Black Lives Matters vs All Lives Matters

  • Thread starter Thread starter SusieQ57
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
adamhovey1988 said:
And I could correctly say your statement is racis
Click to expand...
That’s very rude. My statement is not racist and it is surprising that you say you are “correct” in stating that. Did you even read the rest of my post? I am talking about how right now there is a focus on mistreatments of black people because of what is going on in the country!! I also feel terrible that other minority groups are being oppresssed and mistreated. Of course that is awful. But plenty of these minority groups have said the slogan “black lives matter.”

And I am referencing the phrase. Not the organization BLM. Obviously I am pro life. But even people who aren’t pro life deserve equal rights and fair treatment. As does everyone.

I do not understand why you would like to be hostile on this forum and it is a community and I have never experienced anything but kindness. It is one thing to express your opinion. It is another to say that my statement is racist.
 
My personal belief is that BLM is inherently racist. I shouldn’t have to preface a statement with the fact I’m mixed race to call out a Marxist terorist group, and that IS what they are.
 
Ok so you’re stating that an organization is racist in your opinion. Fine. But saying my statement was does not make sense to me.
 
Last edited:
sealabeag said:
I don’t and won’t use either slogan, because “black lives matter” is, in my opinion, too deeply rooted in political ideology with which I strongly disagree, and is also a truism, whilst “all lives matter” makes one seem like a racist in the eyes of others, and is also a truism. Slogans are generally unhelpful and divisive. I try to speak in more nuanced language, as what I believe and think cannot be expressed in 3 word slogans.
The idea of two sides, one shouting “black lives matter” and the other “all lives matter” at each other makes me cringe and a little concerned for the future of society.
And also social media is not conducive to constructive conversation, in my opinion. 🙂
Click to expand...
I like this approach. This is why I don’t claim the feminist brand, nor do I try to edit it with adjectives to make it reflect my view point. I just actually talk about my opinions which are neither conservative or traditional, which usually leaves people confused but that’s a whole other story.
 
Last edited:
adamhovey1988 said:
My personal belief is that BLM is inherently racist.
Click to expand...
I don’t think think they’re racist. I just think their politics is inherently wrong due to all the positions that oppose Catholic teaching. All the parties in the US are like that, with the exception of the American Solidarity Party.
 
RolandThompsonGunner said:
I get your point, but I would resist the urge to link everything back to abortion. Remember how annoying it is as a pro-life person when someone goes, “oh yeah? If you’re so pro-life why aren’t you lobbying for more social services for single moms?”

It’s impossible for any group or event to address every possible issue under the sun. We shouldn’t assume that just because someone is advocating for x that they don’t care about y.
Click to expand...
Thank you! I just can’t even with the trying to make every.single.thing. come back to abortion. It’s insulting to those dealing with or advocating other issues. There are tons anti-abortion advocates, since like forever, don’t try to take the shine off people being passionate about other issues that are getting attention.
 
Last edited:
…what concrete steps, if any, could we take to try to bring about economic justice? Before answering this question, let me deal briefly with one more objection. In view of the many grave problems in the world today — the horrible reality of abortion, the probable impending legal acceptance of euthanasia, the attacks on family life, the defection of hundreds of thousands of Catholics from the Church — is now the time for us, for anyone, to work actively for the establishment of economic justice? I believe that it is, or rather, that it can be. I concede that abortion is certainly a graver issue, for it is a worse injustice to take someone’s life than merely his job or his home. But everyone has a different vocation, and those who think that they are called to work in pursuit of justice in economic life ought not to be criticized by, nor to criticize, those who believe they are called to work to prevent the murder of the unborn or the aged or in some other area. There are many legitimate apostolates in Christ’s Mystical Body.
Click to expand...
Thomas Storck.
 
catholiclala said:
I don’t think there is a pointed agenda to go after poor minorities but there is a mismanagement of resources that does affect the most vulnerable, who are primarily people of color.
Click to expand...
In other words . . . systemic racism? That seems like a pretty apt definition to me.
sealabeag said:
whilst “all lives matter” makes one seem like a racist in the eyes of others, and is also a truism.
Click to expand...
Nobody with a conscience would deny that all lives matter. It’s just that wielding this phrase in the BLM context is the ideological equivalent of pro-choicers accusing pro-lifers of “not caring about born people.”

And if the abortion issue is wearing thin for people, here’s another fitting analogy. Stop asking me ‘what about men?’ – VictimFocus Blog
 
I read many of the responses, but not all.

Yes, black lives matter, and white lives, and yellow, and brown, and whatever color of the spectrum people are. This isn’t taking away from any person or group.

Does society have some effect on how people are treated. I am certain it does. Not being of color I can’t say what it is like to be of color. But I can say there are many personal choices that affect people much more than societal factors.

Below are a couple of links regarding breakdown of family over the past several decades, and crime data. You are much, much more likely to be killed by someone of your own race than by someone of another race. You are much less likely to be successful if you come from a broken family. You are more likely to live with less means if you come from a broken family.

