s and 70s. They all made valuable contributions to this country.

I think that we should not only remember Dr. King, but the other martyrs of that era, like Medgar Evers, Malcom X, and Fred Hampton, a well known Black Panther who was an eloquent speaker and who was shot to death by police as he lay asleep in his bed.

Also, let's remember who the perpatrators of such disgusting injustices were: Ronald Reagan, Richard Nixon, Lyndon Johnson, the FBI, the CIA, Dick Cheney (who voted twice against the creation of Martin Luther King Day) etc...

I'm going to use this day as a reminder for the year to come to oppose racism, which still exist whether it be a blatant incident of discrimination or abuse, or something as subtle as white privilege. Do not allow yourself to tolerate or benefit from racism.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr is one of the greatest hero's ever, period.  The courage, passion and heart of that man was just unmatchable.  What he did and for who all he did it for took more guts than imaginable.  I'd like it if time travel were possible sometimes. One reason is because It'd be more than a privilage to go back in time and shake Dr. King's hand.

I can never repay the debt I owe him for giving his life (as well as the other civil rights leaders) so that I could breathe, become educated, and live as full as I can as an American.

It is Martin Luther King Day, but to truly honor him is to practice on a daily basis the virtues that he
tried to instill in the conscience of America, and the World.  On a side note, when I was in junior high
my father made us all go into Boston Common to hear him speak.  I don't remember much about it,
but I was there.

I read in the paper all the "celebrations", memorials, and other observences of the day, but I really don't know how exactly to honor such a man. So, I honor him in my own quiet way.

We have come far since the "I have a dream" speech but it is only the beginning. We have so far still to go.


This world needs more Dr. Kings, more Rosa Parks, and Andy Youngs.




Cat

He gave inspiration to those streets sorely in need of a name.

Also, let's remember who the perpatrators of such disgusting injustices were: Ronald Reagan, Richard Nixon, Lyndon Johnson, the FBI, the CIA, Dick Cheney (who voted twice against the creation of Martin Luther King Day) etc...



Lyndon Johson?

Heck, he signed nearly all of the significant Civil Rights bills into law, and it was he who sent the FBI down South to crack down on the KKK.  (In some cases "taking off the gloves of law")

And Johnson singlehandedly created the explosion in the welfare state.  Hell, there ought to be a Lyndon Johnson Holiday.

Also, let's remember who the perpatrators of such disgusting injustices were: Ronald Reagan, Richard Nixon, Lyndon Johnson, the FBI, the CIA, Dick Cheney (who voted twice against the creation of Martin Luther King Day) etc...


America got rid of Washington and Lincoln day for a presidents' day.  Why not dump Martin Luther King Jr. day and replace it with, say, equality day?  I feel that if the bank and the post office can get this day off, there is no reason not to have Washington and/or Lincoln's day off, agree?

Thing was, King wanted equal treatment for blacks.  Today's black "leaders" like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson want special treatment for blacks.

Utah did that...we don't have Martin Luther King Day, we have Human Rights day which I think is stupid.  The day is to celebrate the birth of a great man who did alot to advance civil rights.  He was a great man and deserves that. 

He gave inspiration to those streets sorely in need of a name.


I tell you what's really really sad is that a lot of streets in the United States of American named after Dr. Martin Luther King Jr are some of the baddest streets around.  Crime rates on Martin Luther King Street are higher than rates of miracles on 34th street.  Makes me very  unhappy that a street named after a man who taught us about love and peace and getting along with one another is one that is full of such hatred.

I tell you what's really really sad is that a lot of streets in the United States of American named after Dr. Martin Luther King Jr are some of the baddest streets around.  Crime rates on Martin Luther King Street are higher than rates of miracles on 34th street.  Makes me very  unhappy that a street named after a man who taught us about love and peace and getting along with one another is one that is full of such hatred.


Isn't that sad? :-[ By the way, I happen to know that in Los Angeles, there is a Martin Luther King Blvd., and it is the de facto "40th Street", since it runs between 39th and 41st. I seem to recall that in '92, the L.A. riots began near there.

Isn't that sad? :-[ By the way, I happen to know that in Los Angeles, there is a Martin Luther King Blvd., and it is the de facto "40th Street", since it runs between 39th and 41st. I seem to recall that in '92, the L.A. riots began near there.


Yeah, I was aware of that.

We forget just how terrible the Jim Crow period was.  Jim Crow laws made it nigh impossible for blacks and whites to be friends.  Look at it this way, you were not forbidden to socialize with with blacks if you were white nor whites if you were black, but--and this is a big but---what could you do?  You couldn't drink, dance, or dine together.  You couldn't go to a movie or a show together.  You couldn't even sit together at a roadside cafe and have a cup of coffee.  You didn't go to church togheter, and you certainly didn't go to school with whites if your were black, nor vice versa.  Your workplaces were segrated.  In companies where both blacks and whites worked, blacks were relegated to the the less skilled and more subservient ranks.  If you were white, your co-workers and superiors certainly wouldn't approve of you mingling with black employees on your spare time.  And with good reason, black co-workers would be awfully nervous about consorting with whites on the job.  
You could mingle at your home, I suppose, but then your neighborhood homeowners association would come a-knocking, warning you not to "bring them kind around here!"  If you persisted, the KKK would burn a cross on your lawn, and if you didn't get the message, the next step would be arson and assault against you and your family, and perhaps even murder.  Your sheriff wouldn't help you out, not even if he was sympathetic.  If the yokels heard a rumor that Sheriff Jones is a ******--lover, he'd be voted out in the next election.
Segregation wasn't just tolerated, it was the law.  If you owned a restaurant and announced you would serve both whites and blacks, you would be arrested.  Furthermore, the Klan would burn your place down for good measure, and probably beat the tar out of you--or worse.

Jim Crow was a racist culture held together by terrorism.  This is what the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., was facing as he lead the Civil Rights movement.  He compelled his freedom fighters not to be combative and foul-mouthed.  It takes some serious cajones to face a most vicious enemy without acting on the impulses of hatred, to be brave enough to stand your ground against nightsticks, gun butts, firehoses, and attack dogs, to get hauled to hell-hole jails and be beaten and mauled.  Like Mahatma Ghandi earlier in the century, Dr. King knew the oppressors were counting on a violent insurrection, King the Bull Connors of the Jim Crow South would be delighted to confront violence from the resistors with murderous violence from the police.

How many of us who passionately object to the status quo would be willing to take a firehose blast in the face, a police dog's teeth in the leg, and weeks or months in some stinking jailhouse?  Not I---not yet, at least.

