P
Polak
Guest
It’s a shame you didnt answer my question @blackforest.
I’m particularly curious about your response to this one.
Perhaps you missed them, so here they are again for you to see.
No. Black Lives Matter Is Not Trying to Destroy Your Nuclear Family
- Thread starter blackforest
- Start date
- Status
Perhaps you missed them, so here they are again for you to see.
blackforest
Well-known member
I attend the March for Life because I’m pro-life, not because I align all of my beliefs with Baptists for Life or any number of organizations who show up. If my sign makes a reference to the “right to life,” I don’t even have to align with National Right to Life. If you can’t comprehend this, there’s not much more I can say to you.
@Polak I will not be engaging you on a personal level. Let it go.
P
Polak
Guest
I can understand if you don’t want to answer the 1st question, even if I do not understand why, but I hardly think the 2nd one is personal and is absolutely related to the topic.
You are talking about BLM. You seem to defend it a lot. You’ve stated that the organisation is often misrepresented and demonised and honestly, I don’t remember you ever saying anything negative about it, or criticising it, yet you aren’t a part of it and don’t wish to be. So I was wondering what the reason for that is. Do you see negative aspects in the organisation and that’s why you wouldn’t join?
blackforest
Well-known member
I did criticize Marxism upthread. But as their About page is currently phrased, I don’t take much issue with it. https://blacklivesmatter.com/about/
I’m skeptical of the “gender spectrum” ideology but also know that trans people are made in God’s image and likeness. Also, if the BLM organization truly “center
Overall, I’m not impressed with the organization. It may be time for Catholics concerned about racial justice to get more organized.
R
Raxus
Guest
That’s about all that need be seen here, I’d think.MikeInVA:
Of course not.
R
Raxus
Guest
Yeah they are.
R
Raxus
Guest
Semantics. They can leave the nuclear family right the heck alone, either way.
U
upant
Guest
many people are losing interest in the org and movement because of the violence, especially the violence in the inner city. the rioters are hurting the people they claim are the victims. inner-city dwellers are now victims of the movement.
V
VonDerTann
Guest
News flash - BLM has deleted the “disrupt the nuclear family” on their website.
BLM isn’t changing its core values:
It’s that too many people have figured out what those values are and reject them. BLM’s approval ratings in polling had dropped like a rock (12 points in August) because people see what they’re all about.
BLM isn’t changing its core values:
It’s that too many people have figured out what those values are and reject them. BLM’s approval ratings in polling had dropped like a rock (12 points in August) because people see what they’re all about.
blackforest
Well-known member
Or they got tired of too many Right-wingers misrepresenting them.
V
VonDerTann
Guest
But once again it would have been so easy for them to say so.
There’s a legal expression, “the expression of one thing is the exclusion of another left unsaid.” That applies perfectly here. If they thought their values were being miscited they’d say so. They know dang well what their values are and they know those (unpopular) values have become well known so they’re trying to hide them. Fortunately too many many people (like me!) found out and started to spread the word about what BLM believes…
There’s a legal expression, “the expression of one thing is the exclusion of another left unsaid.” That applies perfectly here. If they thought their values were being miscited they’d say so. They know dang well what their values are and they know those (unpopular) values have become well known so they’re trying to hide them. Fortunately too many many people (like me!) found out and started to spread the word about what BLM believes…
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
That should put to rest any claims that this was ever an important value for the movement.
No need to change their core values. They just had to correct the website to correctly reflect their core values, which never did include “disrupting the nuclear family”.
Since their polling went up like rocket a comparable amount after the killing of George Floyd, rising to a high of 67%, this correction is likely the result of the hard work of Fox News and their ilk in blaming the recent violent unrest on BLM.
V
VonDerTann
Guest
If you believe your post I have a bridge to sell you.
OF COURSE the “disrupt the nuclear family” was important: they wouldn’t have included it on their website if it wasn’t. What IS important is BLM running to delete it when word of it got out.
BLM has existed for years - and by and large, no one cared. Now that they are getting scrutiny in the wake of george Floyd’s overdose death they want to hide what they believe from public scrutiny.
You say their beliefs “never included” “disrupting the nuclear family.” Uh, no, you’re just making false posts to cover for them: their website said that was precisely what they were trying to do.
And btw, through the magnificent wayback site, their old site, in all its anti-family glory, has been retained forever for posterity…
OF COURSE the “disrupt the nuclear family” was important: they wouldn’t have included it on their website if it wasn’t. What IS important is BLM running to delete it when word of it got out.
BLM has existed for years - and by and large, no one cared. Now that they are getting scrutiny in the wake of george Floyd’s overdose death they want to hide what they believe from public scrutiny.
You say their beliefs “never included” “disrupting the nuclear family.” Uh, no, you’re just making false posts to cover for them: their website said that was precisely what they were trying to do.
And btw, through the magnificent wayback site, their old site, in all its anti-family glory, has been retained forever for posterity…
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
That’s all you’ve got, isn’t it? It was on the website (past tense). If it was so important they would not have removed it. Also, if it was so important we would see some actual attempts that that “disruption” of the nuclear family. I guess they had no idea how to do it. It just sounded good when the webmaster wrote it.
When word got out? Was it secret before? Or was it on a public website? Your explanation of their behavior just doesn’t hang together.
That’s because the abuses they protest have gotten on video now and people are seeing what was only described in words previously.
That’s circular reasoning. “Their website say what they were trying to do because… because their website says so!”
Have you checked how far back this “core belief” of disrupting the nuclear family goes? Was it present in 2013? In 2015?
Last edited:
0
0Scarlett_nidiyilii
Guest
Quoting somebody is not “misrepresenting” them.
So…what is your dog in this fight?
V
VonDerTann
Guest
I’m glad that folks like yourself are noticing: Black and Leaf seem absolutely obsessed with “proving” BLM doesn’t really believe what it says it believes.
U
upant
Guest
you still need to prove they were misrepresented, the org hasn’t said the interpretation was wrong.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Only because you seem absolutely obsessed with “proving” that they do. Also you continue to conflate the various "they"s in this narrative.
Last edited:
blackforest
Well-known member
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.
What is any Catholic’s dog in a fight for social justice?
V
VonDerTann
Guest
I didn’t start this thread. When I see posters go out their way to repeatedly defend why an organization, (which has a track record of advocating beliefs inconsistent with catholic theology) doesn’t really believe what they believe, you ought to expect a response. With your 22,000+ posts, you clearly like getting the last word in - and nobody ceded you that right across the board.
- Status