If people want to see change, they need to enact change, starting with the core reasons of what causes people to have a harder time in life. Get married, stay married, take care of your children, be there for them and teach them to succeed.


https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u....016/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-3.xls
 
As a Catholic, I stand with “all lives matter”. The word “catholic” in “one holy, catholic and apostolic Church” comes from the ancient Greek “katholicos” meaning universal. But I have to live in the real world where being Catholic is itself decidedly counterculture and I can understand why it is such a trigger phrase so I don’t use it publicly. On the other hand, I can’t support the use of “black lives matter” either for reasons I’ll outline here:

First, the organization stands for at least a couple of positions that are in conflict with Catholic teachings. @VonDerTann has expanded on that a little bit above.

Second, the slogan has been hijacked by other leftist causes as has been pointed out by @catholiclala as something she didn’t like to see. An example I’ll point out is open borders which is economically inimical to black Americans as open borders essentially means inviting people to compete with blacks and other poor Americans for the same jobs. People should remember this is my example, not hers as I don’t know how she feels about open borders.

Third, the slogan has been hijacked by the DNC. Donations to Black Lives Matter, inc., actually go to ActBlue which is a DNC-controlled foundation that donates to the Biden campaign, among many other Democrat platform causes. It is possible to support BLM but not like the DNC; to me, that is not inconsistent: then I would suggest to donate direct to the local chapter; don’t go through ActBlue because the donation might not go where desired. This is not a new problem, this is an issue with United Way and CRS, for instance, supporting organizations that I as a Catholic cannot support.

Fourth, it’s well past time to ask if black lives matter, does that mean all black lives? Or does that only mean black victims of cops and/or white people? Is it permitted to ask if unborn blacks matter? Do all black victims of black perpetrators matter? Do all black-owned businesses matter? Judging by their actions so far, I don’t think so. I would suggest that if they were truly serious about “black lives matter”, they’d be looking at the greater picture around the war on drugs and its toll on the inner cities, at the greater picture around fatherless families and Planned Parenthood. Also that they would stop burning down black-owned businesses. That would be something I could support.

Maybe it’s time to admit that the Democrat Party, having run the nation’s cities for generations, has not served black Americans any better than the Republican Party has, that blacks are better off going their own way politically without getting their cause hijacked by white liberals.
 
Last edited:
If black lives matter so much to those protesting then where is the same outrage over black on black killings in cities such as Chicago, Detroit, Birmingham, etc. Look at those numbers.

Racism is as HUGE problem, but not as big as the problem within, the breakdown of family, faith, and civility. Yes black lives matter, but not just when there is an incident involving a bad cop. You can not blame the police for all the inner city problems.
 
farronwolf said:
If people want to see change, they need to enact change, starting with the core reasons of what causes people to have a harder time in life. Get married, stay married, take care of your children, be there for them and teach them to succeed
Click to expand...
I can and will support this 100%. It all starts with the family, particularly the father. Once Satan gets to the father (in whatever way; e.g. divorce, abandonment, alcoholism/drugs, gangs, crime and prison, sleeping around, etc.) the mother/wife and children simply have a lower chance of succeeding and breaking the cycle.
 
Mrchatsworth said:
I’m an “all lives matter” person and I can’t believe that simple sentence has now been hijacked to classify someone as racist.
Click to expand...
Not exactly racist but certainly misinformed. Did you think that ‘black is beautiful’ meant white is ugly?

As has been stated, pushing ‘all lives matter’ is like telling the American Cancer Society that all diseases matter. It is off the point and somewhat pejorative.
 
Last edited:
But that’s what’s happened with the pro life movement don’t you think? Pro life used to center on abortion, now it’s used as a banner for social “justice” issues.
The point is all lives matter. None matter more or less. If people can’t see that, then they can’t see past color.
 
However, BLM sometimes reminds me of BLT, so it’s not such a great acronym either.

Some are now counteracting with “Blue Lives Matter” in defense of the police. This should be a unifying acronym of BLM, but then you have the unfortunate “black and blue” phrase.
 
So for discussion sake. What is the biggest threat to “black” lives, since color seems to make a difference?

What single thing would make the most difference in “black” lives. After that, what is the second largest thing affecting “black” lives?

Are these things different than what affects whites, or brown, or yellow lives?
 
VonDerTann said:
–“We disrupt…the nuclear family structure…”
Click to expand...
I thought this one was particularly odd for such an organization to have as a policy, so I went to the website and looked at it in context.

“We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.”

While “disrupt” is a strangely aggressive verb to choose, note that it’s about “supporting each other,” “to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.”

They’re talking about people expanding their own support and childcare networks to include extended family and friends, just as people have always done (the nuclear family living by itself being actually an anomaly in human history). And doing so by choice, to the degree they feel comfortable with it. Not going around and disrupting other people’s nuclear families.
 
I also went and read their page after that initial post.

What I find intriguing is that they label “western-prescribed” nuclear family. In reality, it is really world wide that two parent family structure is predominant. In the US, the nuclear family is well below most of the rest of the world.

So is this disruption due to the fact that it fits what has actually happened, and it requires that community support others for them to be viable, or that it is a better approach?

When you have a single parent household with children, yes, others must come to the support in order for the single parent to have a job to pay the bills. Or the support must come from the taxpayers so that the single parent can stay home to care for the children. When those are the two options, one must disrupt the prescribed family and insist on support.

I also find it intriguing that mothers are listed first, before parents and especially children. Maybe I am reading too much into it.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top