Dr. King was a minister.  He was a religious man.  Shame on the Christian Right today, whose social values are in practice anathema to everything for which Dr. King stood, for trying to claim King as one of their own.  It is almost as shameful as the way the Christian Right tries to say Jesus was like them.  Dr. King was not without his own human frailties, but he did practice what he preached, and he did employ Christian principles in service of the oppressed and the disenfranchised for who Jesus intended them.

Beyond politics and policy, Dr. King possessed a brilliant mind, and a way with words I wish I had.  It is Dr. King's cogent and articulate speeches and his voice---a voice of lyricism and of moral authority well-earned--that continue to inspire us today, thirty-eight years after his death.

http://www.americaslibrary.gov/assets/aa/king/aa_king_subj_e.jpg

Man must evolve for all human conflict a method which rejects revenge, aggression and retaliation. The foundation of such a method is love. --Martin Luther King Jr.

America got rid of Washington and Lincoln day for a presidents' day.  Why not dump Martin Luther King Jr. day and replace it with, say, equality day?  I feel that if the bank and the post office can get this day off, there is no reason not to have Washington and/or Lincoln's day off, agree?

Thing was, King wanted equal treatment for blacks.  Today's black "leaders" like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson want special treatment for blacks.

Sir, I dropped a penny down the depths of your pettiness.  I'm still waiting to hear it clink!
::)

Sir, I dropped a penny down the depths of your pettiness.  I'm still waiting to hear it clink!
::)


I, who tend to cut people too much slack, can no longer give GWB the benefit of the doubt on the cut and color of his sheets.

I read in the paper all the "celebrations", memorials, and other observences of the day, but I really don't know how exactly to honor such a man. So, I honor him in my own quiet way.

We have come far since the "I have a dream" speech but it is only the beginning. We have so far still to go.


This world needs more Dr. Kings, more Rosa Parks, and Andy Youngs.




Cat


If there isn't a special on television I read his "I Have a Dream" and "Mountain Top"(the one the night before he was assassinated) speeches. I would say that anyone who has ever read his words, and believes in the dignity and rights of people, not just a small insular core with a birthright to priviledge,
cannot fail to be inspired.

[quote author=Ły

I, who tend to cut people too much slack, can no longer give GWB the benefit of the doubt on the cut and color of his sheets.


He's a passive racist. I've said so before. And you, Danoota, if you remember, were the only one honest enough to back me up. It's on this page from last year: http://www.inthe00s.com/index.php/topic,6583.45.html

His sheets probably look a little something like this:

http://www.everythingrebel.com/images/blankets/Rebel%20Flag.jpg

He's a passive racist. I've said so before. And you, Danoota, if you remember, were the only one honest enough to back me up. It's on this page from last year: http://www.inthe00s.com/index.php/topic,6583.45.html

His sheets probably look a little something like this:

http://www.everythingrebel.com/images/blankets/Rebel%20Flag.jpg




What I don't understand is when GWBUSH, Rocknrollfan, I or another conservative on the board points out something we don't like about what you the liberals believe, we in no way shape or form are allowed to make assumptions or analyzations towards other very similar situations and issues.

Yet it's perfectly fine of you, from an educated hypothesis standpoint using the information and so called "putting two and two together" to make the assumption that our fellow poster GWBUSH is a racist.

This board is corrupt, biased and extremely one sided.

Then why on earth do you continue to frequent this den of iniquity?


More than one reason, but the main one is because I for one hate to be ridiculed and teamed up against not because I am wrong but because the other people are in unison.  GWBush, Rocknrollfan, and the few others who happen to have a different view on life that isn't exactly like the ones next to them, I back them up and let them know that they aren't alone.

What I don't understand is when GWBUSH, Rocknrollfan, I or another conservative on the board points out something we don't like about what you the liberals believe, we in no way shape or form are allowed to make assumptions or analyzations towards other very similar situations and issues.

Yet it's perfectly fine of you, from an educated hypothesis standpoint using the information and so called "putting two and two together" to make the assumption that our fellow poster GWBUSH is a racist.

This board is corrupt, biased and extremely one sided.


Over the weekend in Boston there was a white supremacist group who decided to picket the African American museum on
Beacon Hill.  The said exactly the same things that were said in this board.  This holiday is the only one that is actively
fought against, but only by a small section of the public who cannot stomach the changes brought about by the Civil Rights movement, even the ones that Max pointed out like drinking out of the same water fountain.  We all know why that is don't we, let's not be coy. 

Over the weekend in Boston there was a white supremacist group who decided to picket the African American museum on
Beacon Hill.  The said exactly the same things that were said in this board.  This holiday is the only one that is actively
fought against, but only by a small section of the public who cannot stomach the changes brought about by the Civil Rights movement, even the ones that Max pointed out like drinking out of the same water fountain.  We all know why that is don't we, let's not be coy. 


You can make that anology with what happened in Boston, to call GWBUSH a racist. I see.

Harmonica, are you blind or just plain illiterate? This is not a point of liberal/conservative contention. For chrissakes, if you had paid attention to a word I've said in the past six months or so, you'd know that I am not even a "liberal." A leftist, presumably, but certainly not a member of the "enlightened middle class." Liberals are capitalists, whereas I am not. Liberalism is a specific political ideology with an actual definition... it is not a catch-all term for anything in opposition to your beliefs. Educate yourself. "Liberals" are not the source of all the world's injustices (and neither are "conservatives").

There are reasons why I believe that our co-poster has passively racist tendencies. For goodness' sake, in a forum dedicated to the memory of an honourable civil rights leader, the only contributions he has been able to make have been sarcastic, irreverent, and in bad taste.

What I don't understand is when GWBUSH, Rocknrollfan, I or another conservative on the board points out something we don't like about what you the liberals believe, we in no way shape or form are allowed to make assumptions or analyzations towards other very similar situations and issues.

Yet it's perfectly fine of you, from an educated hypothesis standpoint using the information and so called "putting two and two together" to make the assumption that our fellow poster GWBUSH is a racist.

This board is corrupt, biased and extremely one sided.


Ignore it, I do.

In that thread I went off on illegal immigration and the race card was pulled.  It's been done and is done often by a few who can't stand disagreement.  If what I wrote in that thread was so racist, why did Rice Cube, who I'm pretty sure said he was Chinese at one time (maybe not), agree?

It's petty.  I basically said I don't consider Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. above George Washington and Abe Lincoln and some would have you think I called it "Martin Lucifer Coon day."

Harmonica, are you blind or just plain illiterate? This is not a point of liberal/conservative contention. For chrissakes, if you had paid attention to a word I've said in the past six months or so, you'd know that I am not even a "liberal." A leftist, presumably, but certainly not a member of the "enlightened middle class." Liberals are capitalists, whereas I am not. Liberalism is a specific political ideology with an actual definition... it is not a catch-all term for anything in opposition to your beliefs. Educate yourself. "Liberals" are not the source of all the world's injustices (and neither are "conservatives").

