Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Hmmm... didn't realize the 14th outlawed segregation! Can you point that out to me, and while you're at it, explain why our society continued to practice segregation LONG after passage of the 14th Amendment?
Segregation now, segregation forever!
- Thread starter Dixie - In Memoriam
- Start date
Hmmm... didn't realize the 14th outlawed segregation! Can you point that out to me, and while you're at it, explain why our society continued to practice segregation LONG after passage of the 14th Amendment?
Check Brown v. Board of Education and the interpertation of the 14th as to how it outlaws segregation.
Because the S.Ct wrongly decided Plessy v. Furgeson.
I thought this was basic 8th grade stuff!
Also you shold read about
the... The Civil Rights Act (1875):
The Civil Rights Act (1875) was introduced to Congress by Charles Sumner and Benjamin Butler in 1870 but did not become law until 1st March, 1875. It promised that all persons, regardless of race, color, or previous condition, was entitled to full and equal employment of accommodation in "inns, public conveyances on land or water, theaters, and other places of public amusement." In 1883 the Supreme Court declared the act as unconstitutional and asserted that Congress did not have the power to regulate the conduct and transactions of individuals.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAcivil1875.htm
Now change what you claimed again!
This passed both houses of Congress!
the... The Civil Rights Act (1875):
The Civil Rights Act (1875) was introduced to Congress by Charles Sumner and Benjamin Butler in 1870 but did not become law until 1st March, 1875. It promised that all persons, regardless of race, color, or previous condition, was entitled to full and equal employment of accommodation in "inns, public conveyances on land or water, theaters, and other places of public amusement." In 1883 the Supreme Court declared the act as unconstitutional and asserted that Congress did not have the power to regulate the conduct and transactions of individuals.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAcivil1875.htm
Now change what you claimed again!
This passed both houses of Congress!
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
Oh it is 8th grade stuff, did you fail again this year?
The period of time I am referring to, is between passage of the 14th and Brown v. BOE. I think Plessy v. Ferguson upholds MY point, that segregation was legal, accepted, and upheld by the Supreme Court for decades.
See.... what you pinheads continue to try and do, is run up to 1948, or 1954, or 1964, grab some landmark Civil Rights event, and then ruuuuun back to 1901 and make THAT the law back then! My argument and point has been consistent, from the Civil War until after WWII, this country held a policy of segregation across the board from coast to coast. Not one single politician advocated desegregation during all that time. YES... EVENTUALLY THEY DID! You act like I have stated that no politician has EVER advocated desegregation in the history of the nation, and I never said that or made such an absurd argument. But you still keep trying to make that my argument!
But the intent of those who proposed the 14 was to end segrigation, its clear from the wording, the Supreme famously has admited as much. So, sure the supreme court was filled with segrigationsts, but Congress was not. Those who wrote and supported the 14th were advocating a policy to end segergation, as were those who wrote and supported THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1875!
Just because they were defeated and the efforts of these lawmakers were not realized until the 1960's does not mean they were not fighting for it!
Wooofully ignorant!
The Civil Rights Act of 1875... passed by congress in 1875...
"That any person who shall violate the foregoing section by denying to any citizen, except for reasons by law applicable to citizens of every race and color, and regardless of any previous condition of servitude, the full enjoyment of any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, or privileges in said section enumerated, or by aiding or inciting such denial, shall, for every such offense, forfeit and pay the sum of five hundred dollars to the person aggrieved thereby, . . . and shall also, for every such offense, be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not less than five hundred nor more than one thousand dollars, or shall be imprisoned not less than thirty days nor more than one year . . .
That no citizen possessing all other qualifications which are or may be prescribed by law shall be disqualified for service as grand or petit juror in any court of the United States, or of any State, on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude; and any officer or other person charged with any duty in the selection or summoning of jurors who shall exclude or fail to summon any citizen for the cause aforesaid shall, on conviction thereof, be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and be fined not more than five thousand dollars."
