Conservative values/principles

[carpedm9587]

Right, it was a return to some of the oldest ideals in history, to some of the oldest traditions known to man. That is the Founding Fathers rejected the new in favor of the old, which is classic conservatism. That's what conservatives do, we reject the status quo in favor of the "old". Your notion that the Founding Fathers were "liberal" in any meaningful sense of the term is absurd.

Ahh.. you're back to your "slice out one sentence from a post so I can claim the win" strategy.

As you wish, MM. I'll leave the last word to you. I have no interest in your disingenuous discussions.

[Mountain Man]

I work with people, MM. I could give a fig about "founders." The founders all brought their own agendas to the organization. Some have since moved on. What the organization is and does is what matters to me - not who founded it or what they thought.



If what they were doing was serving soup to homeless people - no problem.
If what they were doing was joining in the picketing and promoting the views of the founders - big problem.

I work with the local chapter and sometimes with chapters in other cities. I have never encountered a belief within the organization I did not agree with. I have not encountered a belief posted on their national website that I was not sympathetic to. If I was ever required to compromise my ethics in order to work with them, or if the official organization began to espouse views I found ethically problematic, my association with them would end.

The fact that the revelations made to you in this thread about the founders haven't already caused you to question your support for Black Lives Matter -- and my years of experience discussing various matters with you on these forums -- suggests that you would have no problem with rationalizing your association with the group even if you were directly confronted with an idea that you disagreed with. Of course the fact that you can read their (sanitized) manifesto and not find at least one thing that gives you pause is troubling enough.

[Mountain Man]

Ahh.. you're back to your "slice out one sentence from a post so I can claim the win" strategy.

It's more of a "slice out the legs from under your premise and thus collapse your entire argument" strategy.

[seer]

Crime and violence is not associated with skin color; it is associated with poverty.

Carp you do know that more whites live in poverty than blacks? So why are the violent crime numbers so much higher for blacks percentage wise?

If you think it is associated with skin color - if you think having black skin makes you more prone to crime and violence - then you are the very definition of a racist.

I just quoted the stats, I said nothing about skin color causing anything. The point is there is no systemic police racism. That is a myth. BLM is based on a lie.

https://peckford42.wordpress.com/202...police-racism/

Try this, Seer: American citizens are the most lawless, most criminal, most violent people on the planet.

No, not on the planet, but we are the most violent Western nation.

[seanD]

Carp you do know that more whites live in poverty than blacks? So why are the violent crime numbers so much higher for blacks percentage wise?



I just quoted the stats, I said nothing about skin color causing anything. The point is there is no systemic police racism. That is a myth. BLM is based on a lie.

https://peckford42.wordpress.com/202...police-racism/




No, not on the planet, but we are the most violent Western nation.

He's resorting to the typical lib mantra -- implying your a racist. He's resorting to ad hom to cover up the fact he can't refute the stats. I suspect he's going to use the "your just a racist" argument quite heavy in his response. Don't take the bait, Seer.

[Cow Poke]

As you wish, MM. I'll leave the last word to you.

[seer]

He's resorting to the typical lib mantra -- implying your a racist. He's resorting to ad hom to cover up the fact he can't refute the stats. I suspect he's going to use the "your just a racist" argument quite heavy in his response. Don't take the bait, Seer.

Well he hasn't called me a racist yet - just came close. I be fair this is a personal thing for Carp, he has raised two adopted sons that are African American. I give him kudos for that!

[carpedm9587]

Carp you do know that more whites live in poverty than blacks? So why are the violent crime numbers so much higher for blacks percentage wise?

9% of the caucasian population lives in poverty, which is 18.5M people. 22% of the black population lives in poverty, which is 8.8M people. (source)

So of all black and white people living in poverty, 67.8% are white and 32.2% are black.

The U.S department of justice says that white people committed 7.1M crimes and black people committed 2.8M. (https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/crime/ucr.asp?table_in=2)

So of all black and white people who committed crimes, white people committed 71.7% of them and black people 28.3% of them.

See the alignment?

I just quoted the stats, I said nothing about skin color causing anything. The point is there is no systemic police racism. That is a myth. BLM is based on a lie.

https://peckford42.wordpress.com/202...police-racism/

You want to prove a point and you link to someone's blog? And you link to a blog that doesn't even address the specific points I was making? Do you really think this is going to be convincing?

Here, Seer, take a look at the data straight from the horses mouth - the U.S. Sentencing Commission. And if you're going to refute it, try to use data that actually addresses the point being made?

No, not on the planet, but we are the most violent Western nation.

Actually, your response made me go looking, and my inclusion of "violent" made my statement false. For violent crimes, we are nowhere near the top, even for western nations. I should have stayed with "lawless" as measured by the number of people we incarcerate. There we beat everyone else. The closest to us (but still behind) include such marvelous places as El Salvador, Turmenistan, Rwanda, and Cuba: good company for us to be in.

