• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Morgan Freeman Slams Black History month

BWG said:
Still you throw out that ol' 'I remember some' and 'I recall one' crap. That BS don't fly.

Just because every sentence doesn't have a link associated with it doesn't mean it is BS/a lie...but in the end, I think we are both in agreement. I am not nor was not saying that the Dems or GOP is any better than the other in the 'racism' game. As I pointed out, BOTH parties use the race card like some election year tool, pulling it out and using it to gain votes while demonizing the other party as 'racist'.

Freeman is right - "Stop Talking about it" and makig it an issue! We ought to slam the politicians every time they whipout that card, driving home the fact that we are tired of it! We don't need an NAACP...or an NAAWP - How about the Association for 1 America or something like THAT?

Lets demand of our Public Schol officials that the curriculum be changed to include ALL of America in history instead of being satisfied with 1 month a year for segments of that history!

And you are right:
BWG said:
I am in agreement with everyone here in that racism should be eliminated, I think that is a given. However, the ones that believe it has been and is no longer a problem that needs to be dealt with, is either in denial or chooses to pretend the problem doesn't exist.

On that, we are definitely on the same page! :2wave:
 
Speaking of "black history"...The only person the school textbooks name as a victim of the Boston Massacre is Crispus Attucks, and then the books always proceed to point out that he was black. Which should prompt the question in every young student....does that mean black skin is better or worse against bullets?

What I think their insistence on poor Crispus means is that they can't find any black people of the time who was more influential in the revolution than Mr. Attucks.

No, racism is deeply embedded in the history of this country...no no, rather, it's deeply imbedded in the history book writers and teachers of this country.

And now we have politicians and whole interest groups whose survival depends on making sure racism doesn't go away. The NAACP is a leader in this movement. The Democratic Party is a major beneficiary too.
 
easyt65 said:
On that, we are definitely on the same page! :2wave:

I knew that if we kept the dialogue open long enough we would eventually find some common ground..:lol: ..:cool:
 
easyt65 said:
I find it disturbing that many kids don't know that at one time the U.S. made it legal to kill native Americans...

What do you mean, "at one time"? It's still legal in this State, as long as you are firing from a covered wagon.

Never got taken off the books, and we're just too damned civilized to go and shoot someone just to have a test case. ;)

easyt65 said:
Although not the thread for it, I found that my son's history book does contain references to Jesus Christ, but the book teaches that Jesus was a Prophet ONLY, nothing more.

Does it say, specifically, that he is not the son of your god, or does it merely fail to mention it? If the book only refers to him as a Prophet, it is still correct-- even from a Christian perspective.

If it mentions him as a Prophet but not as the son of the God of Abraham, then I would wonder why your school is using a specifically Muslim text.
 
I couldn't agree anymore with Morgan Freeman. That is extreemly true.
The entire notion of "black history month" or the NAACP within itself represents discrimination and the non-existance of integration into society of aa's.

Well said Morgan, well said.
 
I guess this means Morgan Freeman won't be helping Ray Nagin turn New Orleans chocolate?
 
Stinger said:
:rofl I recall a couple of years ago during Black History Month when one of my sons came home from school, High School, and I asked him our of curiousity what they were doing concerning it. He said "We watched a movie". Really, "what movie" I asked. "Oh one about a group called the Temptations, man they were really into drugs and beating their women weren't they". They were showing the made-for-TV movie about the Temps. What a waste.

It's time to end this racist, bias'd observance. We don't have a Red History Month, we don't have a Yellow History Month, we don't have a White History Month. Why not have an American History Month and maybe the kids might learn something about America.

All they'd need to do then was show the movie about Ike and Tina Turner and we'd have a slam dunk home run, wouldn't we? LOL
 
KCConservative said:
I guess this means Morgan Freeman won't be helping Ray Nagin turn New Orleans chocolate?
:2rofll:

:2rofll:

:2rofll:

:2rofll:
 
i'm actually in college to be a history teacher. but i worry that if i do like i want to, which is integrate it, parents will get mad for several reasons. one being, non emphases is placed on african americans during black history month. if it were up to me, i would do nothing special and integrate it into the curriculum. parents would probably get upset because im not teaching students about black history, even if it was integrated. also, if it is integrated, people might complain that i'm not pushing black history enough.
 