There are reasons why I believe that our co-poster has passively racist tendencies. For goodness' sake, in a forum dedicated to the memory of an honourable civil rights leader, the only contributions he has been able to make have been sarcastic, irreverent, and in bad taste.


That's a fact right? Since it came outta your head, it's a fact.  Not an opinion but a fact.  I see.

For African America leaders, the left has Martin Luther King and the right has J.C. Watts.  Which would you rather?
;D

But you know, it's like the subject of "bias."  Dopes such as Bernie Goldberg and Brent Bozell are always going on and on about media "bias."  It's the biggest red herring out there.  What charges of "bias" usually amount to is a cover for defense of iniquities perpetrated by government and big business.  For instance, if "60 Minutes" runs a story on Corporation X dumping heavy metals in the river, the right-wing think tanks trot out their charges of "liberal bias" and "anti-business bias."  Never mind that there are lots of things the media reports which one bloody well should be biased against!  One should be "biased against" dumping heavy metals in the river just as one should be "biased against" a poke in the eye with a sharp stick.  

It is the same principle at work when the right accuses those who support affirmative action programs of being against what Dr. King stood for, because Dr. King said he looked forward to the day when his descendents could be "judged not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."  The charge that "affirmative action" judges people by the color of their skin is a specious argument when you look at the racism still saturating American life.  The level of racism has grown undeniably less since the 1960s, but it is still far, far to high.  Of course, the leaders of the GOP and their lapdog punditry deny the existence of racism to a psychotic degree.

It's just like the Orwellian nature of the Newt Deal.  You know, "The Contract With America" and so-called "Welfare Reform."  These rhetorical platforms for BS inveighed against the "culture of dependence," and boasted they would lift Americans out of poverty and make them participants in the great system of capitalism.  Of course, none of this was true.  None of it stood a chance of ever being true.  What the Newt Deal was, and what Bush has continued is an all-out assault upon the vulnerable--the economically deprived, the children, the elderly, the disabled--but they keep right on lying.  Never stop lying.  If your program produces the opposite results of what you proclaimed it intended (as all of Bush's programs have), admit nothing.  Go on the attack.  Call those who point out the obvious "traitors."  Get corporate-controlled television to declare the Bush program a success.  Drown out nay-sayers with endless patriotic braying and military drumbeats!  Tell a big enough lie often enough, and people will start to believe it!

Would you believe Martin Luther King was in favor of affirmative action?  Of course not!  But he was.
::)

Ignore it, I do.

In that thread I went off on illegal immigration and the race card was pulled.  It's been done and is done often by a few who can't stand disagreement.  If what I wrote in that thread was so racist, why did Rice Cube, who I'm pretty sure said he was Chinese at one time (maybe not), agree?

It's petty.  I basically said I don't consider Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. above George Washington and Abe Lincoln and you would have think I called it "Martin Lucifer Coon day."


I'm tried of all of the corruptedness on the board. They think because they agree with one another and are in the majority that all of their opinions and ideas must not only be right but might as well be facts.

They support a girl who wants an abortion, they in no way shape or form are supporting the termination of life and opportunity but I support a troup over in Iraq, I AM supporting war and death by machine gun.

There is no getting along on the political boards, besides going against what you believe in. There are no compromises, there is nothing of fairness or equalness to be found. It's either fight or suicide.

I'm tried of all of the corruptedness on the board. They think because they agree with one another and are in the majority that all of their opinions and ideas must not only be right but might as well be facts.

They support a girl who wants an abortion, they in no way shape or form are supporting the termination of life and opportunity but I support a troup over in Iraq, I AM supporting war and death by machine gun.

There is no getting along on the political boards, besides going against what you believe in. There are no compromises, there is nothing of fairness or equalness to be found. It's either fight or suicide.

Hey man, this is a set up!  It's like:
"Don't contradict me!"
"I'm NOT contradicting you!"
:D
And would you try to stay on just a bit on topic?  Furthermore, there is no such word as "corruptedness," the word is "corruption," but I fail to see how it applies here.

Hey man, this is a set up!  It's like:
"Don't contradict me!"
"I'm NOT contradicting you!"
:D
And would you try to stay on just a bit on topic?  Furthermore, there is no such word as "corruptedness," the word is "corruption," but I fail to see how it applies here.


I'm not Noah Webster, wasn't the last time I checked anyway.

I am on topic. GWBUSH is not a racist but because McDonald and Danootaandme happen to think he is, it's perfectly ok for them to say so, according to those in unison with them. 

Guess what, I stick up for GWBUSH and I'm not afraid that I'm alone.

That's a fact right? Since it came outta your head, it's a fact.  Not an opinion but a fact.  I see.


What, exactly, are you referring to as a fact? You're posing questions to yourself, coming up with your own convenient answers, and then putting them in my mouth.


I'm tried of all of the corruptedness on the board. They think because they agree with one another and are in the majority that all of their opinions and ideas must not only be right but might as well be facts.

They support a girl who wants an abortion, they in no way shape or form are supporting the termination of life and opportunity but I support a troup over in Iraq, I AM supporting war and death by machine gun.

There is no getting along on the political boards, besides going against what you believe in. There are no compromises, there is nothing of fairness or equalness to be found. It's either fight or suicide.


Would you listen to yourself? The only person getting bent out of shape is you. Man, GW is the one who was called a racist, and even he's acting more level-headed than you. He's giving us the typical woe is me spiel that we're all so used to by now (and not just from him).

What, may I ask, is the fault in someone believing that what he says is right? Do you not make the same assumptions everyday when you open your mouth? So you're mad because leftists seem to dominate the board (which is questionable, I would say that most people who participate on this board are moderates) and that these leftists actually have the audacity to believe what they say is true? That's hardly what I would call corruption.

What, exactly, are you referring to as a fact? You're posing questions to yourself, coming up with your own convenient answers, and then putting them in my mouth.

Would you listen to yourself? The only person getting bent out of shape is you. Man, GW is the one who was called a racist, and even he's acting more level-headed than you. He's giving us the typical woe is me spiel that we're all so used to by now (and not just from him).

What, may I ask, is the fault in someone believing that what he says is right? Do you not make the same assumptions everyday when you open your mouth? So you're mad because leftists seem to dominate the board (which is questionable, I would say that most people who participate on this board are moderates) and that these leftists actually have the audacity to believe what they say is true? That's hardly what I would call corruption.


I didn't put anything into your mouth, you called GWBUSH a racist and if I had called you or someone else a deogratory name based on a highly intellectual hypothesis you woulda got all bent out of shape and cried about how I was outta line with that call.

