Category Archives: race issue

The true colors of Margaret Sanger ( she has blood on her hands ) 

Margaret Sanger: “We Do Not Want Word to Go Out That We Want to Exterminate the Negro Population”

Forgiveness and Reconciliation for Our Times( The Descendants of Dred Scott Show the Way )

( Listen to the Breakpoint commentary here, or read it below. )
On the 160th anniversary of one of the worst Supreme Court decisions, something beautiful and miraculous happened.

Last week, March 6th, marked the 160th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s infamous Dred Scott decision. Dred Scott v. Sanford, along with Plessy v. Ferguson (which enshrined the principle of “separate but equal”) and Roe v. Wade, form a kind of unholy trinity of Supreme Court rulings which legally declared entire classes of people non-persons.
Yet this infamous decision recently became the occasion for a remarkable act of grace.
First some historical background: For the decades preceding the 1857 decision, the country was torn over the issue of slavery. While actual abolitionists did form a small majority in the North (and ideas of racial equality were rare even among abolitionists), northern whites did not want to compete against slave labor in the territories west of the Mississippi river.
That brings me to Dred Scott the man. In 1830, his second master took him from Missouri, a slave state, to Illinois, where slavery was illegal. In 1836, both returned to Missouri. After several attempts to buy his and his family’s freedom, Scott sued his master’s estate, claiming that under what was known as the “Somerset Rule,” which could be summed up as “once free, always free,” his late master had, in effect, set him free by moving him to a free state.
And that brings me to Dred Scott the decision. Chief Justice Taney could have decided Scott’s case on narrow terms. But he had something far more ambitious in mind: He wanted to settle the slavery issue once and for all.
The least infamous part of his opinion ruled that Congress could not ban slavery in the territories, thus making the Civil War all but inevitable.
The most infamous part concerned the status of African Americans. He ruled that Blacks, enslaved or free, could not be citizens of the United States. He justified this by writing that, historically-speaking, Blacks had been “regarded as beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations; and so far inferior, that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect.”
Like I said, infamous.
All of this makes what happened last week on the 160th anniversary of the decision so remarkable. Standing before the Maryland State House, Charlie Taney, a descendant of Roger Taney, apologized on his family’s behalf, to Scott’s descendants and African Americans in general for the “terrible injustice of the Dred Scott decision.”
Then Scott’s great-great granddaughter, Lynne Jackson, accepted the apology on behalf of “all African Americans who have the love of God in their heart so that healing can begin.”
I’m guessing I know where Ms. Jackson spends her Sunday mornings.
Some people will no doubt dismiss this as a kind of theater. After all, Charlie Taney isn’t responsible for what his ancestor wrote. But that misses the point.
What’s going on here is the acknowledgment of an historical wrong followed by an act of grace which holds out the possibility of a new beginning–in other words, what the New Testament calls “reconciliation.”
Reconciliation comes from a Greek word whose principle meaning is “exchange.” In fact, it was principally used in reference to money-changing, where the parties exchanged coins of equal worth.
In this case something far more valuable than money is being exchanged: the acknowledgement of past wrongs for a restoration of relationships and the possibility of, to use another biblical term, shalom: peace, wholeness, and contentment.
Despite Justice Taney’s best efforts, Dred Scott died a free man. His first master’s family bought him back from the estate with the express purpose of freeing him. Many thanks to Mr. Scott’s and Justice Taney’s descendants for showing us the path to reconciliation in these divisive times.

She may save,and change American education by giving poor kids the same chances their rich friends have 

American public school students fall well behind students around the world in math and science proficiency. This is not debatable. According to the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study and the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study, both cited in The New York Times in 2012, “Fourth- and eighth-grade students in the United States continue to lag behind students in several East Asian countries and some European nations in math and science, although American fourth-graders are closer to the top performers in reading.”
In California, the number of credentialed math and science teachers is actually declining, reports the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing.
Newly installed Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos, believes at least two factors have contributed to these and other problems in American education — lack of school choice and the failure of top-down policies dictated by Washington.
During an interview in her office Monday, DeVos cited one example: “This department just invested $7 billion trying to improve failing schools and there were literally no results to show for it.”
A U.S. News and World Report story in 2015 confirms her view that there is little connection between academic achievement and the amount of money spent: “The U.S. spends significantly more on education than other OECD countries. In 2010, the U.S. spent 39 percent more per full-time student for elementary and secondary education than the average for other countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, according to the National Center for Education Statistics.”
DeVos wants to give more power to the states to set their education priorities: “I think the more states and locales are empowered to innovate and create and are unencumbered by unnecessary regulations and sort of beaten into compliance mentally vs. a can-do and results-oriented mentality, it’s been repeatedly demonstrated that any type of top-down solution, no matter where you try to employ it in government, it’s not successful.”
While acknowledging that resistance from teachers’ unions and some members of Congress is strong (she notes the hypocrisy of those members who can afford to send their children to private schools, yet oppose allowing poor children and their parents to choose better schools), she believes a growing number of people are getting behind school choice: “We had an example of that in Florida where over 10,000 parents and students marched in Tallahassee against (a) lawsuit that the teachers union had filed, which of course, has been dismissed, thankfully.” The lawsuit tried to block a school voucher program.

