• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

If we are not "post-racial" in the U.S., who is to blame?

The concept of America being "post-racial" -- IOW, race doesn't matter -- is debated constantly in the media, particularly the liberal media. Bill O'Reilly recently established the battle ground on his FNC show, saying that if Dr. King was alive today, he would be shocked to see what has become of the civil rights movement. He accused people like Al Sharpton of being corporate sellouts and not tackling the real issues plaguing the black community, instead keeping their speeches "heavy on grievance."

O’Reilly found it amazing how instead of talking about personal and familial responsibility, many of the speeches in Washington focused on racial profiling, voter ID, government money for social programs, and even comparing Trayvon Martin to Emmett Till. For those of you having no clue, Till was a 14-year-old Mississippi boy killed on August 28, 1941 (!!) for daring to flirt with a white woman. Gimme a break. There is no comparison. Martin was no Till.

O’Reilly went on to argue that the "collapse of the traditional family is a far more pressing issue in the black community," one that Dr. King would be "broken-hearted" about.

He then targeted Sharpton for benefitting financially from his civil rights work through his group National Action Network. O’Reilly concluded that many of the left are being pressured by teachers’ unions to avoid taking on education reform, and care more about promoting "grievance" than engaging in any kind of "meaningful problem solving."

In my view, O'Reilly is exactly right.

For example, racial profiling: Is it a real issue, or is it simply the statistically proven fact that black teens commit more crimes than almost anyone else?

Voter ID: What is the issue of expecting someone to be who they claim to be when they go vote? The "argument" that the black and other minority community members "can't afford ID" is as bogus as a $3 bill. It isn't a "black issue" and to call it one is nothing more that deceptive campaigning.

Government money for social programs: It is bankrupting us as the Great Pretender and his liberal/socialist cronies build a nanny-state.

Real ethnic issue -- there is only one race: Human, and I refuse to use the term "racial" because it is a coined word that deliberately separates us from one another based on appearance and not true "race traits" (we all have the same genes) -- real ethnic issues are indeed the family and the lack of male input into the young black teen's life. Regardless of what the feminista agenda says, men are necessary for well-rounded spiritual, social and intellectual development among young people of any ethnic or cultural background. Particularly and specifically, the lack of male family leadership in the black community prevents the proper social and spiritual development that leads to responsible adulthood.

Sharpton et al need to direct their attention to these major issues among their constituency, and stop robbing them at the point of a false doctrine in order to live lavish lifestyles that seem to be solely dedicated to perpetuation the myth that whites and white "racism" are responsible for the plight of the American black family -- not to mention being famous by virtue of their constant TV appearances denouncing the very people who support them (whites provide over three-quarters of the funding for the civil rights industry).

Your turn.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Matt Black

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Just a quick one to thank you for starting this thread and to say that, for me, it's not an 'either/or' but a 'both/and'. Work is getting in the way of a more fulsome response....
 

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Orielly's response was to race baiters like Sharpton.But in general regardless of what race has more issues we are all people and we should address these problems across the board without pointing out the race.

There are far to many fatherless homes and dead beat dads. It needs to change.

There are far ti many people who make excuses for their plight in the world and need to be empowered to be self sustaining. There are to many conversations about how to provide things and stuff for people but there are no conversations about how to get people to stand on their own two feet. That is completely ignored in all the conversations.

Address people not color. All these problems are common among everyone.
 
All true, Rev. However, the plight of the single-parent household is far more egregious among that ethnic segment of society than it is in any other, by far. Sixty-five percent of black households are single-parent households. Native American households are next at 49%, Hispanic-Latino are at 37%, Whites at 23% and Asian-Pacific Islanders at 17%.

Overall, slightly less than a third of all households are single-parent in the U.S., while nearly two-thirds of black families are single-parent. It is a crisis for these families, as it is the norm rather than the exception as it is with other ethnic-cultural groups. O'Reilly may have been responding to Sharpton's "race-baiting" but his point is valid, and while the breakdown of the family needs to be addressed across all of American culture, it is particularly devastating to the black community.

These are the real issues behind black crime, black poverty, black gangs, black educational needs. It isn't a matter of anyone but themselves "keeping them down" as they do a sufficient job of that on their own by virtue of the rapid breakdown of their family structures.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
We need to ignore them and provide an alternative message and make sure that message is as loud or louder than theirs.
That might work, but it would be easier to get them onboard with the alternate message, as what you're talking about is also fomenting -- or rather, continuing -- divisiveness.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top