Is there a race problem in America?

  • Thread starter Thread starter YHWH_Christ
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The “segration” is done mostly by money and social housing.
That’s the same thing in America. Do you think the government goes around rounding up black people into ghettos or something? Segregated housing has been illegal in the United States for many decades.
 
Last edited:
In a nation of 330 millions of people, you cannot prove anything with a handful of anecdotal instances.
 
That’s the same thing in America. Do you think the government goes around rounding up black people into ghettos or something? Segregated housing has been illegal in the United States for many decades.
I don’t doubt it.

but in France, apart ultramarine territories, populations other than white are mostly present since the 1960’s in metropole, whereas in America Whites have coexisted with Blacks and Native since almost the beginning of European immigration.

We also have no racial statistics, so we can’t said “Black people are more at risk than White to have X health problem”. We don’t have polls that divided the population such as “white/caucasian, non hispanic, black, hispanic, Asian etc”. Or “white mainline, white evangelical, black protestants etc” for a poll on values.

Some conversations and open acts of racism that we can heard or see in US would have finished on trials in our country. It is for eg impossible legally to create neonazi, white supremacists or such type or organizations.

There is also no official racism suspicion among the administration or the State hierarchy. (for eg, we would not have a president who cultivate ambiguity when he speaks of “chinese virus” for the new coronavirus, and then twit about protecting their Asian population). Sorry to be political, but I need an exemple.

Sure the muslins are the first carceral population, and the police controled more in some neigborhoods some of the population based on their ethnicity (who they look). Which is frequently contested. But we don’t have the same police violence who kill people on such a frequent basis when she tried to arrest people (and people who are presumed innocents or are arrested for small things). We also don’t put underage teenagers in adult prisons for eg.

So there is much more social justice issues in America, with the black are more, deliberately or not victims.
 
Last edited:
We also have no racial statistics, so we can’t said “Black people are more at risk than White to have X health problem”. We don’t have polls that divided the population such as “white/caucasian, non hispanic, black, hispanic, Asian etc”. Or “white mainline, white evangelical, black protestants etc” for a poll on values.
Seems to me that is just a convenient way to hide problems. It’s certainly not preventing racism by ignoring race.
Some conversations and open acts of racism that we can heard or see in US would have finished on trials in our country. It is for eg impossible legally to create neonazi, white supremacists or such type or organizations.
That’s because the US actually has free speech and association protections enshrined into our Constitution. I hate nazis and racism, but I’m glad they have the freedom to spout their nonsense. If the government can silence nazis, then one day the government could silence Christians or Muslims or atheists or whatever group you want to cite.

The solution to unpopular speech is more speech not less. And I certainly hope I never live to see people put on trial for disseminating unpopular views in this country.
 
Last edited:
Is anybody really asking if there is a race problem in the United States?

Of course there is. What it is, debate that. That there is? Of course there is. What, when someone says they’re upset, is “no, you are not upset, let me explain why” actually a possible reply?

No. Please. That answer can’t fly. Of course it can’t.
 
And, more to the point, some Catholic churches fairly recently had separate seating areas for black and white parishioners.
Which parishes? Up to what years? I’ve been to Catholic churches all over this country (probably hundreds of different churches) for fifty years and I’ve never seen any such thing.
That happened most notoriously in New Orleans. Schools were segregated, too. And, as we know, Notre Dame did not allow black applicants until the late 40s. One man who was barred by Notre Dame and Princeton eventually got an honorary degree from Princeton – but not Notre Dame! Did you know that Jesuits would not accept black applicants until the sixties?
Poet asked for parishes not schools.
 
Poet asked for parishes not schools.
Orleans parish and Plaquemines parish, notably. The following is from the obituary of New Orleans archbishop Rummel in November 1964. It is notable for me because I attended Mass in New Orleans during the summer of 1964.

"Archbishop Rummel, a large, slow‐moving man with a thick shock of dark hair, had let his views on the anti‐Christian character of segregation be known as early as 1949. At that time, he canceled an outdoor celebration when city officials decreed that Negro worshipers could not participate with whites.

The next year, he had the “White” and “Colored” signs removed from churches. In 1953, he strengthened this measure with an order that Negroes no longer should be made to take communion last and that they should be admitted to parish organizations. These moves were not wholly effective, thanks to the resistance of laymen and many of the clergy."