GWBUSH isn't going to stick up for himself because he knows he'll get gained up on and beat down and he doesn't think it's worth the effort.  I'm stubborn and just, a optomist in a pessimestic surrounding.

When I say board McDonald I mean this board, the political board. I do not mean all of the other boards.  Maybe the termonology should be "thread" or "topics" I don't know.  The Majority of people who post on the polictical and non/relgious boards are liberals. 

It's corruption because they think that just because they are the majority they are right and it gives them the right to tell others who aren't in their little group that they're stupid and wrong.

  It's corruption because they think that just because they are the majority they are right and it gives them the right to tell others who aren't in their little group that they're stupid and wrong.


And how is calling everyone here that isn't religious, a murderer and immoral any better?

I didn't put anything into your mouth, you called GWBUSH a racist and if I had called you or someone else a deogratory name based on a highly intellectual hypothesis you woulda got all bent out of shape and cried about how I was outta line with that call.

GWBUSH isn't going to stick up for himself because he knows he'll get gained up on and beat down and he doesn't think it's worth the effort.  I'm stubborn and just, a optomist in a pessimestic surrounding.


I'm aware that I called GW a racist. The words that you DID put into my mouth were these:

That's a fact right? Since it came outta your head, it's a fact.  Not an opinion but a fact.  I see.

If GW were capable of "sticking up" for himself as it has to do with this topic, he would do it. He's a big boy. But what remains is a couplet of highly insensitive and offensive remarks that he made about MLK, and it's not like he can erase those from everyone's memory. Neither can you. You can try, but it is a Sysiphean task, and a waste of your time.


When I say board McDonald I mean this board, the political board. I do not mean all of the other boards.  Maybe the termonology should be "thread" or "topics" I don't know.  The Majority of people who post on the polictical and non/relgious boards are liberals.

And I suppose that's a "fact?"  ;) That is your perception, but as we have already concluded that you aren't totally clear on what a liberal is, how can you expect me to trust your assumption? 


It's corruption because they think that just because they are the majority they are right and it gives them the right to tell others who aren't in their little group that they're stupid and wrong.

That is not the definition of corruption. And not only that, but if these "liberals" you detest so much are in the majority, then where are my resounding cries of support when I say that GW has passively racist tendencies? Absent.

I have never witnessed anyone calling you or anyone else "stupid." This is just another example of self-martyrdom. You're not being persecuted. And to tell you the truth, my patience for you has worn well thin just like everyone else's. Many of the people who have professed that they cannot bear to converse with you are NOTself-described liberals (Crazymom being one of them, Philbo another). Learn what Liberalism is before you go branding everyone who doesn't agree with you with that label. You think I would verbally point out GW's passive racism TWICE now in one year if I didn't know exactly what racism was?

I'll show you what is indicative of deep-seated racial prejudices....

He gave inspiration to those streets sorely in need of a name.


America got rid of Washington and Lincoln day for a presidents' day.  Why not dump Martin Luther King Jr. day and replace it with, say, equality day?  I feel that if the bank and the post office can get this day off, there is no reason not to have Washington and/or Lincoln's day off, agree?

Thing was, King wanted equal treatment for blacks.  Today's black "leaders" like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson want special treatment for blacks.

I'm aware that I called GW a racist. The words that you DID put into my mouth were these:

If GW were capable of "sticking up" for himself as it has to do with this topic, he would do it. He's a big boy. But what remains is a couplet of highly insensitive and offensive remarks that he made about MLK, and it's not like he can erase those from everyone's memory. Neither can you. You can try, but it is a Sysiphean task, and a waste of your time.

And I suppose that's a "fact?"  ;) That is your perception, but as we have already concluded that you aren't totally clear on what a liberal is, how can you expect me to trust your assumption? 

That is not the definition of corruption. And not only that, but if these "liberals" you detest so much are in the majority, then where are my resounding cries of support when I say that GW has passively racist tendencies? Absent.

I have never witnessed anyone calling you or anyone else "stupid." This is just another example of self-martyrdom. You're not being persecuted. And to tell you the truth, my patience for you has worn well thin just like everyone else's. Many of the people who have professed cannot bear to converse with you are NOTself-described liberals (Crazymom being one of them, Philbo another). Learn what Liberalism is before you go branding everyone who doesn't agree with you with that label. You think I would verbally point out GW's passive racism TWICE now in one year if I didn't know exactly what racism was?

I'll show you what is indicative of deep-seated racial prejudices....


It's not racism, therefore you have no grounds to stand on.

It's not racism, therefore you have no grounds to stand on.


I didn't say it was racism proper, I said it was "indicative of deep-seated racial prejudice." And that's a verbatim quote. You, however, have succeeded in ignoring the wealth of other points available for comment. It is also clear that your only interest is to turn this into a point of left-right contention, or to call hypocrisy on my. But I'm no hypocrite. Last year I said that I thought GW had passively racist tendencies and deep-seated racial prejudices, and that is exactly what I have said today. You are assuming that if you had done something similar, that this board (which you also assume to be dominated by "liberals") would meet you with moral reproach. But, seeing how this scenario is entirely theoretical at best, it is your argument which has no ground to stand on.

I have at least pointed out two concrete  instances just on this board which reaffirm my beliefs about GW, and even if these beliefs are not indeed true, GW cannot say that he never gve anyone any reason to believe that he had such tendencies. It is these that you continue ignore because you would rather just engage in partisan nonsense.

I didn't say it was racism proper, I said it was "indicative of deep-seated racial prejudice." And that's a verbatim quote. You, however, have succeeded in ignoring the wealth of other points available for comment. It is also clear that your only interest is to turn this into a point of left-right contention, or to call hypocrisy on my. But I'm no hypocrite. Last year I said that I thought GW had passively racist tendencies and deep-seated racial prejudices, and that is exactly what I have said today. You are assuming that if you had done something similar, that this board (which you also assume to be dominated by "liberals") would meet you with moral reproach. But, seeing how this scenario is entirely theoretical at best, it is your argument which has no ground to stand on.

I have at least pointed out two concrete  instances just on this board which reaffirm my beliefs about GW, and even if these beliefs are not indeed true, GW cannot say that he never gve anyone any reason to believe that he had such tendencies. It is these that you continue ignore because you would rather just engage in partisan nonsense.


I've been given a thousand reasons and not one of them stands just enough because of what others on this board think and what they think has nothing to do with right or wrong it has to do wtih who they like, what they like and what they don't.

And how is calling everyone here that isn't religious, a murderer and immoral any better?




I haven't called everyone that isn't relgious a murderer and immoral.

