Showing posts with label racism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label racism. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 20, 2011

Discrimination begins in the womb



My friend Gerry Nadal is confounded.

The man isn't confused often; he's a PhD in Microbiology, and is one of those rare people who makes full use of both hemispheres of his brain, he's as eloquent and insightful about historical perspective as he is brilliant about microbiology. So when Gerry is perplexed, its for a darn good reason. He, like me is absolutely flummoxed that the NAACP is opposed to the Susan B. Anthony and Frederick Douglass Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act of 2011, Why would the NAACP among other so-called civil rights organizations, oppose a bill which would make it illegal to discriminate against unborn babies on the basis of sex or race?


He elaborates here;



"The Bill in question will make it illegal to target babies for abortion based on gender or race, and admittedly raises a problem for Planned Parenthood. Under the Bill, abortionists can be imprisoned for not determining if the race or gender of the baby was a determinative factor in aborting.

In practical terms, it’s doubtful that at the individual level this would affect many African American abortions, as the mothers aren’t aborting because of their child’s race. It does, however, have implications at the macro-level when an organization such as Planned Parenthood operates 78% of their centers in inner-city neighborhoods.

That said, why would any civil rights organization (and there are 45 others opposed to this Bill, including the National Council of Jewish Women) object to the Bill’s language or intent? Supposedly, the opposition is to the names of the two great leaders on the Bill, and therein resides a hornets nest of gender and racial politics, of political correctness. So, let’s lance the boil."

So, its the name is it? Those organizations can't state their true objective, undying allegiance to abortion as a way of life, so they have to find some detail to focus upon. But wait, what about this bill is incongruous to the legacy of tolerance and justice for which we honor Susan B Anthony(click here to see her pro-life views) and Frederick Douglass?



“The truth of the matter is that Douglas and Anthony belong to all of us, including those of us who fight in the modern abolitionist movement.”

As the mother of a child from another group targeted for abortion; those with Down syndrome, I rejoiced when I heard of this legislation. I thought, ‘if we can protect unborn babies from racial and sexual discrimination, maybe, just maybe we can protect them from genetic discrimination.’

I love all the races and both genders which God created. I love the genetic diversity displayed in the almond eyes of my daughter, no less a gift from His Hand than any other child.

We need to see that a love for diversity cannot be artificially begun at birth, it must begins when life begins, at fertilization!

Read Dr Nadal's riveting post on his blog Coming Home. Bookmark and Share

Monday, January 14, 2008

"Barak Obama most pro-abortion candidate"

Terry Jeffrey says that "Barack Obama is the most pro-abortion presidential candidate ever." He recently held a press conference to re-affirm his pro-death committment. You can read the entire story here.
The African American community has already been decimated by abortion, losing their status as largest minority to Hispanics in the 2000 Census. This is in part, due to the high abortion rate among black women.
This is from the website Black Genocide.org:
Although black women constitute only 6% of the population, they comprise 36% of the abortion industry’s clientele. The leading abortion providers have chosen to exploit blacks by locating 94% of their abortuaries in urban neighborhoods with high black populations.
This high rate of abortion has decimated the black family and destroyed black neighborhoods to the detriment of society at large.

(see graph)
It plays right into the hands of Planned Parenthood's founder, eugenics enthusiast, Margaret Sanger.
Read more in this post about Obama's extreme pro-abortion views, and how this plays into the hands of those who want to decimate the black population. Day Gardner has spoken out against Obama in this World Net Daily article. Day Gardner is president of the National Black Pro-Life Union, which helps to coordinate the efforts of black pro-life groups.
"Senator Obama doesn't care that abortion has obliterated the rights of more than 15 million black children since 1973," Gardner said in a statement. "He doesn't care that abortion is the No. 1 killer of African-Americans surpassing deaths caused by accidents, heart disease, stroke, crimes, HIV-AIDS and all other deaths – combined!"
This is a photo of Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, with Ku Klux Klan members. Both groups wanted to eliminate minority and immigrant populations,they just differed in the means they used.
WHY would the first viable African-American presidential candidate align himself with pro-aborts who are out to decimate his fellow African Americans?

HT Life News

Tuesday, July 03, 2007

The Supreme Court Challenges Racial Discrimination in Public Schools

Lawyer Teddy Gordon argued that the Louisville district's plan was a form of
discrimination. In the AP report, he's quoted as saying," Clearly, we need
better race-neutral alternatives. Instead of spending zillions of dollars around
the country to place a black child next to a white child, let's reduce class
size. All the schools are equal. We will no longer accept that an
African-American majority within a school is unacceptable."
Let's keep in mind here that it was parents themselves who were upset with the programs in Seattle and Louisville, and it was the parents who sued. Now, it would stand to reason that parents are in the best position to determine what kind of educational plan is best for their own children. They're far more concerned about whether Johnny can read than who Johnny sits next to in class. No child should have his or her educational opportunities limited because of race. America is supposed to be the land of freedom—not a place where arcane bureaucratic rules and outdated theories of education reign supreme. Parents should have the greatest flexibility in determining where their children go to
school—particularly since it's the parents' tax dollars that are supporting the
schools. It's simply wrong to hang a sign on a schoolhouse door saying only a
certain percentage of blacks or whites are allowed in.
It's morally repugnant to the vast majority of Americans to discriminate against anyone based on race. Therefore, it's time to retire the liberal guilt which states that we have to assign students to schools based on race. Otherwise, we'll never achieve the color-blind society envisioned by King.Town Hall.com

When I taught in a local school district they bused poor Hispanic children for a half hour away from their homes to achieve racial balance. This angered the parents, so when it was time to hire new English as a Second Language teacher, among 20, 000 candidates, the district chose my friend Teresa, born in Bolivia, to pacify the parents. I was in the top five candidates, but was overlooked for what I believe, was racial preference. Teresa and I had graduated with our Master's together, and were both fluent in Spanish, but there the similarities ended. I achieved the 99th percentile in the National Teacher Exam, and Teresa failed it. Three times. Finally, the district had to let her go. An inferior teacher was teaching for three years because of racial preferences.

Conservatives have long been accused of racism, but here the Supreme Court challenges liberal racism, the deliberate assignment of schools based on racial quotas. A much better approach would be to make sure that minorities have high quality schools. This requires a voucher or tax break system which would allow minority parents to choose better schools for their children.

New Yorkers for Choice in Education want just that. UNYCE's goal is to influence our legislators to enact the Maltese-Hikind bill. This legislation is designed to help all education, as well as to give New York's taxpayers some relief. Together we can bring much-needed reform to how elementary and secondary education is financed in New York state.