"In 1951, Archbishop Rummel directed that all Catholic churches remove the “white” and “colored” signs designating proper seating areas. In 1953, he ordained the archdiocese’s first black priest and issued a pastoral letter directing “no further discrimination in the pews, at the Communion rail, at the confessional and in parish meetings, just as there will be no segregation in the Kingdom of Heaven.”
https://web.archive.org/web/20050217080452/http://clarionherald.org/20010118/art501.htm
 
Last edited:
40.png
Poet:
Which denominations and what are their qualifiers?
You don’t remember that Bob Jones University ( a “Christian” institution) barred interracial dating? Or when Mormons would not let black couples marry in the temple?
Which parishes? Up to what years? I’ve been to Catholic churches all over this country (probably hundreds of different churches) for fifty years and I’ve never seen any such thing.
That happened most notoriously in New Orleans. Schools were segregated, too. And, as we know, Notre Dame did not allow black applicants until the late 40s. One man who was barred by Notre Dame and Princeton eventually got an honorary degree from Princeton – but not Notre Dame! Did you know that Jesuits would not accept black applicants until the sixties?
Oh, so you’re going back 20 years for Bob Jones (which is not a church, did not ban black students, was not a legal authority, and apologized for their policy), 65 years for segregated schools, and more than 70 for Notre Dame.

These things are not legal today. So no, it would not be legal to ban a black person from a church.
 
These things are not legal today. So no, it would not be legal to ban a black person from a church.
You are wrong. Because of freedom of religion, a church can bar who it wants. “Unlike most public institutions, churches are not subject to the civil rights laws that have been used to put pressure on schools, businesses and government agencies to accept a racial mix.”


Look, you asked and I answered. Time to move on.
 
Last edited:
more than 70 for Notre Dame.
The black man barred from Notre Dame received an honorary degree from Princeton in 2001. He was a WWII vet and became a judge before he died in 2005. He got nothing from Notre Dame – no apology , no nothing.
 
Last edited:
40.png
Poet:
These things are not legal today. So no, it would not be legal to ban a black person from a church.
You are wrong. Because of freedom of religion, a church can bar who it wants. “Unlike most public institutions, churches are not subject to the civil rights laws that have been used to put pressure on schools, businesses and government agencies to accept a racial mix.”

nytimes.com

Churches Found Still Largely Segregated

Congregation of Pres-elect Carter’s ch in Plains, Ga, is expected to reconsider Nov 14 its policy banning black members; ban against black ch members is not typical in chs throughout US although memberships tend to be segregated; reasons for…

Look, you asked and I answered. Time to move on.
Yes, I asked about churches today and you told me about schools 70 years ago. It was a valid question for evidence about a very serious accusation. You don’t get to make an incorrect statement that segregation is legal in the United States and then inform me ‘it’s time to move on.’

Did you look at the NY Time article you linked, or did you just hope no one else would? It’s dated 1976. This is still 45 years ago.

You made an assertion about what is legal TODAY and you’re backing up that assertion with things that happened 45 to 70 years ago. What happened 70 years ago has nothing to do with what’s legal today.
 
You made an assertion about what is legal TODAY and you’re backing up that assertion with things that happened 45 to 70 years ago. What happened 70 years ago has nothing to do with what’s legal today.
Haven’t you just noticed? The Supreme Court said this week that the Civil Rights Act (passed in '64) applies even more today. So, if churches were exempt from the Civil Rights Act in '76 what makes you think they would not be exempt today? How has the Civil Rights Act been amended since '76?

I gave you historical examples because many here are like me and had no idea of the history of racial segregation in the US. However, I’m old enough to remember when the Civil Rights Act passed in '64.

But, as to today: Do you think the government can make laws telling a religion what persons they must admit to their houses of worship? Doesn’t that sound unconstitutional to you? Weren’t churches exempt from Prohibition, which was a Constitutional amendment?
What happened 70 years ago has nothing to do with what’s legal today.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Check the 14th amendment and how it applies to equal protection of laws today.
 
Last edited:
These things are not legal today. So no, it would not be legal to ban a black person from a church.
None of the churches changed their actions due to state or federal law. Not the Mormons, not Bob Jones University and not the New Orleans diocese.
 
My .02 cents in regards to the OP: I wouldn’t say that the American system with our policies and all are currently racist and descriminatory. There was definitely a time when they were but we have managed to get rid of those laws and pass fair, just legislation. There has also been considerable action taken to help those communities who have been affected by unjust treatment and descrimination and I think that this is good. However, I have seen that more problems have been created in recent years and decades by telling people in our country that there is systematic racism and that evil white people always hate them and want to kill them. This is not good for our social fabric and we cannot build a peaceful nation on such terms. In my honest opinion, we need to STOP with these divisive identity politics and movements and instead ground our common identity in the reality of faith foremostly and also our country and the common good. Also, I am definitely no expert, but having looked at several statistics and anecdotes, it is clear that crime is rampant in inner-city, minority-populated areas, areas that often are on the receiving end of bad policy which only contributes to their sad situation. And so, I think people need to be real and honest about these issues and not lose their minds when it comes to discussing things like police reform or policy change regarding the inner city communities. If anything, we should all seek to evangelize (as always) and promote justice and all the other virtues, seeing as how this is the way to bring true progress and peace.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top