Burned at the Stake?
March 10, 2015
KARL D. writes:
I am sure by now you have heard the story of the Oklahoma University frat boys who were filmed singing a racist song on a bus during a trip. It has now reached its logical conclusion in what is today’s race-religious America. The witches have been selected and are being set up to burn in sacrifice to our new religion.
Now, was the song and lyrics they sang stupid and offensive? Yes. For a variety of reasons. Was it racist? Yup. I don’t think you will find many people who will disagree with that. But do several of these young boys deserve to have their lives turned upside and destroyed because of this?
In today’s America the answer appears to be yes. Because as we know, to be a “racist” white male is worse than being a murderer or rapist. First the fraternity branch was closed down. Within 24 hours, workers were sent in to take down the Greek letters from the fraternity building. Now several boys have been expelled from the university. Expelled! But they are still not done. No, no, no. They are now trying to figure out if they can make some criminal charges stick! Unreal! Add to this the protest marches, round-the-clock press, death threats (that undoubtedly will follow) via phone, email, Internet and post towards the boys (as well as their entire families) one wonders if an actual war criminal would fare better? These boys are going to have a very, very rough future in front of them both personally and professionally. This is life as a racial witch in the 21st century.
Laura Wood writes:
These students definitely deserved to be suspended. It was crude, uncivilized behavior that no university should tolerate. There is even a case for expulsion. Do you really think their lives will be permanently affected? I think the hysteria will pass and their names will be forgotten.
L.N. writes:
Some months ago, a highly-sought OU football recruit punched a tiny little blonde out at a deli near campus. Apparently, he said something homophobic to a friend of hers and she slapped him.
The media reported he broke several bones in her face and that a surveillance video existed of the incident. They claimed they would release the video at a certain date. The date came and went, the next we hear is that the media was suing to get the tape.
A judge made the most ridiculous ruling I have ever heard. He ruled that Joe Mixon was not arrested because of the incident in question, but because he turned himself into the police.
The OU coach, Bob Stoops immediately claimed he had suspended Mixon, but the media caught him attending events with the team. He, of course, has not been expelled from the school as the white racist men were.
The college is claiming the racist chant has made the campus environment unsafe for minorities. All the while minorities are physically assaulting and spitting on whites on campus for wearing fraternity letters, according to a media report just yesterday.
So, the message from the university seems to be that blacks can do anything they wish to white students, but white students do not have freedom of speech.
Laura Wood writes:
This is not a freedom of speech issue. Private institutions [and public universities] have the right to enforce codes of civility, and should enforce codes of civility. But obviously there is a double standard here.
Still, whites should be held to a very high standard when it comes to behavior toward other races.
William writes:
I agree it is not a freedom of speech issue. And I agree that they should be punished. Are there still rules and laws about obscenity? That is what they should be punished for. Racism should not be claimed as some kind of infraction because as we all know, this spurious transgression, racism, can only be committed by whites.
On the other hand, while there is a double standard, I disagree that whites should be held to a very high standard. That is the exact reason why we are in the predicament with rampant obscenities, lawlessness, and violence among blacks. It is due to the double standard. If we are going to be a society with the same rules for everyone, then there cannot be a higher standard required of one group. To have one standard for one group, and another standard for another group is exactly where we are today.
Laura Wood writes:
To say whites should have very high standards in their behavior toward other races, and specifically toward blacks, is not to say there should be no standards for blacks. But your point essentially denies racial differences, and that denial is why we are where we are. Aren’t there different standards for adults and children? Do we feel the same way when a child lashes out at an adult as we do when an adult lashes out at a child? Whites in general should be in a position of leadership in their relations with blacks because of the innate differences between them. That leadership entails responsibility and respectful behavior at all times, which does not rule out the use of force and strong discipline when necessary. As I understand it, in the South, among gentlemen, it was once considered a grave violation of civility to insult a Negro.
I am not saying those different standards should be as extreme as they are in this case. Joe Mixon, if the charges against him are true, should be expelled, jailed and receive harsher physical punishment than that which he committed.
L.N. writes:
Eugene Volokh, First amendment expert, disagrees with you and William.
