No. Black Lives Matter Is Not Trying to Destroy Your Nuclear Family

Status
Not open for further replies.
Reading it as destroying the nuclear family, and taking it out of the context of building communities and only doing so “to the extent that [people] are comfortable” is indeed misrepresenting them.
This is what was on their website.

“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,” it says on the page titled “What we believe.”

They removed that page without comment.

We are both English speaking nations, mine and yours if you are in USA.

Disrupt means
verb
  1. interrupt (an event, activity, or process) by causing a disturbance or problem.
“flooding disrupted rail services”
  1. drastically alter or destroy the structure of.
“alcohol can disrupt the chromosomes of an unfertilized egg”

Its pretty obvious what that website page and their intent is.

Not sure about you but I have been in very disrupting flooding, it sweeps the land clean of all detritus on it, I can show you some photos of flooding disrupting things.

Altering or destroying the structure of something, Another concept pretty easy to show visually. Think BLM riots where structures are set on fire = car burnt out, shop burnt out.

Major disruption.
 
The situation is worse than Antifa, which has no leaders, no organization, no membership, just a collection of slogans and a style of dress. They’re easy to false-flag because anyone can be Antifa.

Everyone who bleats the chorus of “#BLM is all different!” Doesn’t seem to be willing or able to articulate the actual creeds or differences among the organization, the movement, and the sloganeers. Sure, we get that it’s a coalition of people with a spectrum of beliefs. But they buy into this slogan/movement/organization and they must adopt certain beliefs, goals, and methods. Nobody has articulated what they are. They are just crazy eager to tell us what they aren’t.
 
The comparison of the number of people involved in each group will show that the peaceful protesters we saw in May and June vastly outnumber the people doing violence.
False as usual. You cannot cite a statistic of who didn’t riot, and even if you could it would prove nothing (since you can’t prove a negative; just because someone didn’t arrest you for rioting doesn’t mean you didn’t riot).
 
The number of articles about violence you can post is not a reliable way of gauging how many of the protesters were violent.
Hmmm…The rioters caused over a billion dollars in damages; killed or injured thousands; looted millions of dollars in merchandise; burned hundreds of homes and businesses, across like 30 states, and your argument is “well, there weren’t many of them.” Your weak argument speaks for itself.
 
some clarification debunking the common notion that BLM will “destroy the nuclear family.”
You know, you are right that BLM will not destroy the nuclear family.

That destruction started when President Johnson signed into law the welfare provisions which said that welfare could be granted to a woman with children if a man was not in the home.

And it has been cooking along just fine, thankyouverymuch. Estimates nationwide are that 1 in 3 black women pregnancies end in abortion, and in New York City the estimate is that it is approaching 50%. NPR - not what I would call the most conservative “news” organization, noted in a September 27, 2005 program that 40 years before (1965 for those who are math challenged) about 1 in 4 black children were born to unwed mothers. Fast forward to the program date and the estimate was 70%.

BLM is late to the party. They also appear to have no (as in none) interest in facts. An FBI survey several years ago of people in prison found that across the board, for all races, the number one commonality among prisoners was having no father in the home. So BLM wants “aunties” top step up to the plate?

And we wonder why young black boys are joining gangs at the age of 12?

Marxism thrives on chaos; the more chaos there is in society, the liklier it is that a country can be overthrown.

BLM chants: DEFUND THE POLICE"! “PIGS IN A BLANKET! FRY THEM LIKE BACON!”

BLM has a tremendous amount to say about policing (including getting rid of it) but has yet, to my knowledge to say a single thing about black kids in gangs killing one another. And of course, getting police out of black neighborhoods is going to reduce gang violence right?

So I guess you are right - they do not intend to do what has already been accomplished. And of course we won’t get into the politics of Thousand Currents and Alicia Carroll.
 
“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"

Mothers, parents, and children. No specific mention of fathers.
 
their position on the family doesn’t align with catholic morality
That is my sticking point with this organisation. Pope Francis and many Popes before him have always discussed the Catholic Value and tenet of the nuclear family. Our Lady of Fatima said that it would be one of the targets that would be in the sights of those wanting to destroy it.
That destruction started when President Johnson signed into law the welfare provisions which said that welfare could be granted to a woman with children if a man was not in the home.
Lets not equate welfare issues with the ideology of a group of people who want to dismantle the nuclear family in favour of something they believe a better ideology.

The issue of welfare provisions for women with children left alone, or having to flee from their home, or war and civilian widows meant no return to Depression conditions. Who would see women and children starve and be homeless due to circumstances? We, as Catholics, want to stamp out abortion and provide support for women bringing up babies alone. We need to put our money where our mouth is and get on with it.
 
Last edited:
to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable"
This is the part that entirely too many people wish/choose to ignore.
Mothers, parents, and children. No specific mention of fathers.
Fathers aren’t parents?
Its pretty obvious what that website page and their intent is.
to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable"
Go to a BLM event? You’re fueling a riot. If I were a “peaceful protester” I’d stay home - my mere presence emboldens the rioters to do their thing…
Oh good grief. This sounds like those abortion-rights people who blame peaceful pro-lifers for clinic violence. It’s called blame-shifting. And I don’t think I’m the only one who sees through it.
Black and Leaf seem absolutely obsessed
Participation in this thread is optional. If it bothers you that much, feel free to mute it.
What is a Catholic’s dog in the fight of wanting to convince everyone BLM doesn’t believe what they clearly believe? Usually that is spelled “ulterior motive” to me.
We’re commanded not to bear false witness, for one thing.