I've been given a thousand reasons and not one of them stands just enough because of what others on this board think and what they think has nothing to do with right or wrong it has to do wtih who they like, what they like and what they don't.


This sentence is an incoherent catastrophe. How cany any meaning be gleaned from this?

This is a useless endevour. Have the last word, please.

I haven't called everyone that isn't relgious a murderer and immoral.


Right. You inferred that liberals would start killing people if we could find a way to get away with it.

He's a passive racist. I've said so before. And you, Danoota, if you remember, were the only one honest enough to back me up. It's on this page from last year: http://www.inthe00s.com/index.php/topic,6583.45.html

His sheets probably look a little something like this:

http://www.everythingrebel.com/images/blankets/Rebel%20Flag.jpg




I agree!

He's giving us the typical woe is me spiel that we're all so used to by now (and not just from him).


I never gave an impression of "feel sorry for me."  Like you wrote, I know the type.  The type that is willing to call anybody a racist for near anything, the type that feels the need to feel offended for American Indians and teams that name their sports teams after them like the Cleveland Indians and the Washington Redskins; even when the vast majority of Indians don't feel offended.  The type that   The type that is still stuck in the 1960's, still feels racism is everywhere, wants to believe it's everywhere and has no trust in American citizens.

The accusations are irrelevant, mean-spirted and a thinly disguised attempt to make people feel guilty.

I have at least pointed out two concrete

Nothing I have written on this messageboard is tantamount to concerte and I think most here would agree.  It falls under the banner of stupidity.

And not only that, but if these "liberals" you detest so much are in the majority, then where are my resounding cries of support when I say that GW has passively racist tendencies? Absent.

Any Bush-Kerry thread confirms that the majority of this board is liberal, or if nothing else democrat.  The fact they aren't backing the statements is because they're beyond absurd.

You think I would verbally point out GW's passive racism TWICE now in one year if I didn't know exactly what racism was?

Doing it twice means nothing.

I'll show you what is indicative of deep-seated racial prejudices....

This proves your accusing me over what is next to nothing.  Those comments aren't racist, and if you really, honestly believe they are, you've lost it.  You want to prove what you've slandered me with, but haven't been able to do it.  If those two comments are so racist, why did it take so long for anyone to say anything?  It took time for the all-knowing racist-spotters to come along?

McDonald, I believe you are the racist.  I honestly believe you are a self-hating white man who feels guilty over sins you think your ancestors may have committed.  And that really can be documented.

Right. You inferred that liberals would start killing people if we could find a way to get away with it.


To protect the rights of other people, although you yourself do not condone in the experience.

http://www.everythingrebel.com/images/blankets/Rebel%20Flag.jpg


P.S.: The battle flag of northern Virginia is not a racist symbol.  I don't fly one, have one in my house or have anything like that on a shirt, hat or beltbuckle, but pretending that flag symbolizes anything other than a historical army is absurd.

If so, one would could claim that such stupidity means that 65% of Mississippi residents are racist.

http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:sJVCD49GwO2-MM:www.theodora.com/flags/state_flags/mississippi_state_flag.gif

CNN.com - Mississippi votes 2-1 to keep existing flag - April 17, 2001

What is even more interesting is that an estimated 35% of blacks in Mississippi voted to keep that flag.  They must all be Uncle Tom, self-hating racists of their own kind.

P.S.: The battle flag of northern Virginia is not a racist symbol.  I don't fly one, have one in my house or have anything like that on a shirt, hat or beltbuckle, but pretending on though that thing symbolizes anything other than a historical army is absurd.


What's absurd is automatically asuming that the confederate flag means that you hate black people and believe in slavery.

However the POSSIBILITY of having a confederate flag and using it out of context as symbolization for belief in slavery and hatred towards african americans is apparent.  I've known both people who are very racist with confederate flags and people who are not the least bit racist with confederate flags.  There really is no, if this then that strategy, regardless of how McDonald Tries.

What's absurd is automatically asuming that the confederate flag means that you hate black people and believe in slavery.

However the POSSIBILITY of having a confederate flag and using it out of context as symbolization for belief in slavery and hatred towards african americans is apparent.  I've known both people who are very racist with confederate flags and people who are not the least bit racist with confederate flags.  There really is no, if this then that strategy, regardless of how McDonald Tries.


If you fly a Swastika, it doesn't necessarily follow that you are anti-Semitic!
::)

It's petty.  I basically said I don't consider Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. above George Washington and Abe Lincoln and some would have you think I called it "Martin Lucifer Coon day."



I don't understand why you would think that to honor Martin Luther King is to put him above the Presidents,
and I was wondering how you would find a way to fit the Martin Lucifer Coon thing in.  It is another oft
repeated term used only by supremacists to induce giggly little hard-ons. 

I don't understand why you would think that to honor Martin Luther King is to put him above the Presidents,
and I was wondering how you would find a way to fit the Martin Lucifer Coon thing in.  It is another oft
repeated term used only by supremacists to induce giggly little hard-ons. 

That's about the size of it, Danoota!
;D

I don't understand why you would think that to honor Martin Luther King is to put him above the Presidents.....


Well, I was somewhat wrong after looking it up.  Washington still gets his own day (though it's not a day you get off,) but Lincoln doesn't.  I just feel that's wrong.

and I was wondering how you would find a way to fit the Martin Lucifer Coon thing in.

I was not looking to fit that term in.  But judging from the reaction I got from somebody simply over what I thought was a semi-funny remark about street names, you'd would have figured I used the term straight out.  It's what J. Edgar Hoover's FBI called him, and it is obviously offensive.

It's what J. Edgar Hoover's FBI called him, and it is obviously offensive.



Not offensive, beyond offensive, you absolutely know that, but still used it.

Not offensive, beyond offensive, you absolutely know that, but still used it.


As opposed to labeling me a racist?

I was not looking to fit that term in.  But judging from the reaction I got from somebody simply over what I thought was a semi-funny remark about street names, you'd would have figured I used the term straight out.  It's what J. Edgar Hoover's FBI called him, and it is obviously offensive.



You were not looking to fit the term in, but since people were upset about your quips about street names
you figured you would use it , and why not, J Edgar Hoover did? (and we all know about jedgar)    ???

You haven't?  You may not have said "atheists are murderers and immoral", but you sure as heck implied it:
Anyone with half a brain can see that you mean that "Christians and other higher spiritual power believers" are the ONLY ones with "morals and values" that aren't "made up inside their head".


I don't get where your trying to go with this. If you don't follow somebody/something else...what else can you do besides get it out of your own head?

