CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Black Radicals Shutdown Commerce in Chicago
Demonstrators shouted “16 shots!” and “No justice, no shopping!”
The march started at Michigan and Wacker Drive and began walking north. They include demonstrators from the "Nation of Islam", which is marching under the banner of “Justice of Else”; RevCom, the "Revolutionary Communist Party", and the "Rev. Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow PUSH coalition."
The latter group is marching slowly, while the other groups have pushed ahead, effectively taking up five city blocks along Michigan Ave., with hundreds of Chicago Police Department officers lining the streets.
Protesters are attempting to gain access to major department stores and shopping malls. Police turned them away at the entrance to Water Tower Place, but they continue to try to enter other shopping areas with the intention of blocking commerce from taking place. As of noon, the protesters were walking toward the John Hancock tower.
Is this what Americans want "Commerce" shutdown by the Radical Leftist ?
"Better Wake Up America" this is what Leftist of this Country have in store for this country !
Well, if this all came out a month ago I guess they would have been marching down suburban streets, screaming at children "16 shots! No justice, no candy!"
What i find very interesting by your statement "16 shots ! No justice , no candy !" is the Leftist failed to even acknowledge the killing of a 9 year old black boy in Chicago by 1 maybe 2 black thugs.
Well they don't care about black on black violence of course...
My point was why punish retailers on black Friday? The retailers aren't responsible for what happened. If this news had come out on Halloween, would they have taken their anger out on innocent trick or treaters? No candy for you!
Protesting, by its very nature, must be disruptive. If it isn't, then nobody is listening. Throughout the history of protesting, protesters sought to find the most disruptive methods they can manage to force people to listen to messages they either have not heard, or have been avoiding. This isn't exactly new, so I'm not sure why people are freaking out so much about it. I live in Chicago and it really wasn't a big deal.
Not sure how I'm freaking out but they could have protested in front of the mayor's office, or city hall or the police station. Thanks for your opinion though, I guess?
I intentionally said "people" instead of you, as I was referring to much of the general response as opposed to yours specifically in that sentence.
As for the other places you mentioned, none of them would have given them anywhere near as much public visibility or disruption. From a pure efficiency standpoint, there really wasn't anywhere in the city that made more sense.
They should be protesting all the blacks killed by blacks in that part of town where all these shootings occur, but that doesn't fit the liberal agenda. It has to be a white shooting a black no matter what the justification. If this were a black cop shooting this guy 16 times, you would hear nary a word by the left and the MSM. This is selective faux outrage in its purest form.
I just saw in the news that they caught a couple of suspects, all black. Black on black crime doesn't fit the liberal narrative. There has to be a white component in it to measure a blip on the radar screen with the left.
I have to believe that those of you on the right who continue this narrative simply haven't spent any time in predominantly black areas. I live in South Chicago, pretty much the capitol of black on black violence in this country, and I see protesting regarding said violence just about every day.
They do protest blacks killing blacks. In fact, unlike the stupid pro-gun Republicans, the liberals try to do something about it. They want tighter gun laws so a psychotic white-supremacist or violent Black protester don't shoot innocent civilians.
Also, it is clear that most of the cops that shot the black people are obviously prejudiced, corrupt, or downright racist. In most cases they are scared because they believe in the stigma that all black people are dangerous so they jump to extreme measures when the victims do the slightest thing that seems like a threat.
However, a few disgusting cops try to actively harm blacks.
Liberals want internal violence, tensions, and unrest to end but Republicans are preventing them from doing so.
"Black Radicals"??How about "Political Radicals"? The ones that cover up for "Police Radicals"? People have a right to be angry! Breitbart think that only they and their right wing "Radicals" have rights .... and NOBODY abuses them as much as THEY do!
"With them, everything is illusion, smoke and mirrors, gossip and accusations, outright lies and intricately manufactured half truths!" Those are not MY words, they are from a book, however, they are SO fitting! (The book was referring to the "Stasi", The East German Secret Police, Breitbart bedfellows! (IMO).
In Chicago 2073 shootings , 440 deaths as of November 23,2015. Where are the "Black Lives Matter" protesters ? Do black lives matter ? Where are the "No Justice No Shopping" protesters ? Your links are provided
It has nothing to do with being threatened, it has to do with what's right. What right to they have to inconvenience the public and interfere with commerce. They are costing these businesses money; entities that had nothing to do with the shooting.
This is the Bongo's version of ''Black'' Friday. The Bongo's inability to recognize the importance that commerce and business has to the community in which they live graphically illustrates their backwardness and spiteful childish psyche'. They ''bite their nose off to spite their face', ugly enough, sorry, strangely enough. The worrying thing is that they'll never change. Their ''oh poor us'' mentality will always enable them to rationalize their congenital destructive nature. Rather a bleak outlook for the future of America.
I was responding to the tone of the OP, which seemed threatened.