Although I am a race realist, I have to disagree with whites being held to a higher standard than all other races on the grounds of the harm that will come to whites with that attitude. That smacks of anarcho-tyranny. What about justice being blindfolded?
The media interviewed a young black woman on the OU campus and she was insisting that “they all do it, they just got caught this time and as long as they are the majority this will continue.” So basically, she was calling for a majority minority campus – which I believe is the outcome of this hysteria.
Now, I would agree with you and William if these kids had taunted black kids with this song, but they were merely letting off steam while amongst their own (or so they thought). They have probably been frustrated at the black thuggery that has largely went unpunished, while whites have been blamed for all ills in society. I don’t believe that they meant to hurt anyone.
So you believe that a white person who express racist thoughts should be castigated publicly, while everyone else gets a pass?
Laura Wood writes:
First, I said there is a case for expulsion, not that these students should be expelled.
L.N. writes:
Although I am a race realist, I have to disagree with whites being held to a higher standard than all other races on the grounds of the harm that will come to whites with that attitude. That smacks of anarcho-tyranny. What about justice being blindfolded?
I am talking about a code of civility, not criminal or legal justice. These students should not be charged with a crime. When I said that whites should hold themselves to a higher standard, I did not mean that they should accept positive harm to themselves. I am referring to manners and their code of conduct.
L.N. writes:
The media interviewed a young black woman on the OU campus and she was insisting that “they all do it, they just got caught this time and as long as they are the majority this will continue.” So basically, she was calling for a majority minority campus – which I believe is the outcome of this hysteria.
The exaggerations and demonization of whites is not right, and I didn’t suggest that it is.
Now, I would agree with you and William if these kids had taunted black kids with this song, but they were merely letting off steam while amongst their own (or so they thought). They have probably been frustrated at the black thuggery that has largely went unpunished, while whites have been blamed for all ills in society. I don’t believe that they meant to hurt anyone.
So you’re saying that black criminality justifies crudeness and cruelty on the part of whites? I entirely disagree. And even if this was in private, it is behavior that should be unacceptable in any college student.
So you believe that a white person who express racist thoughts should be castigated publicly, while everyone else gets a pass?
What are considered “racist thoughts” today often are nothing but the truth. That is not the case here. This is crude and disgusting behavior. As is so typical, it has been used to inflame black hostility toward whites and subject to the usual exaggerations.
David J. writes:
I’m more inclined towards William’s take on the matter: the races should be held to the same standards. That the races are currently held to different standards explains the existence of affirmative action, disparate impact, hate-crime legislation, and political correction; all policies that racial conservatives tend to loathe.
Furthermore, as a Christian, I compare the situation to God’s expectations for mankind. Does He have different moral standards for the various races of men? I know of no biblical evidence in support of such a notion. His commandments apply to all humans without exception or degree, even though individuals and groups differ in their innate abilities to obey them. For instance, black Christians will generally struggle to follow the commandment “Thou shalt not murder” more so than their Korean counterparts because the latter group has been endowed with greater native intelligence and self-control. The same can be said for other sins such as ungodly pride (blacks have more natural self-esteem) and fornication (blacks have greater sex drives and impulsivity). Where is the Scripture that applies lower standards for blacks or any other group in these matters?
Laura Wood writes:
Good grief, I am not suggesting that sins are not sins when blacks commit them. I am not justifying affirmative action. To say there should be some differences is not to say that all differences, no matter what they are, are justified.
Authority entails responsibility. When a parent says to a child, even in jest, “You can’t do anything right,” or “I would like to kill you,” it obviously carries much more weight than when a child says to a parent, “You can’t do anything right” or “I would like to kill you.” When an ordinary person says to a king, “You are worthless,” that is much less serious than when a king says to a subject, “You are worthless.” The relations between whites and blacks are not exactly analogous to these relationships of parents and children, or kings and subjects, but they are analogous in that they should conform to an unspoken hierarchy.
Whites should be in a position of leadership with regard to blacks. That does not mean they should commit suicide or accept positive harm to themselves, but it does mean that they should never take pleasure in cruelty or insults toward blacks. Never.