← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Happy Hacker
Thread ID: 14184 | Posts: 3 | Started: 2004-06-14
2004-06-14 19:30 | User Profile
The Michigan Supreme Court ruled 5-2 that a white man passed over for a promotion in favor of a less qualified black man should not have a higher burden of proof than a non-white in proving that he is a victim of discrimination. Whites, unlike non-whites, were required to show that the employer had a track record of discriminating against whites. So, it would not matter if an employer signed a confession saying "Yeah, I f****d da crackrr cuz he's casper, slap mah fro!"
In dissent, subhuman judge Marilyn Kelly wrote "In our society, demeaning acts of prejudice directed against whites because of their race are uncommon."
Uh, Ms. Kelly, isn't double standard of justice for a white man not an example of demeaning prejudice directed toward whites? Is not every case the ubiquitously practiced so-called Affirmative Action not discrimination and prejudice against whites? Our society has a not-so-settle anti-white attitude which Ms. Kelly does her part to contribute to.
Besides, what does a frequency of a crime have to do with whether victims of the crime deserve equal protection?
Anti-white racists try to maintain that the impact of AA and other anti-white practices are very limited in their impact. If this is the case, then what's the harm to the non-whites with ending the racial double standards, especially considering the bad publicity created by such things? Their lies couldn't be any more transparent.
[URL=http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/06/14/race.discrimination.ap/index.html]CNN[/URL]
2004-06-14 20:06 | User Profile
Uncommon? She don't live in my neighborhood.
2004-06-14 20:31 | User Profile
"In our society, demeaning acts of prejudice directed against whites because of their race are uncommon." Given the media 'blackout' on black crime, the sad fact is that a lot of whites actually believe this garbage.
This is of course to say nothing of the demeaning, prejudicial hiring procedures enforced through affirmative action laws, together with EE laws as interpreted by judges such as Mary (another beneficiary of this AA spoils system).