Wasn't he a cross dresser ??? :D

Oh yes, it's so absurd that someone who has read nearly everything you've written on this board over the past year or more to believe that you have PASSIVE RACIST TENDENCIES. It would have been absurd to conclude that you were a card-carrying member of the Klan, sure, but like I said before.... if all you can offer to a thread that was intended to show gratitude to a civil rights icon is a few seriously tasteless and petty remarks about his legacy, then the shoe definitely fits.

What is entirely absurd is to suggest that I hate White people. Could you be more reactionary?

Am I supposed to feel guilty for something that my ancestors had nothing at all to do with, and something from which I have never benefitted? I'm a first generation American, in case you weren't paying attention to my posts as much as I have paid attention to yours. And why would I hate anyone living today for what their ancestors may or may not have engaged in 400 years ago? If anyone feels the sort of guilt you speak of, it's you and your ilk, for they are the ones who so vehemently deny the existence of racism at all (except the "obvious" discrimination against whites in this country), and what a prespammersite assertion, only an idiot coul be so deluded as to believe it. Could this be a defense mechanism for coping with a heritage such as yours; a heritage of slave-ownership, dicrimination, jim crow, kkk, etc...? Georgia's a mighty fine state, tell ya what. You dug your own hole. I seriously still cannot believe what you said.

And then, there's the matter of my being stuck in the 60's...  ::) A decade I had no part in. And if you ever paid attention to my posts, you'd know that it's the 80's I'm stuck in... the 80's. Ask anybody.

Let me try to guess a few of the little social injustices that you might be focusing on in your day to day life:

1. Black comedians get to make racist jokes, but if a white comedian did it there would be a media sheeshsorm...
2. Affirmative action is discrimination against whites...
3. White, Christian males are the most discriminated group in the country...
4. Sometimes minorities and the ACLU take it just a little too far, what with changing team-names and banning prayer in school...
5. Illegal immigrants are scum who are ruining this country and they should be shot! (remember this: http://www.inthe00s.com/index.php/topic,7178.0.html, because I sure do.)

As opposed to real issues like poor people stariving in the street, and teenage kids taking on massive debts to pay for a worthless Bachelor's degree, these are the things that bug you the most.

Your comments on Monday were just added fodder for the fire. But it's pointless to keep arguing. You will never come out and profess your racial frustration openly, and therefore I can never confirm it undeniably. However, I just wanted to reiterate and make myself clear on the matter, so that others might read your posts a little more closely from now on, and so there is no amiguity about my opinion of you in response to some of the things you have said over the course of this past year. SO here goes:

I, McDonald, after having read nearly every post of GW's for over a year, believe that he has passively racist tendencies and deep-seated racial prejudices to which he will never own up. I'm not trying to fit him into a stereotype based soley on his political affiliation, but I am judging him by his own words. I know I am not alone in this opinion. That is all.

Just because someone is not religious does not mean they don't follow somebody/something else.  My husband and I may not be religious (in YOUR definition of the word), but we have taught our children what is right and wrong and they base their actions on what they've learned from US.  They haven't "made it up in their heads" and we most certainly aren't "some higher spiritual beings".


Why do your kids follow it? Why do you follow it? because you believe it's right? Good reason. or is it ----->  Because you're afraid of punishment from authority? You know as well as I do that many aethiest can claim they follow "something" else such as the law.  That's nothing more than fear for oneself. They don't not do something bad because they believe it's wrong, they don't do something against the law because they know the trouble they will face for it.  Now everyone of them do this, no.  Do some of them, yes.

If I see someone hurt, I will help them.  If I witness and accident, I will stop.  There is no "authority" that is making me do it, I just do it out of the goodness of my heart.  Even if it WERE fear of punishment, how is that different from Christianity?  Do you not fear punishment or disappointment from God for wrongdoings?  Why is something like the law saying you can/can't do something different than God saying you can/can't do something?


Cause God doesnt' change, man does.

Hence the "I'll throw the fear of God into "em" ,  "Don't do it or you will burn in hell", etc etc.  I raise my child
to do what is right because it is the right thing to do, not for some arbitrary punishment/reward in the "afterlife".  There are millions and millions of people who everyday do things out of the goodness of their hearts without notice who never set foot in a church.  There are people who wage war and sit in pews and recieve the blessings of the multlitudes. 

Hence the "I'll throw the fear of God into "em" ,  "Don't do it or you will burn in hell", etc etc.  I raise my child
to do what is right because it is the right thing to do, not for some arbitrary punishment/reward in the "afterlife".  There are millions and millions of people who everyday do things out of the goodness of their hearts without notice who never set foot in a church.  There are people who wage war and sit in pews and recieve the blessings of the multlitudes. 



There is also the "three-fold rule".  ;)




Cat

Hence the "I'll throw the fear of God into "em" ,  "Don't do it or you will burn in hell", etc etc.  I raise my child
to do what is right because it is the right thing to do, not for some arbitrary punishment/reward in the "afterlife".   There are millions and millions of people who everyday do things out of the goodness of their hearts without notice who never set foot in a church.  There are people who wage war and sit in pews and recieve the blessings of the multlitudes. 


Your talking to a man who does not believe in Heaven.

It's STILL fear of punishment, making Christians just as self-centered as you seem to think atheists are.


Your not getting what I'm saying.  I wouldn't kill someone because I care about that other person. I look at him or her see that that have a past, a present, a future. To someone out there in this world, they mean everything. They're loved, they love.  They played Baseball in junior high school and will one day run for office as a politican who wants to ambitiously put an end to hunger, whatever the story of there life is it's important and I have no right to take that away from them.  I wouldn't kill someone because it's all about them, what I'm doing to them, what I'm taking away from them.
 
Other's wouldn't kill someone because what will happen to me if I do. Will I get into trouble? Will I be punished? What suffering will I endure because of what I've done.

I get what you're saying.  You, however, don't seem to be getting my point.  It's perfectly FINE for you to say "I wouldn't kill someone because of XYZ", yet a non-believer says the same thing and you say they have an ulterior motive.  MOST Christians wouldn't kill someone because they are taught that it is a sin.....and you are punished for your sins.


there are many instances where an atheist will use his/her atheism as a scapegoat. They will ask, "why do you think this is wrong"  and a beliver will say, "it goes against my religion" and the response will be, "oh, well I have no religion and I don't feel it's wrong".  Same thing with rights as well.  "why do you feel that it's right to love your neighbor?"  "Cause my relgion say's it is"  "oh, well I don't have relgion, I dn't feel it's right."

Your talking to a man who does not believe in Heaven.


This is a reference in general, not specific to one person.

How is that using atheism as a scapegoat?  Maybe you should check the definition of words before you use them.  If anything, it's the "believers" using their religion as a scapegoat.  By saying "my religion says so", it removes all responsibility from the person.


