College president apologizes for saying all lives matter

[cooltigger21 0]

Smith College president Kathleen McCartney, in the aftermath of the Ferguson and Staten Island grand jury decisions, wrote an email stating that all lives matter. After getting very negative feedback from the race protesters she backed down. http://www.foxnews.c...l-lives-matter/

[AUDub 11,132]

The phrase is unfortunately loaded.

Deconstructing the "All Lives Matter" Response (by Rev Cynthia Landrum)

Monday night I posted on Facebook "#blacklivesmatter." No sooner did I post this, than someone commented, "All lives matter." And it was no surprise. No sooner did the slogan "Black Lives Matter" start getting used in Ferguson than the response slogan "All Lives Matter" came back. And on the surface of it, this seems completely reasonable. All lives do matter, right? Here's why the "All Lives Matter" slogan is a problem.

First of all, there's the context it is being used in. A Saint Louis-area minister, for example, wrote of a "Black Lives Matter" sign being defaced with "All Lives Matter" written on the front and a racial slur written on the back. The fact that "All Lives Matter" is being used to argue against the idea that Black lives matter is proof that (1) People spreading that slogan don't really believe Black lives matter, at least not equally, and (2) It's therefore not true that all lives do matter equally in their eyes. The statement's use belies itself. If all lives matter, then black lives matter, so why the argument? Why the comeback? The comeback proves that statement false, and proves it for what it is -- a response born of fear and racism.

Secondly, rushing to proclaim equality in the face of a stated injustice is a gross minimization of the very real struggles and injustices faced by African Americans in our country. To respond to "Black Lives Matter" with "All Lives Matter" is a response that minimizes, with its proclamation of equality, the current inequalities experienced.

We've created a culture that says that if you're scared, it's okay to kill somebody, and it's completely reasonable to be scared of a black man, because all black men are scary, therefore they're at fault when they're killed, and the fact that they were killed while unarmed doesn't really matter. In our culture, black men are routinely killed for being scary -- scary because they "look like a thug," scary because they're wearing a hoodie, scary because they're holding a toy gun or a BB gun, scary because they might have stolen some cigarettes. The response to this culture has to be to begin by proclaiming that these lives matter -- Black lives matter.

Lastly, the "All Lives Matter" response has been used specifically in rallies organized to support Darren Wilson, the officer who shot Michael Brown. On the surface, that seems to be a statement just supporting that police lives matter, too. And the lives of our police officers do matter. But use of the slogan in support of someone who has killed another person again supports the idea that some lives matter and some lives don't, like the one that was lost. Use of the slogan in this context says, "There's no way that this officer could have done wrong. We support him without question." And to say that there's no way in which this could have been anything else other than an officer doing his job takes us back again to the idea that black men are scary, bad, and if they get killed, it had to have been their fault.

In short, the "All Lives Matter" slogan, with every usage, contradicts its message. If one truly believes that all lives matter, then what's important right now is to proclaim loudly that Black lives matter. Michael Brown's life matters.

[AUUSN 823]

"Lamentably, many of Darren Wilson's fans claim to be constitutional conservatives and moralists. This is preposterous. A true constitutional conservative looks at the Ferguson situation and sees a young black male who was denied his Sixth Amendment rights and executed in the street. A constitutional conservative does not necessarily have to be emotionally connected to Michael Brown, or even think he was a good person. A constitutional conservative could even conceivably believe that Michael Brown deserved to be in prison for a long time for the robbery he allegedly committed. But there is absolutely no grounds for someone who claims to believe in constitutional principles to think it is acceptable for Darren Wilson to bypass every other procedural step that he could have taken short of deadly force and ultimately choose to shoot and kill Michael Brown, including shooting him in his head as though he were a wild beast being put down.

It has become abundantly clear that alleged “constitutional conservatives” do not really care about constitutional principles. They care about one constitutional principle: the right to bear arms. By "the right to bear arms," they mean the right to manufacture demonstrably fictitious narratives describing blacks as wild demons about to kill them, before they shoot to kill in “desperate fear of their lives.” This is not just Officer Darren Wilson’s narrative, but it was the narrative of George Zimmerman before him. It will be the narrative of the next person who comes along and claims that he was nearly beaten to death by a black monster before he shot "it" in fear of his life. Sadly, alleged “constitutional conservatives” will continue to swallow that repetitive cock and bull story hook, line, and sinker. It’s not because they are credulous and guileless, but because they are morally bankrupt and will sanguinely treat the Constitution they claim to respect like used toilet paper when it’s time to talk about respecting the constitutional rights of black males.

The next time Darren Wilson's supporters, the “brave” constitutional conservatives, talk about “government tyranny,” just know that they define it as "anything that does not accomplish their political goals.” It is a definition that is endlessly malleable and has nothing to do with the written text of the Constitution. What these “constitutional conservatives” do not understand is that they are eroding constitutional rights for everybody. While they are enjoying playing games with black lives, which they manifestly do not respect, there will come a time when all Americans, regardless of racial or ethnic background, will experience the full weight of a tyrannical state. The problem is that when they turn around to start their loud protestations about respect for the Constitution and the inviolability of life, it will simply be too late. Artificial morality never pays. The tables will soon turn, and “constitutional conservatives” will have to live in the country they actively helped to create—a profoundly immoral police state that has no respect for life of any kind (including theirs)." http://www.ctghq.org/commentary/artificial-morality-darren-wilsons-supporters

[cooltigger21 0]

The phrase is unfortunately loaded.