( Billy’s thoughts – I for one do not understand why the left is so against giving poor parents the same choice that the rich have when it comes to sending their kids to the best schools. We do not need to save the schools, we need to save the kids including the poor kids. Shame on the left for being against somebody who wants to do that. Read the rest of the above column.)

Little Caesars founder quietly paid Rosa Parks’ rent for years

Here is a good deed story that involves two people who are no longer with us. 

That’s why I think it’s time to rethink hate crime legislation.

Read, or listen to the Point of View commentary.

CHURCH Pastor peeved by Planned Parenthood in pulpit

This past weekend, Metropolitan African Methodist Episcopal Church in Washington, DC, played host to Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards who was featured with a cross in the background while she touted the organization she heads.
OneNewsNow talked with Pastor Joseph Parker of St. James AME Church (Leland, Mississippi), about the church hosting the leader of the leading abortion-provider in America.
“It’s disappointing to me as a pastor in an AME church to think that not just our denomination, but leadership in the black community in particular, doesn’t realize who Planned Parenthood is,” says Parker. “Planned Parenthood is a very wicked and an evil organization in many ways – and they’ve clearly shown themselves to be extremely racist in the way they do business.”

( More )

Inspired by Martin Luther King Jr., Bellevue , Nebraska woman’s mother led the fight to end the poll tax

Read the story.

Happy MLK Day from US Senator Ben Sasse 

( Billy’s thoughts – The following was posted by Nebraska US Senator Ben Sasse on his Facebook page. Go to senator’s  page to see a video of Dr. King. ) 
“I have no despair about the future. I have no fear about the outcome of our struggle in Birmingham, even if our motives are at present misunderstood. We will reach the goal of freedom in Birmingham, and all over the nation, because the goal of America is freedom. …
One day the South will know that when these disinherited children of God sat down at lunch counters, they were in reality standing up for what is best in the American dream and for the most sacred values in our Judaeo-Christian heritage, thereby bringing our nation back to those great wells of democracy which were dug deep by the founding fathers in their formulation of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.”
– Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”

Today we remember a man of unshakeable conviction who awakened the conscience of our nation. Dr. King persevered, even unto death, in asserting the god-given rights of all Americans. May we never lose sight of his message. Happy #MLKDay.

Letter from a Birmingham Jail on obeying God, rather than man

Listen to, or read the commentary here.

If King were alive today , he would be a conservative thought the late Chuck Colson 

I’m Eric Metaxas. Today on BreakPoint we re-present Chuck Colson’s commentary on Martin Luther King Day and Dr. King’s dramatic defense of the moral law.

Chuck Colson
More than forty years ago, on August 28, 1963, a quarter million people gathered in front of the Lincoln Memorial. They marched here for the cause of civil rights. And that day they heard Martin Luther King Jr. deliver his famous “I Have a Dream” speech, a speech in which he challenged America to fulfill her promise.
“I have a dream,” he said, “that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed. ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal.’ ”
While we know of the speech, most people are unaware that King also penned one of the most eloquent defenses of the moral law: the law that formed the basis for his speech, for the civil rights movement, and for all of the law, for that matter.
In the spring of 1963, King was arrested for leading a series of massive non-violent protests against the segregated lunch counters and discriminatory hiring practices rampant in Birmingham, Alabama. While in jail, King received a letter from eight Alabama ministers. They agreed with his goals, but they thought that he should call off the demonstrations and obey the law.
King explained why he disagreed in his famous Letter from a Birmingham Jail. “One might well ask,” he wrote, “how can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?” The answer “is found in the fact that there are two kinds of laws: just laws … and unjust laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws,” King said, “but conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.”
How does one determine whether the law is just or unjust? A just law, King wrote, “squares with the moral law of the law of God. An unjust law … is out of harmony with the moral law.”
Then King quoted Saint Augustine: “An unjust law is no law at all.” He quoted Thomas Aquinas: “An unjust law is a human law not rooted in eternal or natural law.”
This is the great issue today in the public square: Is the law rooted in truth? Is it transcendent, immutable, and morally binding? Or is it, as liberal interpreters argue, simply whatever courts say it is? Do we discover the law, or do we create it?
daily_commentary_01_16_17Many think of King as a liberal firebrand, waging war on traditional values. Nothing could be further from the truth. King was a great conservative on this central issue, and he stood on the shoulders of Augustine and Aquinas, striving to restore our heritage of justice rooted in the law of God.
Were he alive today, I believe he’d be in the vanguard of the pro-life movement. I also believe that he would be horrified at the way in which out of control courts have trampled down the moral truths he advocated.
From the time of Emperor Nero, who declared Christianity illegal, to the days of the American slave trade, from the civil rights struggle of the sixties to our current battles against abortion, euthanasia, cloning, and same-sex “marriage,” Christians have always maintained exactly what King maintained.
King’s dream was to live in harmony with the moral law as God established it. So this Martin Luther King Day, reflect on that dream—for it is worthy of our aspirations, our hard work, and the same commitment Dr. King showed.
(This commentary originally aired on August 28, 2003.)