No it does not.  By having a set standard that I can not change, I have to obey the rules to be good and go agaisnt them to be bad.  If anything it is the ONLY thing that puts responsibility on a person.  I am told, "thou shall not steal"  I steal, I have no choice but to take the responsibilty for it and know I did wrong. No way around it, I did wrong, not a matter of opinion or choice, simple as can be, I DID wrong.  An atheist steals he/she can think whatever they want to of it.  There are no set standards so if they wanna feel what they did was wrong, sure. If they wanna feel like it wasn't wrong, sure.  Either way not only was what they did their choice, but how they looked at it was as well and no one can tell them different.

And I also agree wtih the motivation statement you pointed out which is why I pointed it out to begin with .  Stealing something is wrong no matter what, and just so you won't be breathing down my neck for eternity I'll say that I believe God looks at perspective and motivation a lot in the world of Sin.  I find it hard to believe that the God I believe in and love with all my heart looks at a woman who steals and apple for her starving daughter the same way he does a woman who steals money from her grandmother so she can buy beer for tonights party.

This topic has morphed significantly

"I Have A Dream"
by Martin Luther King, Jr,


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Delivered on the steps at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington D.C. on August 28, 1963. Source: Martin Luther King, Jr: The Peaceful Warrior, Pocket Books, NY 1968

Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of captivity. But one hundred years later, we must face the tragic fact that the Negro is still not free.

One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languishing in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land.

So we have come here today to dramatize an appalling condition. In a sense we have come to our nation's capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir.

This note was a promise that all men would be guaranteed the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check which has come back marked "insufficient funds." But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation.

So we have come to cash this check -- a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice. We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to open the doors of opportunity to all of God's children. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quicksands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood.

It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment and to underestimate the determination of the Negro. This sweltering summer of the Negro's legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. Nineteen sixty-three is not an end, but a beginning. Those who hope that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual. There will be neither rest nor tranquility in America until the Negro is granted his citizenship rights.

The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges. But there is something that I must say to my people who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice. In the process of gaining our rightful place we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred.

We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. we must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force.

The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny and their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom.

We cannot walk alone. And as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall march ahead. We cannot turn back. There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, "When will you be satisfied?" we can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as the Negro's basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one. We can never be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream.

I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow cells. Some of you have come from areas where your quest for freedom left you battered by the storms of persecution and staggered by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive.

Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed. Let us not wallow in the valley of despair. I say to you today, my friends, that in spite of the difficulties and frustrations of the moment, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal." I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slaveowners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood. I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a desert state, sweltering with the heat of injustice and oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice. I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day the state of Alabama, whose governor's lips are presently dripping with the words of interposition and nullification, will be transformed into a situation where little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls and walk together as sisters and brothers. I have a dream today. I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together. This is our hope. This is the faith with which I return to the South. With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.

This will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with a new meaning, "My country, 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing. Land where my fathers died, land of the pilgrim's pride, from every mountainside, let freedom ring." And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true. So let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire. Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York. Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania! Let freedom ring from the snowcapped Rockies of Colorado! Let freedom ring from the curvaceous peaks of California! But not only that; let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia! Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee! Let freedom ring from every hill and every molehill of Mississippi. From every mountainside, let freedom ring.

When we let freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, "Free at last! free at last! thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"

If an atheist does something good or bad, they have noone else to take responsibility for their actions but themselves.  If a "Christian" does good, it's because that's what they were told to do by God and if they do bad, they take responsibility to whom?  God   And what happens if you don't take responsibility for your actions and repent your sins to God?  You go to hell.  Therefore, taking responsibility and repenting your sins is to avoid punishment from God. (I'm leaving the law out of this because if you steal, it doesn't matter to the law WHAT your beliefs are)

....why is it so hard for you to see that atheists are not inherently bad people?  You automatically assume that just because it's not written down in some book that they worship, they don't have a set of guidelines they follow.  And, that, given the chance, they would do anything they could get away with.  I think the statistic that there are more "Christians" in jail than atheists should show you that they aren't.
So, what you're saying is that the 10 commandments aren't set in stone?  There's room for interpretation?  I thought God was unchanging?  If he looks at "perspective and motivation in determining right and wrong", why is that "okay", but an atheist's "perspective and motivation in determining right and wrong" is "not okay"?


I fear the unbearable guilt I'd feel for taking away someone's life far more than I fear the punishment I'd recieve from God.  So take take me as I am, that's what I put on the plate.

I know good atheist and I know bad atheist.  I like Dylan and consider him to be a better person than some of the so called Christians I know.  They're are a lot of So called Christians in the world, who are not Christians.  Maybe even I'm not a real Christian, but I try as best I can, which is saying more than a lot.  

It's not ok for the umpteenth time because of the motivation.  I want 100 dollars therefore it's ok to steal a 100 dollars, that is not right.  Me me me..doesn't matter.  A little girl is dying from dehydration and her father steals water from the well, that isn't wrong.

I'll leave giving you a couple of stories that I've been taught.

A man once told me, "don't ever hit a woman" and I nodded my head in agreement but being the philosophical thinker I am I asked him, "what if the woman was trying to kill one of my friends?"  and he replied, "hit her, I would".

Huckelberry Finn, in Mark Twains classic novel questioned what his aunt had told him about Heaven and Hell... now I don't have a whole long time to go into detail on the book but he came to the belief that by helping his African American friend he would go to Hell.  After thinking about it for a while Huck Finn said, "well I'm going to Hell."  :)

I realize the world is gray, that doesn't give me an excuse to do whatever the Hell I want, it doesn't anybody else either.

"I Have A Dream"
by Martin Luther King, Jr,


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Delivered on the steps at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington D.C. on August 28, 1963. Source: Martin Luther King, Jr: The Peaceful Warrior, Pocket Books, NY 1968

Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of captivity. But one hundred years later, we must face the tragic fact that the Negro is still not free.

One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languishing in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land.

So we have come here today to dramatize an appalling condition. In a sense we have come to our nation's capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir.

This note was a promise that all men would be guaranteed the inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check which has come back marked "insufficient funds." But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation.

So we have come to cash this check -- a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice. We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to open the doors of opportunity to all of God's children. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quicksands of racial injustice to the solid rock of brotherhood.

It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment and to underestimate the determination of the Negro. This sweltering summer of the Negro's legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. Nineteen sixty-three is not an end, but a beginning. Those who hope that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual. There will be neither rest nor tranquility in America until the Negro is granted his citizenship rights.

The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges. But there is something that I must say to my people who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice. In the process of gaining our rightful place we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred.

We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. we must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force.

The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny and their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom.