Deconstructing the "All Lives Matter" Response (by Rev Cynthia Landrum)

Monday night I posted on Facebook "#blacklivesmatter." No sooner did I post this, than someone commented, "All lives matter." And it was no surprise. No sooner did the slogan "Black Lives Matter" start getting used in Ferguson than the response slogan "All Lives Matter" came back. And on the surface of it, this seems completely reasonable. All lives do matter, right? Here's why the "All Lives Matter" slogan is a problem.

First of all, there's the context it is being used in. A Saint Louis-area minister, for example, wrote of a "Black Lives Matter" sign being defaced with "All Lives Matter" written on the front and a racial slur written on the back. The fact that "All Lives Matter" is being used to argue against the idea that Black lives matter is proof that (1) People spreading that slogan don't really believe Black lives matter, at least not equally, and (2) It's therefore not true that all lives do matter equally in their eyes. The statement's use belies itself. If all lives matter, then black lives matter, so why the argument? Why the comeback? The comeback proves that statement false, and proves it for what it is -- a response born of fear and racism.

Secondly, rushing to proclaim equality in the face of a stated injustice is a gross minimization of the very real struggles and injustices faced by African Americans in our country. To respond to "Black Lives Matter" with "All Lives Matter" is a response that minimizes, with its proclamation of equality, the current inequalities experienced.

We've created a culture that says that if you're scared, it's okay to kill somebody, and it's completely reasonable to be scared of a black man, because all black men are scary, therefore they're at fault when they're killed, and the fact that they were killed while unarmed doesn't really matter. In our culture, black men are routinely killed for being scary -- scary because they "look like a thug," scary because they're wearing a hoodie, scary because they're holding a toy gun or a BB gun, scary because they might have stolen some cigarettes. The response to this culture has to be to begin by proclaiming that these lives matter -- Black lives matter.

Lastly, the "All Lives Matter" response has been used specifically in rallies organized to support Darren Wilson, the officer who shot Michael Brown. On the surface, that seems to be a statement just supporting that police lives matter, too. And the lives of our police officers do matter. But use of the slogan in support of someone who has killed another person again supports the idea that some lives matter and some lives don't, like the one that was lost. Use of the slogan in this context says, "There's no way that this officer could have done wrong. We support him without question." And to say that there's no way in which this could have been anything else other than an officer doing his job takes us back again to the idea that black men are scary, bad, and if they get killed, it had to have been their fault.

In short, the "All Lives Matter" slogan, with every usage, contradicts its message. If one truly believes that all lives matter, then what's important right now is to proclaim loudly that Black lives matter. Michael Brown's life matters.

It's political correctness on steroids. Either all lives matter or they don't. Black lives matter. White lives matter, Arab lives matter. Red man lives matter. All lives matter period. It's high time these people get over the victimhood status. They profit financially and politically by keeping their own people in bad situations and excusing bad behavior. They don't care about black babies killed by abortion. Conservative black lives don't matter to these people. Black conservatives are considered to be a traitor to their race. Black thug lives matter is a more accurate description.

[AUDub 11,132]

The phrase is unfortunately loaded.

Deconstructing the "All Lives Matter" Response (by Rev Cynthia Landrum)

Monday night I posted on Facebook "#blacklivesmatter." No sooner did I post this, than someone commented, "All lives matter." And it was no surprise. No sooner did the slogan "Black Lives Matter" start getting used in Ferguson than the response slogan "All Lives Matter" came back. And on the surface of it, this seems completely reasonable. All lives do matter, right? Here's why the "All Lives Matter" slogan is a problem.

First of all, there's the context it is being used in. A Saint Louis-area minister, for example, wrote of a "Black Lives Matter" sign being defaced with "All Lives Matter" written on the front and a racial slur written on the back. The fact that "All Lives Matter" is being used to argue against the idea that Black lives matter is proof that (1) People spreading that slogan don't really believe Black lives matter, at least not equally, and (2) It's therefore not true that all lives do matter equally in their eyes. The statement's use belies itself. If all lives matter, then black lives matter, so why the argument? Why the comeback? The comeback proves that statement false, and proves it for what it is -- a response born of fear and racism.

Secondly, rushing to proclaim equality in the face of a stated injustice is a gross minimization of the very real struggles and injustices faced by African Americans in our country. To respond to "Black Lives Matter" with "All Lives Matter" is a response that minimizes, with its proclamation of equality, the current inequalities experienced.

We've created a culture that says that if you're scared, it's okay to kill somebody, and it's completely reasonable to be scared of a black man, because all black men are scary, therefore they're at fault when they're killed, and the fact that they were killed while unarmed doesn't really matter. In our culture, black men are routinely killed for being scary -- scary because they "look like a thug," scary because they're wearing a hoodie, scary because they're holding a toy gun or a BB gun, scary because they might have stolen some cigarettes. The response to this culture has to be to begin by proclaiming that these lives matter -- Black lives matter.

