Pennsylvania Dems pass bill blocking whites-only towns with no support from Republicans

evince said:
en.wikipedia.org

Tulsa race massacre - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...
The Tulsa race massacre was a two-day-long terrorist perpetrated by white supremacists that took place in the Greenwood Districtof Tulsa, Oklahoma, United States, between May 31 and June 1, 1921. Mobs of white residents, some of whom had been armed and appointed as deputies by city government officials, attacked black residents and their homes and businesses. The attackers burned and destroyed more than 35 square blocks of the neighborhood—at the time, one of the wealthiest black communities in the United States, colloquially known as "Black Wall Street."The event is considered one of the worst incidents of racial violence in American history.
 
evince said:
The Tulsa race massacre was a two-day-long terrorist perpetrated by white supremacists that took place in the Greenwood Districtof Tulsa, Oklahoma, United States, between May 31 and June 1, 1921. Mobs of white residents, some of whom had been armed and appointed as deputies by city government officials, attacked black residents and their homes and businesses. The attackers burned and destroyed more than 35 square blocks of the neighborhood—at the time, one of the wealthiest black communities in the United States, colloquially known as "Black Wall Street."The event is considered one of the worst incidents of racial violence in American history.
Click to expand...

Literally over a century ago.

Not relevant to the modern world.
 
If they say the 1950s

They know that means what FDR created


If they say earlier they know it shows they want racism back full on

So they never say a date
 
Nomad said:
Well, I am in NO WAY defending or condoning the ridiculous idea of mandating whites only neighborhoods, if for no other reason that it would be impossible to do in the US, even with trump in the WH.

OTOH, I feel that in the interest of fairness and balance I have to take an opportunity to play devil's advocate here and look at it from the other side.

The white side, IOW.

What I'm saying is, before we go off on a knee jerk reactionary tangent about what racist scum white people are and how faultless and blameless non-white people are, maybe it would be enlightening to examine the possible reasons why there are seemingly more and more average, everyday, middle class white people who, after five decades of being fine with integration and a mixed racial makeup in their neighborhoods, are suddenly tiring of what they see in the news to the point that they actually want to create neighborhoods that legally bar non-whites from living there.

This is not something that just occurred out of nowhere for no other reason than racial hatred and these are not trailer dwelling, Confederate flag waving, southern low-trash bigots we're talking about.

Things are changing in some very strange and disturbing ways on both sides of the fence and across racial lines.

So again... why would white people be taking up the idea of not allowing non-white people in their neighborhoods?

Click to expand...
www.famousbirthdays.com

Amir Odom

Content creator and conservative influencer known for videos reacting to liberal issues and "tough topics." He posted a video titled, "Why white privilege isn't a big deal." He has amassed more than 750,000 subscribers on his Amir Odom YouTube channel.
www.famousbirthdays.com www.famousbirthdays.com
 
Teflon Don said:
Is whites only housing even a thing in Pennsylvania
Click to expand...
The main thing that republicans, and one Democrat, voted against was changing the language to add LGBTQ+ to it, making it into a lawsuit ready to happen when the first group made a rule that bathrooms are separated by sex in their "club"...

The law is specific to clubs and fraternities, and says that when it comes to housing and accommodations (bathrooms) you cannot use your first amendment right to choose with whom to assemble by making a club or Fraternity/Sorority and keep out "undesirables" based on race.

The law is now in the Senate, where it appears to be languishing.

The main argument against it, for those that voted against it, is it basically designed to make trial lawyers rich.
 
Damocles said:
The main thing that republicans, and one Democrat, voted against was changing the language to add LGBTQ+ to it, making it into a lawsuit ready to happen when the first group made a rule that bathrooms are separated by sex in their "club"...

The law is specific to clubs and fraternities, and says that when it comes to housing and accommodations (bathrooms) you cannot use your first amendment right to choose with whom to assemble by making a club or Fraternity/Sorority and keep out "undesirables" based on race.

The law is now in the Senate, where it appears to be languishing.

The main argument against it, for those that voted against it, is it basically designed to make trial lawyers rich.
Click to expand...
There it is. I knew it wasn’t as “simple” as our simple friends on the left make it out to be. I guess they still think it is Selma.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top