Slavery language in the marriage pledge

From various articles.

Summary: In a now famous Marriage Pledge, signed by presidential candidates Bachmann and Santorum, one conservative group sought to define marriage between a man and a woman. However, one controversial passage in the preamble raised some eyebrows:

"Slavery had a disastrous impact on African-American families, yet sadly a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African-American baby born after the election of the USA?s first African-American President."

The social conservative group has retracted that language. Bachmann defended it earlier this weekend.

I am so pissed about this retraction. I have been on Facebook all day defending this clear language that DID NOT say that black children were better off under slavery. Now they retract it. Ridiculous!

*

This slavery horse crap !! I have heard this ridiculous whining all my life and enough!! NO one alive had anything to do with it and the country has been destroyed, Pandering to these Clowns and idiots!

*

The really sad thing is, the Left has no interest whatsoever in bettering the plight of the black family.

If they address this comment at all, they’ll know that it didn’t really say or mean what they will say it did. No, they won’t be defending blacks.

They will simply be attacking people on the right.

The Left is a very evil enterprise as a group.

*

Today’s dysfunctions and misplaced moralities versus yesteryear’s chattel slavery — the conditions of which varied greatly according to locale — this is not something that can be propounded in a sound bite. If they wanted to produce a lengthy discourse on it that explained all the angles possible, that would be a different story.

--- Yeah, you read that right. This guy thinks the problem here is that comparing the problems of modern black Americans to antebellum black Americans is just too complicated and require a long debate.

*

Yes, Virginia, some things are worse than slavery.

*

Some slave manned plantations had more liberal (in a good sense) policies and allowed their slaves to have side businesses and to buy themselves free. Some allowed marriages and families that were preserved as a group. This was due to Christian morality, which some masters honored more than others depending on their personal convictions.

*

Children born into slavery could be separated from their mothers and sold from the moment they were born, could be beaten or whipped, could be worked to exhaustion or death, could be starved, and could be raped. And sometimes they were - that's what slavery is all about. The notion that all this is "better off" than today's conditions is both ridiculous and offensive.

*

This entire episode is a case study in why conservatives (and conservatism) loses in the public forum of ideas.

1. Conservative group or person makes a controversial statement (such as the suggestion that black children enjoyed more stable “families” under slavery than in many situations today - a statement which has the ring of truth).

2. The left screams “racism”, or, what-have-you.

3. The conservative person or group goes wobbly, starts trying to “clarify” his/her/their remarks.

4. The left screams louder.

5. The conservative person or group “apologizes” and retracts his/her/their earlier remarks. The “retraction” has no bearing to the fact that the remarks are based on truth. Rather, it comes with ONE reason: to “save face” and to stop the screaming.

When are conservatives going to stand up to the screamers and say, “I said what I meant and meant what I said, I’m NOT sorry, I’m NOT going to apologize, and I’m NOT going to take back what I said, for truth is truth.” ????

Just sayin’....


*

The other argument is this....Not that the black folks are totally responsible for abortion in this country, however as a group they had the power to prevent many/most of the 60 million plus abortions that have taken place.

Same can be said of American Catholics, they also had the power as a group to prevent the aprox 60 million abortions that have taken place.

Also Black`s/Catholics both have blood on their hands, not just for abortion, but gay marriage, having prayer and God`s Word removed from public square etc.

For full disclosure RINO WASP`s etc that have voted Democrat or for moderate Republicans etc, also have blood on their hands. Not sure if this group alone could have prevented all the death/destruction? But certainly the other 2 groups on their own could have prevented liberal Supreme Court Justices from ever having their say.

Black`s have such a rich Christian heritage, but now when they wave their arms in Church Sunday Morning saying they Love Jesus, it`s all in vain IMHO

*

I understood the meaning of the original pledge's wording as this:

" A black child born today in America has less of a chance, less hope, then a black child born in America when slavery was legal. "

That's simply true. Simply, horribly, brutally true.

*

"Can someone tell me what is inaccurate in this statement? "

Nothing inaccurate at all, but that doesn’t mean it wasn’t a stupid thing for a Presidential candidate to sign.

*

When the Irish first came to the U.S. (famine), they were treated worse than the slaves. Strange that no one talks about it much.

*

it was American slavery, versus that in the Caribbean and Brazil, that fostered stable family units among slaves. It was this, among other things, that was principally responsible for American slavery to have been a relatively minor participant in the importation of slaves compared to the Caribbean and Brazil. Though the same thing could be said about black children for almost any time in U.S. history up to about the 1970s.

*

The comparison is stupid, and offensive. Slavery is totally anomalous in a free society. . Those families were not free agents. A better one would have been to compare today with 1960. Free blacks in 1960 were doing much better. Even with the burden of racial segregation, blacks were better able to maintain family life.