Lastly, the "All Lives Matter" response has been used specifically in rallies organized to support Darren Wilson, the officer who shot Michael Brown. On the surface, that seems to be a statement just supporting that police lives matter, too. And the lives of our police officers do matter. But use of the slogan in support of someone who has killed another person again supports the idea that some lives matter and some lives don't, like the one that was lost. Use of the slogan in this context says, "There's no way that this officer could have done wrong. We support him without question." And to say that there's no way in which this could have been anything else other than an officer doing his job takes us back again to the idea that black men are scary, bad, and if they get killed, it had to have been their fault.

In short, the "All Lives Matter" slogan, with every usage, contradicts its message. If one truly believes that all lives matter, then what's important right now is to proclaim loudly that Black lives matter. Michael Brown's life matters.

It's political correctness on steroids. Either all lives matter or they don't. Black lives matter. White lives matter, Arab lives matter. Red man lives matter. All lives matter period. It's high time these people get over the victimhood status. They profit financially and politically by keeping their own people in bad situations and excusing bad behavior. They don't care about black babies killed by abortion. Conservative black lives don't matter to these people. Black conservatives are considered to be a traitor to their race. Black thug lives matter is a more accurate description.

You really need to go look up the definition of minimization.

[cooltigger21 0]

"Lamentably, many of Darren Wilson's fans claim to be constitutional conservatives and moralists. This is preposterous. A true constitutional conservative looks at the Ferguson situation and sees a young black male who was denied his Sixth Amendment rights and executed in the street. A constitutional conservative does not necessarily have to be emotionally connected to Michael Brown, or even think he was a good person. A constitutional conservative could even conceivably believe that Michael Brown deserved to be in prison for a long time for the robbery he allegedly committed. But there is absolutely no grounds for someone who claims to believe in constitutional principles to think it is acceptable for Darren Wilson to bypass every other procedural step that he could have taken short of deadly force and ultimately choose to shoot and kill Michael Brown, including shooting him in his head as though he were a wild beast being put down.

It has become abundantly clear that alleged “constitutional conservatives” do not really care about constitutional principles. They care about one constitutional principle: the right to bear arms. By "the right to bear arms," they mean the right to manufacture demonstrably fictitious narratives describing blacks as wild demons about to kill them, before they shoot to kill in “desperate fear of their lives.” This is not just Officer Darren Wilson’s narrative, but it was the narrative of George Zimmerman before him. It will be the narrative of the next person who comes along and claims that he was nearly beaten to death by a black monster before he shot "it" in fear of his life. Sadly, alleged “constitutional conservatives” will continue to swallow that repetitive cock and bull story hook, line, and sinker. It’s not because they are credulous and guileless, but because they are morally bankrupt and will sanguinely treat the Constitution they claim to respect like used toilet paper when it’s time to talk about respecting the constitutional rights of black males.

The next time Darren Wilson's supporters, the “brave” constitutional conservatives, talk about “government tyranny,” just know that they define it as "anything that does not accomplish their political goals.” It is a definition that is endlessly malleable and has nothing to do with the written text of the Constitution. What these “constitutional conservatives” do not understand is that they are eroding constitutional rights for everybody. While they are enjoying playing games with black lives, which they manifestly do not respect, there will come a time when all Americans, regardless of racial or ethnic background, will experience the full weight of a tyrannical state. The problem is that when they turn around to start their loud protestations about respect for the Constitution and the inviolability of life, it will simply be too late. Artificial morality never pays. The tables will soon turn, and “constitutional conservatives” will have to live in the country they actively helped to create—a profoundly immoral police state that has no respect for life of any kind (including theirs)." http://www.ctghq.org...sons-supporters

Spare me the bullsh*t. Michael brown put himself in harms way. He robbed a store and beat up the clerk. He attacked the officer and tried to take his gun away from him. He caused his own death pure and simple.

[AUUSN 823]

It's political correctness on steroids. Either all lives matter or they don't. Black lives matter. White lives matter, Arab lives matter. Red man lives matter. All lives matter period. It's high time these people get over the victimhood status. They profit financially and politically by keeping their own people in bad situations and excusing bad behavior. They don't care about black babies killed by abortion. Conservative black lives don't matter to these people. Black conservatives are considered to be a traitor to their race. Black thug lives matter is a more accurate description.

Except Japanese lives. They should be firebombed. Right? That's what you wrote yesterday...

[AUUSN 823]

"Lamentably, many of Darren Wilson's fans claim to be constitutional conservatives and moralists. This is preposterous. A true constitutional conservative looks at the Ferguson situation and sees a young black male who was denied his Sixth Amendment rights and executed in the street. A constitutional conservative does not necessarily have to be emotionally connected to Michael Brown, or even think he was a good person. A constitutional conservative could even conceivably believe that Michael Brown deserved to be in prison for a long time for the robbery he allegedly committed. But there is absolutely no grounds for someone who claims to believe in constitutional principles to think it is acceptable for Darren Wilson to bypass every other procedural step that he could have taken short of deadly force and ultimately choose to shoot and kill Michael Brown, including shooting him in his head as though he were a wild beast being put down.

