Celestial-body-NOS
Why should Man not rebel against Nature, when Nature herself is in rebellion against Justice?
No bio...
User ID: 290
I wonder how things would have gone if Dave Barry had been President and had just told 'a couple of guys named Victor' that "It would be such a shame if UBL were to fatally cut his throat while shaving."
but it’s not the whole story without the class angle.
That's true of many 'racial' issues.
"The black pawns and the white pawns have more in common with each other than with their kings; if they organised together, the whole board could be a republic in a dozen moves." (GNU Terry Pratchett)
The only thing that's particularly strange about this is the who/whom. Rarely until the present moment did a dominant ethnicity allow a minority one to abuse it so violently.
There was also the class dimension. The pre-colonial-British-descent victims were largely working class.
They are not the same. Rotherham was worse. Much, much worse.
It was a worse instance of the same thing, much in the way that pancreatic cancer is worse than prostate cancer despite them both being cases of cells multiplying faster than they ought to.
"They explicitly discriminated by race as long as they could legally" applies to anything they did after the ruling as well.
From 1939 (when the Wonderlic test was introduced) to 1964 (Civil Rights Act), they had the choice of (1.) whether or not to consider race and (2.) whether or not to consider (measured) intelligence. During that period, they chose to open doors for white people, no test required, but close them to black people, no matter how intelligent. This is evidence establishing motive; that their goal was to keep black people at the bottom of the socio-economic ladder.
So any other method of screening that someone might want to try out is outlawed?
Prior to the Civil Rights Act, Duke Power Co. did not use any screening method if the applicant was white; if they had had such a testing requirement prior to 1964, that would have been evidence that they were being honest about their motivations, and would have been justified in using a different instrument (unless they switched from a test that a random black person was half as likely to pass to one he was a hundredth as likely to pass). The fact that they felt no need to require any kind of test until they had to consider black people indicates that having any method of screening was a transparent attempt to weasel out of extending to Black Americans the same opportunities which had previously been reserved to the more melanin-lacking segments of the population.
...So on the day the law said they could no longer screen by race, they stopped screening by race and started screening by IQ test. And this proves to you that they were still screening by race, because they... complied with the law to stop discriminating by race?
The fact that they explicitly discriminated by race as long as they could legally do so indicates mens rea; that they sought to exclude Black Americans for being Black Americans.
What screening method should they have switched to, in your view?
The same method they used to screen white people prior to the Civil Rights Act.
Ass or not, the court accepted it. Perhaps they felt Duke Power was not using the Wonderlic as a proxy for race, but had been using race as a proxy for what the Wonderlic measures.
That would have been somewhere in the vicinity of a plausible conclusion if, sometime between 1939 and 1964, Duke Power Co. had started requiring an IQ test for all applicants and stopped considering their race. The fact that they made the change not when the Wonderlic test was introduced, not when overt racial discrimination was becoming frowned upon, not when the Civil Rights Act passed Congress, but at the very last moment they thought they could get away with, points toward the grown-up equivalent of hovering one's finger 5 mm from someone's face while saying "I'm not touching you! I'm not touching you!".
I'd expect the winning distribution would be something like 70% Asian (of all types), 25% white and 5% other
Wouldn't that depend on where you set the cut-off?
The court in Griggs explicitly accepted that Duke Power was NOT using proxies to derive their desired racial preference
"If the court accepts that, than the court is a ass — a idiot."¹
The Wonderlic test was first written in 1939; Duke Power Co. only adopted it as a requirement on the same day they could no longer legally discriminate directly on the basis of race.
The case should have fallen under the doctrine of noli meiere in cruro et dicere pluviam.
¹Charles Dickens, Oliver Twist.
when their predecessors were hung...for poor performance....
I doubt that that has ever happened, given that tapestries are seldom elected to high office. Hanged, on the other hand....
I never see dogs*
*With the rare exception of seeing eye dogs and police dogs
- No dogs are permitted on the premises under any circumstances.
- Any animal assisting a blind person shall be deemed to be a cat.
- Any animal entering on police business shall be deemed to be a wombat.
- Any animal which the Speaker wishes to admit shall be deemed to be a mongoose.
--supposedly from the rules of some Oxbridge debating society.
That is science fiction
And what would you call the idea of people on multiple continents conversing with one another without leaving their homes, by means of a network of computing machines spanning the entire globe and beyond?
The difference is one of degree, not kind. The former is less bad than the latter, but they both come from the same malignant well: the belief that the well-being of Mtumbe Ngoube from Kinshasa or Fulan al-Fulani from Karbala matters less than that of John Doe from Kansas City or Max Mustermann from Koln.
There is a story told of Churchill, that he asked some lady
Churchill: "Madam, would you sleep with me for five million pounds?"
Socialite: "My goodness, Mr. Churchill... Well, I suppose... we would have to discuss terms, of course... "
Churchill: "Would you sleep with me for five pounds?"
Socialite: "Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?!"
Churchill: "Madam, we've already established that. Now we are haggling about the price.
and this is not based in hatred of Congolese or Iraqis.
No, but it is based in indifference, and with regard to the horrors visited upon many, many, innocent people throughout history, the space between 'indifference' and 'hatred' would take an electron microscope to measure.
When an elephant stands on the tail of a mouse, it is no solace to the mouse that you do not hate him but are indifferent to him.
My motivation is directing ethnogenesis in a eugenic direction
That's what we've been arguing about‽
The way things are going (assuming humanity survives at all), a century from now we will be able to take the best genes from every branch and twig of the human family tree, and splice them into anyone who wants them!
No, its not that simple. Even granting your premise arguendo, they are still human beings, made according to the Imago Dei.
some police departments have been putting their own drones up to try to spot the original drones, and the police drones then get spotted.
...like Winnie-ther-Pooh hunting Woozles. (He was following his own footprints around a grove of larch-trees.)
It's probably something in the water, given that obesity rates are lower in the mountains and highest at the mouths of long rivers....
free prostitute
How, exactly, is that not a contradiction in terms‽
"Latinx: a word used only by gringxs."
Where do you stand on 'Latines' or 'Latinaos'?
I mean, is every revolution in history actually just based on vibes?
The Boston Tea Party started after the British lowered taxes on tea (and eliminated taxes on several other goods), but kept a small tax to make the point that 'we have the right to impose taxation without representation'.
Are those views that it's great and sweet and opposition to it is Everything Wrong With The World These Days?
More complicated than that.
Because if not you should start a new op so we can discuss it.
Will do; where should I post it?
"If you want to marry a virgin, you should leave a few of them around!"
So his argument proves too much? (Note that I myself have Views on that particular composition....)
the men of Sodom immediately try to rape the angels
Because the angels were foreigners. The men of Sodom were not motivated by desire for the angels; they sought to degrade them, for having the temerity to exist as foreigners. (Some interpretations speculate that the mob wanted to interrogate the angels, 'knowing' them in a more literal sense.)
Lot's offer of his daughters was not a contrast between same-sex and opposite-sex attraction, but an attempt to protect his guests by whatever means he could think of. (Sacred hospitality was considered very important in the Ancient Mediterranean; cf. the Classical myth of Philemon and Baucis, in which Jupiter and Mercury visit a village incognito and are turned away by everyone except the titular couple, who invite them into their small home, resulting in the village being turned into a pond and the inhabitants into fish, the house of Philemon and Baucis being turned into an ornate temple, and the granting of their request that they would die at the same time as each other, at which time they were turned into trees [an oak and a linden].)
...where's Charles James Napier when you need him?
More options
Context Copy link