To the surprise of many, the anti-abortionists behind the billboards are black themselves and say they were motivated by a record number of abortions among black women. Of the 36,094 women in Georgia who had abortions in 2008, nearly 21,000 were African-American, more than twice the number of white women. Nationally, the CDC says black women are still three times more likely than white women to get an abortion.YouTube version of the ABC World News segment is here.
Really? You have access to their minds? OK, how many of them would let a Black man marry their daughter?Given that these are black men who already married someone's daughters, it seems like it would be somewhat hypocritical not too.
Yep, didn't think so. -- Ironmouth
Yep, didn't think so. -- IronmouthOh but you have access to their minds, despite the fact that you don't even know what race they are, despite the fact that it was explained in the very comment you quoted
I guess I'm having some real trouble reconciling these two statements of yours. Because any time I see talk of one race "outbreeding" another, I sure as hell see a bunch of motherfucking racists. The very race-concsious aspect of their approach belies any sort of "we're in it for the Blacks" mentaility.Uh, you don't think black people can be racist against Mexicans?
Bush tried to pose as a moderate on immigration and play up his Latino family connections, and it never worked very well to get Latino votes. The really funny part is, because of changing demographics, Texas is going to be in play nationally, soon. If not in 2012, then by 2016 or 2020 for sure.-- drjimmy11Actually it DID work in 2000. But then there was the whole Lou Dobbs/Tancredo/etc movement in the republican party and that was the end of that. The republicans have probably lost Hispanics for a generation, although not to the same extent as African Americans.
Your statement is that by each and every account, Black men are demanding that their daughters marry black men and make them "fetal containers" for the African-American race?He was talking about the people you were talking about, who were the people who are running this campaign. Black men who are worried about there being too many black babies getting aborted.
Because, you know, I thought that like every group, there was variation in the attitudes of the persons within the group. What evidence do you have of the idea that all black males require their daughters to marry black men.-- Ironmouth
And before you accuse me of pedantry, let me point out that it is not my responsiblity to apply intellectual rigor to categorical statements you've made. That's your responsiblity.-- IronmouthExcept you're talking nonsense. He never said that all black men wanted there to be more black babies, only the people running this campaign.
Seriously, you have someone insisting that all black men want to use black women as a vessel to continue the race and you wonder why I'm fighty?-- IronmouthNO ONE SAID THAT
I'm inclined to agree with Ironmouth, and I think this has the potential to backfire big time on the people who are behind this. Yes, there are black men who are leading this charge at the grass-roots level, but the major pro-life organizations tend to be lily white at the top. If one of these guys tries to get elected, or hell promoted even, to a level of some national prominence I have no doubt that there will be deep ambivalence among the country club leadership.I think there is some confusion here. There are two different messages being pushed by the pro-life movement: 1) Abortion should be illegal and 2) You, PERSONALLY should not get an abortion.
If anotherpanacea was just quoting these dudes, than I did misinterpret. But the quote shows how really racially charged what these types are doing is. The concerns with "breeding" and the like only show their true colors.Ironmouth, here's what happened:
However, I just looked through the articles and found no such quote. Anywhere. Nor is the statment in quotes.
<.........................................................>
^
|
This is the set of all African-American males
<............(:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::)............>
^
|
This is the subset of African-American males referred
to by anotherpanacea as "These," representing not ALL
African-American males, but the particular few who
are in charge of this campaign
<............(:::::::::::[|||||||]:::::::::::)............>
^
|
This is the subset of the ABOVE subset of African-
American males referred to by anotherpanacea as
"Those who have daughters," representing not ALL
African-American males who have daughters, but
the set of African-American males who are in
charge of this campaign who have daughters
Since demonstratives can be ambiguous, I understand your initial mistake. However, in the face of the original author clarifying what he meant, and so many other people confirming that that interpretation makes sense and wondering why are you being so weird about it, I'm having a hard time understanding why you keep insisting that he meant something completely different and pretty offensive. Please stop that. Even if your interpretation is correct, and he meant only the anti-abortion African-American men who are paying for some of the billboard cost, there is no evidence to support his statement that they believe black women are vessels for the race.He was using pretty standard "internet feminist" rhetoric used to describe all pro-lifers. If you read, for example, Amanda Marcotte you hear that kind of thing all the time. It's supposed to be a (somewhat hyperbolic and 'provocative') extrapolation from what they want. I.e. IF they think that woman should be forced to give birth for the good of the country/race/etc THEN it's true that they think that women are in part 'vessels' for babies.
I often wish the Democrats would go ahead and make abortion illegal and thus kill the Republican party overnight.Well, then republicans would just say they need to keep getting elected to keep abortion illegal, just like democrats will say they need to keep getting elected to keep universal healthcare if they ever pass it. Or like how they campaign on keeping Social security from being privatized.
« Older Poland's late, great, legendary reporter Ryszard K... | The primarily instrumental ban... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Trailer from the Maafa 21 film mentioned in the New York Times article is here.
And the title of this post is a reference to a comment made by the Reverend Jesse Jackson 33 years ago. More context can be found in this article.
posted by zarq at 9:59 AM on March 2, 2010