It has become abundantly clear that alleged “constitutional conservatives” do not really care about constitutional principles. They care about one constitutional principle: the right to bear arms. By "the right to bear arms," they mean the right to manufacture demonstrably fictitious narratives describing blacks as wild demons about to kill them, before they shoot to kill in “desperate fear of their lives.” This is not just Officer Darren Wilson’s narrative, but it was the narrative of George Zimmerman before him. It will be the narrative of the next person who comes along and claims that he was nearly beaten to death by a black monster before he shot "it" in fear of his life. Sadly, alleged “constitutional conservatives” will continue to swallow that repetitive cock and bull story hook, line, and sinker. It’s not because they are credulous and guileless, but because they are morally bankrupt and will sanguinely treat the Constitution they claim to respect like used toilet paper when it’s time to talk about respecting the constitutional rights of black males.

The next time Darren Wilson's supporters, the “brave” constitutional conservatives, talk about “government tyranny,” just know that they define it as "anything that does not accomplish their political goals.” It is a definition that is endlessly malleable and has nothing to do with the written text of the Constitution. What these “constitutional conservatives” do not understand is that they are eroding constitutional rights for everybody. While they are enjoying playing games with black lives, which they manifestly do not respect, there will come a time when all Americans, regardless of racial or ethnic background, will experience the full weight of a tyrannical state. The problem is that when they turn around to start their loud protestations about respect for the Constitution and the inviolability of life, it will simply be too late. Artificial morality never pays. The tables will soon turn, and “constitutional conservatives” will have to live in the country they actively helped to create—a profoundly immoral police state that has no respect for life of any kind (including theirs)." http://www.ctghq.org...sons-supporters

Spare me the bullsh*t. Michael brown put himself in harms way. He robbed a store and beat up the clerk. He attacked the officer and tried to take his gun away from him. He caused his own death pure and simple.

Read. The. Article.

[cooltigger21 0]

The phrase is unfortunately loaded.

Deconstructing the "All Lives Matter" Response (by Rev Cynthia Landrum)

Monday night I posted on Facebook "#blacklivesmatter." No sooner did I post this, than someone commented, "All lives matter." And it was no surprise. No sooner did the slogan "Black Lives Matter" start getting used in Ferguson than the response slogan "All Lives Matter" came back. And on the surface of it, this seems completely reasonable. All lives do matter, right? Here's why the "All Lives Matter" slogan is a problem.

First of all, there's the context it is being used in. A Saint Louis-area minister, for example, wrote of a "Black Lives Matter" sign being defaced with "All Lives Matter" written on the front and a racial slur written on the back. The fact that "All Lives Matter" is being used to argue against the idea that Black lives matter is proof that (1) People spreading that slogan don't really believe Black lives matter, at least not equally, and (2) It's therefore not true that all lives do matter equally in their eyes. The statement's use belies itself. If all lives matter, then black lives matter, so why the argument? Why the comeback? The comeback proves that statement false, and proves it for what it is -- a response born of fear and racism.

Secondly, rushing to proclaim equality in the face of a stated injustice is a gross minimization of the very real struggles and injustices faced by African Americans in our country. To respond to "Black Lives Matter" with "All Lives Matter" is a response that minimizes, with its proclamation of equality, the current inequalities experienced.

We've created a culture that says that if you're scared, it's okay to kill somebody, and it's completely reasonable to be scared of a black man, because all black men are scary, therefore they're at fault when they're killed, and the fact that they were killed while unarmed doesn't really matter. In our culture, black men are routinely killed for being scary -- scary because they "look like a thug," scary because they're wearing a hoodie, scary because they're holding a toy gun or a BB gun, scary because they might have stolen some cigarettes. The response to this culture has to be to begin by proclaiming that these lives matter -- Black lives matter.

Lastly, the "All Lives Matter" response has been used specifically in rallies organized to support Darren Wilson, the officer who shot Michael Brown. On the surface, that seems to be a statement just supporting that police lives matter, too. And the lives of our police officers do matter. But use of the slogan in support of someone who has killed another person again supports the idea that some lives matter and some lives don't, like the one that was lost. Use of the slogan in this context says, "There's no way that this officer could have done wrong. We support him without question." And to say that there's no way in which this could have been anything else other than an officer doing his job takes us back again to the idea that black men are scary, bad, and if they get killed, it had to have been their fault.

In short, the "All Lives Matter" slogan, with every usage, contradicts its message. If one truly believes that all lives matter, then what's important right now is to proclaim loudly that Black lives matter. Michael Brown's life matters.

It's political correctness on steroids. Either all lives matter or they don't. Black lives matter. White lives matter, Arab lives matter. Red man lives matter. All lives matter period. It's high time these people get over the victimhood status. They profit financially and politically by keeping their own people in bad situations and excusing bad behavior. They don't care about black babies killed by abortion. Conservative black lives don't matter to these people. Black conservatives are considered to be a traitor to their race. Black thug lives matter is a more accurate description.

You really need to go look up the definition of minimization.