The morally outraged right needs to place an asterisk and footnoted disclaimer after their headlines: BLM WANTS TO DESTROY THE NUCLEAR FAMILY!!*****

(*To the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.")
 
Last edited:
Lets not equate welfare issues with the ideology of a group of people who want to dismantle the nuclear family in favour of something they believe a better ideology.
You apparently did not get the irony in my comment. I made no such equation; the OP has the opinion/position that BLM is not out to disrupt the nuclear family. It was long ago disrupted; BLM makes absolutely no effort to address what is perhaps the most significant problem within black families, and that is the absence of a father other than to act as provider of genetics.

BlM cannot destroy what is already in shambles; but it could have, were it to really care a fig about black families, supported the nuclear family by the fathers taking responsibility for their sexual escapades. BLM’s “support” is about as genuine as their "support " for those caught up in gang violence; those killed and wounded, those who are shooters, and the families of all concerned. BLM’s (name removed by moderator)ut to the matter? (crickets)
The issue of welfare provisions for women with children left alone, or having to flee from their home, or war and civilian widows meant no return to Depression conditions.
Okay, we do not have the desperation of families (including fathers) of the Dustbowl, and the Depression (my dad was born in 1912 and my mother in 1917, so I am not exactly ignorant of the time). But if you think things are better, I would vociferously disagree with you. 1965: 25% of children born out of wedlock. 1965 70% born out of wedlock. You think that has no impact on poverty, let alone crime?
We, as Catholics, want to stamp out abortion and provide support for women bringing up babies alone.
I am pro life and don’t need a lecture. Read the above statistics. Those young women are not getting abortions because they have a supportive husband who would father those children. I cannot solve the problem and neither can you, nor can Right To Life. It has to come from within the black community itself. Example is one of the greatest teachers. It isn’t about “my money”. It is about role models or lack thereof. And maybe part of that is about a change in the welfare rules - but that is not a cure.
 
The post formatting is confusing - a CAF thing we have no control over - but that was a response to @VanDerTann blaming peaceful protestors for violent protests. Within that context, I do stand by my analogy.
 
You apparently did not get the irony in my comment.
ok then enough said. It is very hard to tell who is serious and who is not , with their comments on a written platform.
BlM cannot destroy what is already in shambles;
It can though, contribute to its disruption, which is culpability and one of the stated aims of the group or whatever it calls itself.
Okay, we do not have the desperation of families (including fathers) of the Dustbowl, and the Depression (my dad was born in 1912 and my mother in 1917, so I am not exactly ignorant of the time). But if you think things are better, I would vociferously disagree with you. 1965: 25% of children born out of wedlock. 1965 70% born out of wedlock. You think that has no impact on poverty, let alone crime?
Which stat there is a typo
I am pro life and don’t need a lecture. Read the above statistics.
I am pro CAF and dont need a lecture on a conversation I have not had with you.
Thanks for reading this post the way it is intended and not in any other spirit.
 
Last edited:
So what’s your count?
It is not my count. It is the count of the US Crisis Project in conjunction with Princeton University. They counted 10,600 demonstrations across the US from May 24th to August 20th. Violent demonstrations occurred in fewer than 220 locations. On the other hand there were also 360 counter protests in the same period, of these 43 of them turned violent. So it looks like 12% of the counter protests turned violent while only 2% of the racial justice protests turned violent. So I think we know who is more likely to turn violent.
 
It wasn’t right wing counterprotestors who caused a billion dollars in damages.

It was BLM folks.
 
Lets not equate welfare issues with the ideology of a group of people who want to dismantle the nuclear family in favour of something they believe a better ideology.
welfare has been destroying the nuclear family from its start,
We, as Catholics, want to stamp out abortion and provide support for women bringing up babies alone. We need to put our money where our mouth is and get on with it.
but not with policies proven to break apart the family. welfare needs to be reformed or removed and replaced with a pro-family policy.
 
welfare has been destroying the nuclear family from its start,
No, welfare was there for broken families to help pick up the pieces.
Satan is destroying the nuclear family. Lets be honest.
but not with policies proven to break apart the family. welfare needs to be reformed or removed and replaced with a pro-family policy
If a woman has a means to fed and house a baby, when she is pro choice, she will give much more though to not killing the baby.
I dont know how it works in your country but here and in many poorer countries, it can sway a choice.
 
No, welfare was there for broken families to help pick up the pieces.
Satan is destroying the nuclear family. Lets be honest.
the welfare marriage penalty destroyed the nuclear family, you can’t deny it
If a woman has a means to fed and house a baby, when she is pro choice, she will give much more though to not killing the baby.
you don’t think adoption fills this bill for those who can’t afford their decisions?
I dont know how it works in your country but here and in many poorer countries, it can sway a choice.
it is also used as free birth control since abortion is paid for by the government.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top