The Civil Rights Act of 1875... passed by congress in 1875...
"That any person who shall violate the foregoing section by denying to any citizen, except for reasons by law applicable to citizens of every race and color, and regardless of any previous condition of servitude, the full enjoyment of any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, or privileges in said section enumerated, or by aiding or inciting such denial, shall, for every such offense, forfeit and pay the sum of five hundred dollars to the person aggrieved thereby, . . . and shall also, for every such offense, be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not less than five hundred nor more than one thousand dollars, or shall be imprisoned not less than thirty days nor more than one year . . .
That no citizen possessing all other qualifications which are or may be prescribed by law shall be disqualified for service as grand or petit juror in any court of the United States, or of any State, on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude; and any officer or other person charged with any duty in the selection or summoning of jurors who shall exclude or fail to summon any citizen for the cause aforesaid shall, on conviction thereof, be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and be fined not more than five thousand dollars."
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
So you are going to use an example of a law passed by a Congress which didn't represent half the people in the country at the time (the South) because of reconstruction, and who's law was found to be unconstitutional by the SCOTUS, as an example of how America stood tall for desegregation?
You gotta be kidding me!
Let's stop with the obtuseness here. Lincoln himself didn't want blacks mingling with whites in society, and the overwhelming majority of white people in America, did not want to share their schools, restaurants, bathrooms, with black people. Now you can pretend that because some white elites in the North who didn't have any blacks to speak of in their society, voted for the 1875 act as a means to punish the South, was an indicator of how non-prejudiced America was, but you are an idiot.
YOU SAID that NO polititians were for desegrigation until 1960's... FALSE, these NORTHERN ones were, they wrote legislation for it and PASSED it. I never said it was AMERICA STANDING TALL, I said the struggle lasted over 100 years!
Last edited:
Another Republican....
Thats AWSOME! I belive that the Republican party had a very good civil rights record for the time back in the 1870's.
Had I been alive then I would have been a Republican, they were the liberals of the time!
Yes, then and now...if you weren't brainwashed by the revisionist history you've been bombarded with, you might realize that...
Of course, when I was young and dumb, back in the LBJ days, I was a Democrat....but since, I've opened my eyes,...... I amazed some of you can't...
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
No you dimwit, that's NOT what I am saying.
In 1870, less than 1% of blacks lived in the North. The legislation you are crowing about, did not effect the Northern states in the least, they weren't going to have to integrate anyway! The ONLY reason the legislation was even brought to the floor, was because of vindictiveness toward the South in the wake of the Civil War and assassination of Lincoln. The Congress of the time, was comprised of Northerners and representatives from the South who were appointed by Northerners for the blacks. This had nothing to do with desegregating society, it had to do with punishing the South.
Seems you still have a huge gaping hole... from 1873 to 1948, where you can't find evidence of this social fight for civil rights. And we still have the illustrious Supreme Court, through all those years, in all those cases, upholding the practice of discrimination and segregation. Seems you have a LOT left to refute here, better get busy!
Dixie - In Memoriam
New member
LOL... Why don't you give examples of the illustrious liberal Senators and Congressmen who were standing up demanding desegregation while their constituents in Wisconsin and Illinois were cruising through neighborhoods murdering black people who they feared would steal their jobs? Tell us about the New York and California representatives who were demanding we end segregation while their constituents torched Harlem and Watts! Let's hear about all these great and wonderful liberal leaders who were fighting the good fight all that time, through all that turmoil.
Unfortunately, your profound ignorance of the history (and scope) of racism and discrimination in America, is revealed in your responses. It would probably be better for all involved if you just shut up and move on.
There are two sides to the Civil Rights battle.... You only asked about one side... but almost all of your claims have been illistrated to have been terrably wrong and illistrative of your extreem ignorance about CIVIL RIGHTS from 1865 to present!
Last edited:
The reason I support Gay marriage over civil unions is becasue of the holding in Brown V. Board of Education... Seperate is NOT equal!