You really need to get off the idea that one life matters above all others. I value ALL life. I don't look at a black man and say his life doesn't have the same value as mine does. I judge people solely by their character and by nothing else. If a white man does what Michael Brown did and a black cop had killed him, I would stand up for that black cop just as surely as I stood up for Darren Wilson. You want equal treatment, then accept equal responsibility. The race baiters demand rights for blacks but are not willing to also demand responsibility from them

[cooltigger21 0]

It's political correctness on steroids. Either all lives matter or they don't. Black lives matter. White lives matter, Arab lives matter. Red man lives matter. All lives matter period. It's high time these people get over the victimhood status. They profit financially and politically by keeping their own people in bad situations and excusing bad behavior. They don't care about black babies killed by abortion. Conservative black lives don't matter to these people. Black conservatives are considered to be a traitor to their race. Black thug lives matter is a more accurate description.

Except Japanese lives. They should be firebombed. Right? That's what you wrote yesterday...

You don't want your city firebombed then don't start a war. You don't want to be killed then don't rob a store and attack a cop. Actions have consequences. The Japanese made the choice to start a war with the United States. As a result of that choice they faced the consequences of having their homeland bombed. Michael Brown made the decision to first go rob that store. He then made the decision to attack the cop. The consequences then followed. That is the problem with liberals. They always want to absolve people from the responsibility of their actions.

[AURaptor 1,121]

Brown lost his rights when he attacked a cop & tried to take his gun.

" black mothers shouldn't have to worry for their son's lives who rob stores & assault cops " - valid view as the Left sees it.

[AUUSN 823]

It's political correctness on steroids. Either all lives matter or they don't. Black lives matter. White lives matter, Arab lives matter. Red man lives matter. All lives matter period. It's high time these people get over the victimhood status. They profit financially and politically by keeping their own people in bad situations and excusing bad behavior. They don't care about black babies killed by abortion. Conservative black lives don't matter to these people. Black conservatives are considered to be a traitor to their race. Black thug lives matter is a more accurate description.

Except Japanese lives. They should be firebombed. Right? That's what you wrote yesterday...

You don't want your city firebombed then don't start a war. You don't want to be killed then don't rob a store and attack a cop.

The little world inside your head must be so utopic. So then by your admission, all lives don't matter. The little Japanese boy who had no say in what war his government started deserved to be burned to death. I think I remember that very same rationale spewed by some terrorist who flew planes into the World Trade Center.

[AUUSN 823]

Brown lost his rights when he attacked a cop & tried to take his gun.

" black mothers shouldn't have to worry for their son's lives who rob stores & assault cops " - valid view as the Left sees it.

Really? He lost all of his constitutional rights? Every. Single. One?

[AUDub 11,132]

You really need to get off the idea that one life matters above all others.

Start with a goofy rhetorical strawman.

I value ALL life.

Good! We're on even footing there.

I don't look at a black man and say his life doesn't have the same value as mine does.

Didn't say you did.

I judge people solely by their character and by nothing else.

Good! That's the way it should be.

If a white man does what Michael Brown did and a black cop had killed him, I would stand up for that black cop just as surely as I stood up for Darren Wilson.

I don't fault you for that at all.

You want equal treatment, then accept equal responsibility. The race baiters demand rights for blacks but are not willing to also demand responsibility from them

"You're not worthy of your rights until others earn them for you!"

[AUUSN 823]

The Japanese made the choice to start a war with the United States. As a result of that choice they faced the consequences of having their homeland bombed.

"The Japanese Americans made the choice to start a war with the United States Middle East. As a result of that choice they faced the consequences of having their homeland World Trade Center bombed." See what I did there?

[homersapien 11,354]

The phrase is unfortunately loaded.

Deconstructing the "All Lives Matter" Response (by Rev Cynthia Landrum)

Monday night I posted on Facebook "#blacklivesmatter." No sooner did I post this, than someone commented, "All lives matter." And it was no surprise. No sooner did the slogan "Black Lives Matter" start getting used in Ferguson than the response slogan "All Lives Matter" came back. And on the surface of it, this seems completely reasonable. All lives do matter, right? Here's why the "All Lives Matter" slogan is a problem.

First of all, there's the context it is being used in. A Saint Louis-area minister, for example, wrote of a "Black Lives Matter" sign being defaced with "All Lives Matter" written on the front and a racial slur written on the back. The fact that "All Lives Matter" is being used to argue against the idea that Black lives matter is proof that (1) People spreading that slogan don't really believe Black lives matter, at least not equally, and (2) It's therefore not true that all lives do matter equally in their eyes. The statement's use belies itself. If all lives matter, then black lives matter, so why the argument? Why the comeback? The comeback proves that statement false, and proves it for what it is -- a response born of fear and racism.

Secondly, rushing to proclaim equality in the face of a stated injustice is a gross minimization of the very real struggles and injustices faced by African Americans in our country. To respond to "Black Lives Matter" with "All Lives Matter" is a response that minimizes, with its proclamation of equality, the current inequalities experienced.

We've created a culture that says that if you're scared, it's okay to kill somebody, and it's completely reasonable to be scared of a black man, because all black men are scary, therefore they're at fault when they're killed, and the fact that they were killed while unarmed doesn't really matter. In our culture, black men are routinely killed for being scary -- scary because they "look like a thug," scary because they're wearing a hoodie, scary because they're holding a toy gun or a BB gun, scary because they might have stolen some cigarettes. The response to this culture has to be to begin by proclaiming that these lives matter -- Black lives matter.

