Michele Bachmann signed marriage pact suggesting black families were better off during slavery

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gift_from_God
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
_Abyssinia said:
What is meant is that families were better off in that there were more two parent families, they are not saying slavery was good for Black people. They are not saying slavery was the reason as to why there were more two parent Black families, it just a point of history.
Click to expand...
How many of those families under slavery were broken up when one parent was sold off? Black families had no security at all under slavery. The pledge was poorly written.
 
antonivs said:
How many of those families under slavery were broken up when one parent was sold off? Black families had no security at all under slavery. The pledge was poorly written.
Click to expand...
Do we really know how many slaves were sold separate from their families and how many were sold WITH their families? I don’t think we do. I do know that in past years, before our all encompassing welfare programs, there were more in tact black families than their are now. And I know that having babies out of wedlock was as frowned on in the black community as they were in the white community.
 
Gift_from_God said:
What really irks me is why someone would even suggest that blacks families were better off during slavery, especially considering that the parents of slaves were often sold to other people
Click to expand...
mary_bobo said:
Do we really know how many slaves were sold separate from their families and how many were sold WITH their families? I don’t think we do. I do know that in past years, before our all encompassing welfare programs, there were more in tact black families than their are now. And I know that having babies out of wedlock was as frowned on in the black community as they were in the white community.
Click to expand...
We know that under slavery 400,000 black children a year were not being killed.
 
James_Trevor said:
I assume they meant that today a child conceived in an African-American family has a great chance of being aborted. Statistically speaking at least.

I think (again I think) that this has a lot to do with the subconscious racism in our society. Who makes up a large portion of poor inner-city population? African-Americans. What schools are underpaid and under-educated? Inner-city schools. Why do families turn to abortion? Lack of education and perceived future financial troubles.

It seems to me like society tucks much of it’s minorities in the inner-cities, doesn’t create fair opportunities for them to get out and forgets about them.
Click to expand...
What is means is that in today’s America, under a black President, a black child has a mich higher chance of either being aborted or raised by a single mother than it did during the slavery period. Truth is a funny thing. The NAACP hates this statement, but it is true nontheless.
 
estesbob said:
So you don’t think 400,00 dead african American children a year has any impact on the African American family?
Click to expand...
Part of the pledge stated that black children are more likely to be raised by a single parent since the election of Obama as opposed to the age of slavery. Hence, abortion is irrelevant to the thread
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
Abortion destroys families, and since abortion disportionately affects black people, it is very relevant to this conversation.
Click to expand...
But this is about black kids being raised by two parents today as opposed to 150 years ago. If this was about black people procreating, or if this was about how families have been destroyed in general, then abortion would be relevant to the thread
 
Gift_from_God said:
But this is about black kids being raised by two parents today as opposed to 150 years ago. If this was about black people procreating, then this would be relevant
Click to expand...
It takes 2 people to procreate…and without procreation there are no children.
 
After signing this “pledge”, Bachmann is basically out of the running for the nomination. Had she and the other guy taken the time to read it, I doubt that either would have signed it. Now that the racist commentary has been taken out, let’s see how fast the others sign it. Do you really think they will??? I don’t. Gingrich won’t. Romney won’t. Cain won’t. (Cause he doesn’t like to read.)

The Swiftboat is heading towards any one who is signing this silliness!
:cool:
 
So many Republican politicians seem to forget that their every move will be filtered through the lens of a leftist MSM.

It is not sufficient to just be factually correct. A little sensitivity to how something might actually sound would go a long way too.

On some issues, saying you are sorry and retraction don’t carry a whole lot of weight after the fact.
 
Personanongrata said:
After signing this “pledge”, Bachmann is basically out of the running for the nomination. Had she and the other guy taken the time to read it, I doubt that either would have signed it. Now that the racist commentary has been taken out, let’s see how fast the others sign it. Do you really think they will??? I don’t. Gingrich won’t. Romney won’t. Cain won’t. (Cause he doesn’t like to read.)

The Swiftboat is heading towards any one who is signing this silliness!
:cool:
Click to expand...
It’s not an issue other than among the left wing blogosphere. She is likely going to end up as the next VP the United States
 
As a Republican, I find this pledge offensive and very un-Republican.

I will not vote for any candidate that signs that pledge, primary or general.
 