So, you are an American citizen - ergo you are more likely to be a lawless person than someone living in any other country.

[carpedm9587]

He's resorting to the typical lib mantra -- implying your a racist. He's resorting to ad hom to cover up the fact he can't refute the stats. I suspect he's going to use the "your just a racist" argument quite heavy in his response. Don't take the bait, Seer.

Actually - I noted that he would be a racist IF he were implying that violence is linked to skin color - which his statement leaves ambiguous.

And this is the problem with making comments about black people and violence. It is absolutely true that black people commit more violent crimes (percentage-wise) than white people. But that violence has nothing to do with their blackness: it has to do with their poverty. That has been clearly shown in study after study: violence and crime are linked to poverty, not to blackness. Repeatedly associating violence with "being black" continually reinforces the stereotype that "black people are more violent." THAT is part of the systemic racism/bias prevalent in our country.

If you think not - ask yourself why the need to single out the race of the person when referring to the crime if the race has nothing to do with the propensity for committing crimes? It is also statistically true that people with black hair commit more crimes than people with any other hair color, but we do not see people saying, "black-haired people commit more crimes than anyone else!" So why do we have a need to focus on skin color, which is just as irrelevant as hair color, when discussing violence and crime? Why are we not making the ACTUAL association: poverty.

[carpedm9587]

Watch me.

I've actually gotten pretty good at this - after some false starts.

[Cow Poke]

Watch me.

I've actually gotten pretty good at this - after some false starts.

Well, that move has become known as a "Carpe", just like trying to report a thread and accidentally amen'ing it has become known as "a CP".

[JimL]

Wow... what more needs to be said?

How about what exactly it is that you disagree with.

[carpedm9587]

Well he hasn't called me a racist yet - just came close. I be fair this is a personal thing for Carp, he has raised two adopted sons that are African American. I give him kudos for that!

Why do I need kudos for adopting two children? Because they're black?

Seer, my plumbing is screwed up and my wife and I wanted a family. We looked at the options, and adoption seemed to make the most sense. Why go through all of the medical hoops or surrogates or any of that when there is a world of children already out there that need homes. When we went to adopt, there was a place on the form for specifying the child we wanted, right down to hair color and skin color. I was disgusted. I felt like I was ordering a pair of pants - not adopting a human being. My wife and I agreed we would not complete that part and simply indicate "no preference" for all of the defining characteristics.

Turns out, if you do that, you are pretty much assured of getting a black child. You see, black children are hard to place. Most white people don't want to adopt black children. Because the black population is disproportionately poor, the rate of unwanted pregnancies is higher and the number of adults looking to adopt is smaller. So, Isaiah became our son.

When we went to adopt the second time, my wife and I had an interesting argument. This time, she wanted to specify "black" so that Isaiah would be sure of having a sibling of his own race and feel less the "odd-man-out" if we ended up with a white child. While I understood what she was saying, and empathized with the sentiment, it required me to put down on a piece of paper that I was choosing my child on the basis of their skin color. It was not something I could bring myself to do. We almost didn't adopt as a result.

There are no kudos due. While having black children has made me VERY aware of the wide variety of ways that racism creeps into their lives almost every day, I did not choose to have black children. I just choose to have children.

[Cow Poke]

Why do I need kudos for adopting two children? Because they're black?

Seer, my plumbing is screwed up and my wife and I wanted a family. We looked at the options, and adoption seemed to make the most sense. Why go through all of the medical hoops or surrogates or any of that when there is a world of children already out there that need homes. When we went to adopt, there was a place on the form for specifying the child we wanted, right down to hair color and skin color. I was disgusted. I felt like I was ordering a pair of pants - not adopting a human being. My wife and I agreed we would not complete that part and simply indicate "no preference" for all of the defining characteristics.

Turns out, if you do that, you are pretty much assured of getting a black child. You see, black children are hard to place. Most white people don't want to adopt black children. Because the black population is disproportionately poor, the rate of unwanted pregnancies is higher and the number of adults looking to adopt is smaller. So, Isaiah became our son.

When we went to adopt the second time, my wife and I had an interesting argument. This time, she wanted to specify "black" so that Isaiah would be sure of having a sibling of his own race and feel less the "odd-man-out" if we ended up with a white child. While I understood what she was saying, and empathized with the sentiment, it required me to put down on a piece of paper that I was choosing my child on the basis of their skin color. It was not something I could bring myself to do. We almost didn't adopt as a result.

Interesting.

[carpedm9587]

Well, that move has become known as a "Carpe", just like trying to report a thread and accidentally amen'ing it has become known as "a CP".

Yeah... I'm aware. I can live with it.


And yours is MUCH funnier!