Lastly, the "All Lives Matter" response has been used specifically in rallies organized to support Darren Wilson, the officer who shot Michael Brown. On the surface, that seems to be a statement just supporting that police lives matter, too. And the lives of our police officers do matter. But use of the slogan in support of someone who has killed another person again supports the idea that some lives matter and some lives don't, like the one that was lost. Use of the slogan in this context says, "There's no way that this officer could have done wrong. We support him without question." And to say that there's no way in which this could have been anything else other than an officer doing his job takes us back again to the idea that black men are scary, bad, and if they get killed, it had to have been their fault.

In short, the "All Lives Matter" slogan, with every usage, contradicts its message. If one truly believes that all lives matter, then what's important right now is to proclaim loudly that Black lives matter. Michael Brown's life matters.

It's political correctness on steroids. Either all lives matter or they don't. Black lives matter. White lives matter, Arab lives matter. Red man lives matter. All lives matter period. It's high time these people get over the victimhood status. They profit financially and politically by keeping their own people in bad situations and excusing bad behavior. They don't care about black babies killed by abortion. Conservative black lives don't matter to these people. Black conservatives are considered to be a traitor to their race. Black thug lives matter is a more accurate description.

You really need to go look up the definition of minimization.

You really need to get off the idea that one life matters above all others. I value ALL life. I don't look at a black man and say his life doesn't have the same value as mine does. I judge people solely by their character and by nothing else. If a white man does what Michael Brown did and a black cop had killed him, I would stand up for that black cop just as surely as I stood up for Darren Wilson. You want equal treatment, then accept equal responsibility. The race baiters demand rights for blacks but are not willing to also demand responsibility from them

I see your problem here.

"Black lives matter" says nothing about them mattering more than white lives. Yet you instinctively jump to a zero sum scenario, which inherently differentiates between black and white lives.

[homersapien 11,354]

Brown lost his rights when he attacked a cop & tried to take his gun.

" black mothers shouldn't have to worry for their son's lives who rob stores & assault cops " - valid view as the Left sees it.

Really? He lost all of his constitutional rights? Every. Single. One?

Apparently, one's rights are naturally arbitrated by armed LEO's.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

There are two kinds of people. Those who wish to empathize and understand and, those who wish to complain and blame. Those driven by love and, those driven by hate. You can find both in EVERY group.

http://news.yahoo.com/florida-professor-resigns-offensive-facebook-comments-001451445.html?bcmt=comments-postbox

[cptau 169]

"Lamentably, many of Darren Wilson's fans claim to be constitutional conservatives and moralists. This is preposterous. A true constitutional conservative looks at the Ferguson situation and sees a young black male who was denied his Sixth Amendment rights and executed in the street. A constitutional conservative does not necessarily have to be emotionally connected to Michael Brown, or even think he was a good person. A constitutional conservative could even conceivably believe that Michael Brown deserved to be in prison for a long time for the robbery he allegedly committed. But there is absolutely no grounds for someone who claims to believe in constitutional principles to think it is acceptable for Darren Wilson to bypass every other procedural step that he could have taken short of deadly force and ultimately choose to shoot and kill Michael Brown, including shooting him in his head as though he were a wild beast being put down.

It has become abundantly clear that alleged “constitutional conservatives” do not really care about constitutional principles. They care about one constitutional principle: the right to bear arms. By "the right to bear arms," they mean the right to manufacture demonstrably fictitious narratives describing blacks as wild demons about to kill them, before they shoot to kill in “desperate fear of their lives.” This is not just Officer Darren Wilson’s narrative, but it was the narrative of George Zimmerman before him. It will be the narrative of the next person who comes along and claims that he was nearly beaten to death by a black monster before he shot "it" in fear of his life. Sadly, alleged “constitutional conservatives” will continue to swallow that repetitive cock and bull story hook, line, and sinker. It’s not because they are credulous and guileless, but because they are morally bankrupt and will sanguinely treat the Constitution they claim to respect like used toilet paper when it’s time to talk about respecting the constitutional rights of black males.

The next time Darren Wilson's supporters, the “brave” constitutional conservatives, talk about “government tyranny,” just know that they define it as "anything that does not accomplish their political goals.” It is a definition that is endlessly malleable and has nothing to do with the written text of the Constitution. What these “constitutional conservatives” do not understand is that they are eroding constitutional rights for everybody. While they are enjoying playing games with black lives, which they manifestly do not respect, there will come a time when all Americans, regardless of racial or ethnic background, will experience the full weight of a tyrannical state. The problem is that when they turn around to start their loud protestations about respect for the Constitution and the inviolability of life, it will simply be too late. Artificial morality never pays. The tables will soon turn, and “constitutional conservatives” will have to live in the country they actively helped to create—a profoundly immoral police state that has no respect for life of any kind (including theirs)." http://www.ctghq.org...sons-supporters

Just wondering if you are a pacifist? If you are attacked and fear for your life, you plan to do nothing to defend your life?

[AUUSN 823]

"Lamentably, many of Darren Wilson's fans claim to be constitutional conservatives and moralists. This is preposterous. A true constitutional conservative looks at the Ferguson situation and sees a young black male who was denied his Sixth Amendment rights and executed in the street. A constitutional conservative does not necessarily have to be emotionally connected to Michael Brown, or even think he was a good person. A constitutional conservative could even conceivably believe that Michael Brown deserved to be in prison for a long time for the robbery he allegedly committed. But there is absolutely no grounds for someone who claims to believe in constitutional principles to think it is acceptable for Darren Wilson to bypass every other procedural step that he could have taken short of deadly force and ultimately choose to shoot and kill Michael Brown, including shooting him in his head as though he were a wild beast being put down.