Darryl1958 said:
So many Republican politicians seem to forget that their every move will be filtered through the lens of a leftist MSM.
Click to expand...
True, but I think it’s fair to say that Obama will be under the magnifying glass of FOX News until the election
 
Slavery had a disastrous impact on African-American families, yet sadly a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African-American baby born after the election of the USA’s first African-American President,’

Be careful. You all fell for the political slant, the twisting slur taunting that Republicans believe slavery is not so bad. We all know that slavery was bad, especially chattel slavery, the kind our country practiced. The statement says that black families are especially having a rough time now - that they were more intact during slavery! The statement decries what’s presently happening to black families, it’s not justifying slavery. It’s saying black families are having a rough go of it right now.

It’s like using Hitler or the Nazis to show evil. We all know Hitler and the Nazis are bad, that’s the purpose of the comparison.

Sadly, a republican can’t talk about slavery or blacks or their words will be twisted and they’re called a racist. And then good people fall for it. That does not benefit blacks or our country. It benefits Democrat politics.
 
incense said:
It’s like using Hitler or the Nazis to show evil. We all know Hitler and the Nazis are bad, that’s the purpose of the comparison.
Click to expand...
I think most would agree, most of the time the Hitler/Nazi comparisons are used they fail miserably and never really do compare. I think most people will say that comparing people to Hitler and Nazis is never a smart thing to do.

While Gov. Gary Johnson is not my first choice (since he’s pro-choice), I find that he has more common sense than most candidates, and I do agree with the statement he issued:
July 9, 2011, Las Vegas, Nevada – Presidential candidate and former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson charged today in a formal statement through his campaign that the Family Leader “pledge” Republican candidates for President are being asked to sign is “offensive to the principles of liberty and freedom on which this country was founded”. Governor Johnson also plans to further state his position against the Family Leader pledge this afternoon in Las Vegas, NV at a speech he will deliver at the Conservative Leadership Conference.
Click to expand...
Johnson went on to state that “the so-called ‘Marriage Vow” pledge that FAMILY LEADER is asking Republican candidates for President to sign attacks minority segments of our population and attempts to prevent and eliminate personal freedom. This type of rhetoric is what gives Republicans a bad name.
Click to expand...
“Government should not be involved in the bedrooms of consenting adults. I have always been a strong advocate of liberty and freedom from unnecessary government intervention into our lives. The freedoms that our forefathers fought for in this country are sacred and must be preserved. The Republican Party cannot be sidetracked into discussing these morally judgmental issues — such a discussion is simply wrongheaded. We need to maintain our position as the party of efficient government management and the watchdogs of the “public’s pocket book”.
Click to expand...
“This ‘pledge’ is nothing short of a promise to discriminate against everyone who makes a personal choice that doesn’t fit into a particular definition of ‘virtue’.
Click to expand...
While the Family Leader pledge covers just about every other so-called virtue they can think of, the one that is conspicuously missing is tolerance. In one concise document, they manage to condemn gays, single parents, single individuals, divorcees, Muslims, gays in the military, unmarried couples, women who choose to have abortions, and everyone else who doesn’t fit in a Norman Rockwell painting.
Click to expand...
The Republican Party cannot afford to have a Presidential candidate who condones intolerance, bigotry and the denial of liberty to the citizens of this country. If we nominate such a candidate, we will never capture the White House in 2012. If candidates who sign this pledge somehow think they are scoring some points with some core constituency of the Republican Party, they are doing so at the peril of writing off the vast majority of Americans who want no part of this ‘pledge’ and its offensive language.
Click to expand...
 
Gift_from_God said:
Part of the pledge stated that black children are more likely to be raised by a single parent since the election of Obama as opposed to the age of slavery. Hence, abortion is irrelevant to the thread
Click to expand...
So are you refuting that statistic?
 
Gift_from_God said:
True, but I think it’s fair to say that Obama will be under the magnifying glass of FOX News until the election
Click to expand...
I don’t know. Truth be told, I don’t watch Fox all that much.
Actually, not at all.

So do liberals generally watch it enough to know, or is it mostly a case of “I heard it from a friend of a friend sort of deal” with you guys too?

For sure, Obama was under the microscope in the conservative publications that I read regularly, such as Townhall and National Review. Stanley Kurtz was particularly thorough.

Overall though, the attitude on most of the mains TV networks that I tuned into during the election was rather smiley faced and glowing when it came to doing the Obama talk.
No microscopes there.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top