If it mentions him as a Prophet but not as the son of the God of Abraham, then I would wonder why your school is using a specifically Muslim text.

BINGO! THAT'S what I'm talking about!
 
t125eagle said:
parents would probably get upset because im not teaching students about black history, even if it was integrated. also, if it is integrated, people might complain that i'm not pushing black history enough.

History is history especially in an American History class or other "generic" history class. Events should be taught based on their relevence and importance to history overall. NOT because the people involved were of a particular race.
 
oh, I agree wholeheartedly. but there are some who will not feel that way. especially if you go from black history month, where everything is african american baised, to integrated where not every african amerian will make the cut, in importance. in the grand scheme of things, that an african american invented the stop light is not all that important, unless your stuck at a red light and your late...then you might want to know who to cuss! but, the point being, that every african american, who might be important during black history month, would not be so important in the history of the us or such. yeah, the key ones would be mentioned, king, booker washington, maybe carver, malcom x.
 
t125eagle said:
i'm actually in college to be a history teacher. but i worry that if i do like i want to, which is integrate it, parents will get mad for several reasons. one being, non emphases is placed on african americans during black history month. if it were up to me, i would do nothing special and integrate it into the curriculum. parents would probably get upset because im not teaching students about black history, even if it was integrated. also, if it is integrated, people might complain that i'm not pushing black history enough.


Why don't you just teach history? Blacks didn't live in a vacuum. Whites didn't either. In the United States, the history of blacks and whites is a common one. It does injustice to both parties when "black history" or "women's history" or "hispanic history" are treated separately.

George Washington Carver was an American who happened to be black.

Susie Anthony was an American that was a woman.

Lincoln was an American that was white, and tall.

Jefferson Davis was an American that was white.

They all lived in a soup called "America", and each reacted to that environment as their innate abilities and desires guided them.

Teach the kids what it is to be an American. That's what important.
 
t125eagle said:
but, the point being, that every african american, who might be important during black history month, would not be so important in the history of the us or such. yeah, the key ones would be mentioned, king, booker washington, maybe carver, malcom x.

Oh, you mean the blacks would be treated the same way as the whites, with the importance of their contribution being used to determine how much class time is spent on them? How unfair! (yeah, I'm being sarcastic).

Like I said before, does anyone care about Crispus Attucks when his only claim to fame is "bullet stop"? Any realistic protrayal of the Revolution would either name all the victims of the Boston Massacre (I think there were seven killed?), or none. As far as high school goes, none would be enough.
 
t125eagle said:
i'm actually in college to be a history teacher. but i worry that if i do like i want to, which is integrate it, parents will get mad for several reasons. one being, non emphases is placed on african americans during black history month. if it were up to me, i would do nothing special and integrate it into the curriculum. parents would probably get upset because im not teaching students about black history, even if it was integrated. also, if it is integrated, people might complain that i'm not pushing black history enough.
This is exactly the reason why education in schools in the US is so messed up. Parents going to school telling the teachers what to and what not to teach. This is nearly non-existant in other countries.
Seriously, parents should do what they do, that being parenting and let the teachers do what they do. None of this cross interferring stuff.
 
Deegan said:
I am so pleased to hear black men speaking up about this! The more we try and tip toe around this issue, is the longer this keep us all apart, and that is not what anyone wants, save a few radical opportunists. The day of the big business of racism is slowly ending, good riddance.

I don't afree with Morgan on this one. In an ideal world, he would be right, we wouldn't need black history month. And in the nice life he has carved out for himslef, he probably doesn't see that America still needs the kick in the but to teach black history or we run the risk of it not being taught at all.

Of course it's anecdotal, but I have met PLENTY racist teachers in my day.

I heard a story the other day about a woman teaching at a Catholic school in Utah, and when MLK was assissnated, the NUNS were saying they were glad the nig*** was killed. Unfortunately, that's still our America.
 
Back
Top Bottom