It has become abundantly clear that alleged “constitutional conservatives” do not really care about constitutional principles. They care about one constitutional principle: the right to bear arms. By "the right to bear arms," they mean the right to manufacture demonstrably fictitious narratives describing blacks as wild demons about to kill them, before they shoot to kill in “desperate fear of their lives.” This is not just Officer Darren Wilson’s narrative, but it was the narrative of George Zimmerman before him. It will be the narrative of the next person who comes along and claims that he was nearly beaten to death by a black monster before he shot "it" in fear of his life. Sadly, alleged “constitutional conservatives” will continue to swallow that repetitive cock and bull story hook, line, and sinker. It’s not because they are credulous and guileless, but because they are morally bankrupt and will sanguinely treat the Constitution they claim to respect like used toilet paper when it’s time to talk about respecting the constitutional rights of black males.

The next time Darren Wilson's supporters, the “brave” constitutional conservatives, talk about “government tyranny,” just know that they define it as "anything that does not accomplish their political goals.” It is a definition that is endlessly malleable and has nothing to do with the written text of the Constitution. What these “constitutional conservatives” do not understand is that they are eroding constitutional rights for everybody. While they are enjoying playing games with black lives, which they manifestly do not respect, there will come a time when all Americans, regardless of racial or ethnic background, will experience the full weight of a tyrannical state. The problem is that when they turn around to start their loud protestations about respect for the Constitution and the inviolability of life, it will simply be too late. Artificial morality never pays. The tables will soon turn, and “constitutional conservatives” will have to live in the country they actively helped to create—a profoundly immoral police state that has no respect for life of any kind (including theirs)." http://www.ctghq.org...sons-supporters

Just wondering if you are a pacifist? If you are attacked and fear for your life, you plan to do nothing to defend your life?

That article has nothing to do with your question. Someone breaks into my house, they will feel the effect of a Smith and Wesson .45 round.

[cptau 169]

"Lamentably, many of Darren Wilson's fans claim to be constitutional conservatives and moralists. This is preposterous. A true constitutional conservative looks at the Ferguson situation and sees a young black male who was denied his Sixth Amendment rights and executed in the street. A constitutional conservative does not necessarily have to be emotionally connected to Michael Brown, or even think he was a good person. A constitutional conservative could even conceivably believe that Michael Brown deserved to be in prison for a long time for the robbery he allegedly committed. But there is absolutely no grounds for someone who claims to believe in constitutional principles to think it is acceptable for Darren Wilson to bypass every other procedural step that he could have taken short of deadly force and ultimately choose to shoot and kill Michael Brown, including shooting him in his head as though he were a wild beast being put down.

It has become abundantly clear that alleged “constitutional conservatives” do not really care about constitutional principles. They care about one constitutional principle: the right to bear arms. By "the right to bear arms," they mean the right to manufacture demonstrably fictitious narratives describing blacks as wild demons about to kill them, before they shoot to kill in “desperate fear of their lives.” This is not just Officer Darren Wilson’s narrative, but it was the narrative of George Zimmerman before him. It will be the narrative of the next person who comes along and claims that he was nearly beaten to death by a black monster before he shot "it" in fear of his life. Sadly, alleged “constitutional conservatives” will continue to swallow that repetitive cock and bull story hook, line, and sinker. It’s not because they are credulous and guileless, but because they are morally bankrupt and will sanguinely treat the Constitution they claim to respect like used toilet paper when it’s time to talk about respecting the constitutional rights of black males.

The next time Darren Wilson's supporters, the “brave” constitutional conservatives, talk about “government tyranny,” just know that they define it as "anything that does not accomplish their political goals.” It is a definition that is endlessly malleable and has nothing to do with the written text of the Constitution. What these “constitutional conservatives” do not understand is that they are eroding constitutional rights for everybody. While they are enjoying playing games with black lives, which they manifestly do not respect, there will come a time when all Americans, regardless of racial or ethnic background, will experience the full weight of a tyrannical state. The problem is that when they turn around to start their loud protestations about respect for the Constitution and the inviolability of life, it will simply be too late. Artificial morality never pays. The tables will soon turn, and “constitutional conservatives” will have to live in the country they actively helped to create—a profoundly immoral police state that has no respect for life of any kind (including theirs)." http://www.ctghq.org...sons-supporters

Just wondering if you are a pacifist? If you are attacked and fear for your life, you plan to do nothing to defend your life?

That article has nothing to do with your question. Someone breaks into my house, they will feel the effect of a Smith and Wesson .45 round.

The article may not, but the actual events in Ferguson do. The police officer was doing what he was trained and ordered to do by the people of Missouri.

[autigeremt 6,569]

I read an article about this yesterday. I think there needs to be an expectation from people across the board that doesn't expect cherry picked emotional reactions. All lives should matter.