We cannot walk alone. And as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall march ahead. We cannot turn back. There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, "When will you be satisfied?" we can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the hotels of the cities. We cannot be satisfied as long as the Negro's basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one. We can never be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream.

I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow cells. Some of you have come from areas where your quest for freedom left you battered by the storms of persecution and staggered by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive.

Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed. Let us not wallow in the valley of despair. I say to you today, my friends, that in spite of the difficulties and frustrations of the moment, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.

I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal." I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slaveowners will be able to sit down together at a table of brotherhood. I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a desert state, sweltering with the heat of injustice and oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice. I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today.

I have a dream that one day the state of Alabama, whose governor's lips are presently dripping with the words of interposition and nullification, will be transformed into a situation where little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls and walk together as sisters and brothers. I have a dream today. I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight, and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together. This is our hope. This is the faith with which I return to the South. With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.

This will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with a new meaning, "My country, 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing. Land where my fathers died, land of the pilgrim's pride, from every mountainside, let freedom ring." And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true. So let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire. Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York. Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania! Let freedom ring from the snowcapped Rockies of Colorado! Let freedom ring from the curvaceous peaks of California! But not only that; let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia! Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee! Let freedom ring from every hill and every molehill of Mississippi. From every mountainside, let freedom ring.

When we let freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, "Free at last! free at last! thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"




Very Nice.  I hope to find a poster of Martin Luther King Jr and put it up in my room. I can't think of to many people that I admire as much as that man.  He truly is one of the greatest heros anyone of any race could ask for.  Just the thought of how much he cared and loved, I'm not ashamed to say that it brings me to tears.

More words from the The Reverend

Everybody can be great,because everybody can serve. You don't have to have a college degree to serve. You don't have to make your subject and your verb agree to serve. You don't have to know about Plato and Aristotle to serve. You don't have to know Einstein's theory of relativity to serve. You don't have to know the second theory of thermodynamics in physics to serve. You only need a heart full of grace, a soul generated by love.and you can be that servant.

Very Nice.  I hope to find a poster of Martin Luther King Jr and put it up in my room. I can't think of to many people that I admire as much as that man.  He truly is one of the greatest heros anyone of any race could ask for.  Just the thought of how much he cared and loved, I'm not ashamed to say that it brings me to tears.

You sure got that right!
:)

Maybe YOU would, but a majority of Christians wouldn't.   But wait, you said before that Dylan was more concerned with himself than others?  How can he be a "good person" if he's so self-centered and "makes up his morals and values as he goes"?   So, what you're saying is that God's "law" isn't really unchanging, like you said.   Nice stories, but what do they have to do with God's rules?  If anything, your second one proves MY point, that everyone has their own interpretation of what is right and wrong.  Not long ago, people used the Bible to justify racism, religious prejudice, not to mention umpteen wars.  That is precisely what MLK was fighting against.  His basic premise was that we are all the same, regardless of skin color, religion sex, etc.:

"When we let freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, "Free at last! free at last! thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"
" As long as you believe that...... ::)


The Majority of Christians aren't really Christians then. 

Secondly what I mean by God is unchanging is he isn't going to take the exact same case of something and decide if Mary does it, she's going to be punished, but if Jonie does it she's gonna get away scott free with it.  Now in life, it appears that often people get away with things scott free, because we except that punishment to happen BAM right now.  Often it does not.  We see one person suffer right away after a wrong doing and we have to wait for a long time for the punishment to catch up to another person.  I believe that even if we aren't able to see it, it happens, no avoiding it.

Dylan does make up his rules as he goes along, that doesn't mean that all of his rules he makes up are bad ones.  I also know that people use "chrisitianity" for evil purposes such as defending racism.  Satan is extremely clever in his antics, as far as fighting dirty, I don't think I could find a better example.  Using what's good and skewing it in evil ways and taking what's evil and working with the mind to percieve it as good, sick and sad, but brilliant.

I know good atheist and I know bad atheist.  I like Dylan and consider him to be a better person than some of the so called Christians I know.  They're are a lot of So called Christians in the world, who are not Christians.  Maybe even I'm not a real Christian, but I try as best I can, which is saying more than a lot.  




I agree about Dylan!

These poems, with all their crudities, doubts, and confusions, are written for the love of Man and in praise of God,
and I'd be a damn' fool if they weren't.
Dylan Thomas

Sure he will.  If Mary is someone who "hasn't accepted Jesus as her savior", she's going to hell, DESPITE her beliefs.  If Jonie HAS accepted Jesus, she's going to heaven.  According to the definition YOU gave a while back, if someone hasn't accepted Jesus, they won't get into heaven so it looks like Mary isn't going to heaven.....the ULTIMATE punishment.

Oh, please, don't even bring Satan into this.  The Satanists are an entirely different group...one which I'm sure you have misconceptions about as well. ::)


Anything that will enlighten the discussion leave out, huh?

That's fair though. You accept Jesus you get to go, you don't, you don't.  It's not I don't like you so no matter what you do, you get to go or I like you so even if you don't, you get to go.

What did I leave out?  The role of Satan?  Once again, if you knew anything about "true" Satanism (not what you learned in bible study), it's not about evil.

And, on the whole Heaven thing....that's YOUR perception of how to get there.  I was raised Catholic and there was nothing about "accepting Jesus as your personal savior".  So, even though we prayed to the same God, I guess his rules about me or a Jewish person are different than the rules for you?  Or are the Catholic and Jewish et. al. religions just wrong on that?  Every monotheistic religion must be "wrong" then because "Christianity" is the only one I'm aware of that has that requirement....


Interesting.  The majority of my home town and about 15% -25% of the kids on campus are catholic, they all believe the same way I do about accepting Jesus into your heart.  Only known a couple of Jews in my life, never talked to them about what they believe.  You got me on the Jews part.

Death is our only answer.

Well, the Jews certainly don't believe it because they don't see Jesus as the son of God and an integral part of their religion.

As far as Catholics go, there is MUCH MORE needed to get to heaven than accepting God into your heart (which you do at baptism, which many Christians do not "count" because Catholics are usually baptized at birth).  See, the Catholics realize that there can be "heaven" for those who have NOT accepted God or Jesus based on what Paul writes in (I think Romans).  They also teach the importance of reaffirmation through the sacraments.  There's much more to it than "accepting Jesus".


Can't forget purgatory either.

I agree about Dylan!

These poems, with all their crudities, doubts, and confusions, are written for the love of Man and in praise of God,
and I'd be a damn' fool if they weren't.
Dylan Thomas


We got two different Dylans here bud.

We got two different Dylans here bud.

"Like when you say 'Dylan," he thinks you're talkin' about 'Dylan Thomas.'  Whoever he was.  The man ain't got no cultcha!"
--Paul Simon