[AUtiger98 24]

"Lamentably, many of Darren Wilson's fans claim to be constitutional conservatives and moralists. This is preposterous. A true constitutional conservative looks at the Ferguson situation and sees a young black male who was denied his Sixth Amendment rights and executed in the street. A constitutional conservative does not necessarily have to be emotionally connected to Michael Brown, or even think he was a good person. A constitutional conservative could even conceivably believe that Michael Brown deserved to be in prison for a long time for the robbery he allegedly committed. But there is absolutely no grounds for someone who claims to believe in constitutional principles to think it is acceptable for Darren Wilson to bypass every other procedural step that he could have taken short of deadly force and ultimately choose to shoot and kill Michael Brown, including shooting him in his head as though he were a wild beast being put down.

It has become abundantly clear that alleged “constitutional conservatives” do not really care about constitutional principles. They care about one constitutional principle: the right to bear arms. By "the right to bear arms," they mean the right to manufacture demonstrably fictitious narratives describing blacks as wild demons about to kill them, before they shoot to kill in “desperate fear of their lives.” This is not just Officer Darren Wilson’s narrative, but it was the narrative of George Zimmerman before him. It will be the narrative of the next person who comes along and claims that he was nearly beaten to death by a black monster before he shot "it" in fear of his life. Sadly, alleged “constitutional conservatives” will continue to swallow that repetitive cock and bull story hook, line, and sinker. It’s not because they are credulous and guileless, but because they are morally bankrupt and will sanguinely treat the Constitution they claim to respect like used toilet paper when it’s time to talk about respecting the constitutional rights of black males.

The next time Darren Wilson's supporters, the “brave” constitutional conservatives, talk about “government tyranny,” just know that they define it as "anything that does not accomplish their political goals.” It is a definition that is endlessly malleable and has nothing to do with the written text of the Constitution. What these “constitutional conservatives” do not understand is that they are eroding constitutional rights for everybody. While they are enjoying playing games with black lives, which they manifestly do not respect, there will come a time when all Americans, regardless of racial or ethnic background, will experience the full weight of a tyrannical state. The problem is that when they turn around to start their loud protestations about respect for the Constitution and the inviolability of life, it will simply be too late. Artificial morality never pays. The tables will soon turn, and “constitutional conservatives” will have to live in the country they actively helped to create—a profoundly immoral police state that has no respect for life of any kind (including theirs)." http://www.ctghq.org...sons-supporters

Charles Barkley does not approve of this message.

[AUUSN 823]

"Lamentably, many of Darren Wilson's fans claim to be constitutional conservatives and moralists. This is preposterous. A true constitutional conservative looks at the Ferguson situation and sees a young black male who was denied his Sixth Amendment rights and executed in the street. A constitutional conservative does not necessarily have to be emotionally connected to Michael Brown, or even think he was a good person. A constitutional conservative could even conceivably believe that Michael Brown deserved to be in prison for a long time for the robbery he allegedly committed. But there is absolutely no grounds for someone who claims to believe in constitutional principles to think it is acceptable for Darren Wilson to bypass every other procedural step that he could have taken short of deadly force and ultimately choose to shoot and kill Michael Brown, including shooting him in his head as though he were a wild beast being put down.

It has become abundantly clear that alleged “constitutional conservatives” do not really care about constitutional principles. They care about one constitutional principle: the right to bear arms. By "the right to bear arms," they mean the right to manufacture demonstrably fictitious narratives describing blacks as wild demons about to kill them, before they shoot to kill in “desperate fear of their lives.” This is not just Officer Darren Wilson’s narrative, but it was the narrative of George Zimmerman before him. It will be the narrative of the next person who comes along and claims that he was nearly beaten to death by a black monster before he shot "it" in fear of his life. Sadly, alleged “constitutional conservatives” will continue to swallow that repetitive cock and bull story hook, line, and sinker. It’s not because they are credulous and guileless, but because they are morally bankrupt and will sanguinely treat the Constitution they claim to respect like used toilet paper when it’s time to talk about respecting the constitutional rights of black males.

The next time Darren Wilson's supporters, the “brave” constitutional conservatives, talk about “government tyranny,” just know that they define it as "anything that does not accomplish their political goals.” It is a definition that is endlessly malleable and has nothing to do with the written text of the Constitution. What these “constitutional conservatives” do not understand is that they are eroding constitutional rights for everybody. While they are enjoying playing games with black lives, which they manifestly do not respect, there will come a time when all Americans, regardless of racial or ethnic background, will experience the full weight of a tyrannical state. The problem is that when they turn around to start their loud protestations about respect for the Constitution and the inviolability of life, it will simply be too late. Artificial morality never pays. The tables will soon turn, and “constitutional conservatives” will have to live in the country they actively helped to create—a profoundly immoral police state that has no respect for life of any kind (including theirs)." http://www.ctghq.org...sons-supporters

Charles Barkley does not approve of this message.

Looks like I'm the only true Constitutional Conservative here...

[AUUSN 823]

The article may not, but the actual events in Ferguson do. The police officer was doing what he was trained and ordered to do by the people of Missouri.

The people of MO? Negative Ghost Rider. I'm coming at this from a very different perspective based on my previous ROE and escalation of force training. I don't expect you to understand it or agree with it. At a minimum you could try to see my point of view rather than reply with cute little questions about passivity.