Incidentally, though, there is this little thing called the right to assembly. And, notably, businesses themselves have no constitutional rights nor do individuals have any constitutional right to make money. Given a choice, I would choose the right actually enumerated in the Constitution. Not that I really care all that much; like I said, they momentarily shut a few things down... big deal.
Businesses do have rights; they are legal entities that can sue and be sued and have a rights that cannot legally be infringed upon, like the tortious interference of commerce, or the public's right to move, come and go without impediment. No big deal to you since it doesn't come out of your pocket, or cost you a dime. Classic liberal.
I never said businesses have no rights. I said they have no constitutional rights, certainly none that pertain in this situation and none that are more explicit or defensibly precedent to the explicit individual constitutional right to assemble.
You are right that I do not care since it does not affect me. Classical egoist, though, not classical liberal. What a classical conservative assumption to make, though.
The right to assemble has its limits just as freedom of speech has. You can't shout "fire" in a theater and you don't have carte blanche to slander and libel; each has its limitations.
The Holmes quote that you are using is out of proper context. The standard created in Schenck v. U.S. was that speech is not protected when it is both dangerous (poses a legitimate public risk, such as causing an immediate panic) and false.
What they said was not false, and it has no risk of creating the sort of public danger Justice Holmes spoke of.
The right to assemble still doesn't give you rights over others to pursue their own happiness whether it's running their own business/corporation, or the right to freely move.
Actually, in a very real way it does. People don't have a civil or Constitutional right to convenience, which is ultimately what you are talking about here. The only "damage" done by the protesters was inconveniencing people during the course of their protesting. Not only does that not fail any sort of legal test regarding freedom of speech or assembly, but it doesn't even fail any non-Constitutional legal test that I am familiar with.
Simply put, inconveniencing others is the main method of all protesters.
Actually, in a very real way it does. People don't have a civil or Constitutional right to convenience, which is ultimately what you are talking about here. The only "damage" done by the protesters was inconveniencing people during the course of their protesting. Not only does that not fail any sort of legal test regarding freedom of speech or assembly, but it doesn't even fail any non-Constitutional legal test that I am familiar with.
Simply put, inconveniencing others is the main method of all protesters.
So I don't get it, are you trying to make an argument that because their actions didn't directly threaten someone's safety, then those actions are okay?
The'' Bongo'' did their best to turn Detroit into a 3rd world zone, ( not without some success) and now they are targeting Chicago. The Bongo's answer to everything usually involves rioting, looting and a 100 to 1 ratio of revengeful reprisal. The 'Bongo'' should be sold the idea;- down in jungle living in tent, better than apartment, no rent.
Face: Mainly Leptoproscopic( Narrow)Sometimes Meso- or even Euryproscopic, Neither Facial nor alveolar prognathism occurs except among some archaic peoples.
Nose:Long,narrow,high in both root and bridge.
Mongoloid:
Skull: High incidence of Brachycephaly(Short Round Head)
American Indians while Mongoloid are often Dolicephalic.
Foreheads slightly lower than that of the Caucasoid.
No Supraobital development.
Face: Wide and short, projecting cheek bones, Prognathism rare. Shovel shaped incisors common especialy in Asia.
Nose: Mesorine(Low and Broad in both root and bridge.
Negroid:
Skull: usually Dolicephalic, a small minority are Brachycephalic.
Forehead most often high, little supraobital development.
Face: Leproscopic (to a much lesser degree than the Caucasion), Prognathism common in most Negro populations.
Nose: Low & broad in root and bridge with characteristic depression at root.
Now these are only the most common races. There are many more than just this.
A race is a scientific category for the Homo sapiens (the current and only living species of human), which narrows down things further.
I don't remember what affirmative acyion is. If I go long enough without thinking about something, I forget it. I am learning disabled, so I have to work my ass off to learn and retain information. I'll sum it up: We are all one human race, and skin color and other ethnic features should never be a factor. "I have a dream, that one day, man should be judged not by the color of his skin", but by the content of his character." -Doctor King
Like it or not there are different races, to suggest otherwise is ridiculous. What about sex? Are we all the same sex? What about sexual orientation, are we all the same? No. You should embrace our differences, not try to pretend they don't exist.
So what? First if all, don't bother posting shit from the bible to me. No offence, I'm pretty tolerant of believers for an atheist but obviously I'm not going to accept that as fact. AND your verse doesn't dispute te existence of different races.
Wasn't Eve created from the rib of Adam? Or some silly bullshit like that? So Eve is a man? There are no sexes just one human sex.
I never said it was okay to hate people based on the color of their skin. But you claim we're all the same race, and if that's true then racism doesn't exist.
Dude, calm down. I was answering your statements. I was not accusing you. LOL. You make a valid argument. Racism does noit exist if I am write, but bigotry in general does.
You did not quote my entire statement. I said if it is true that we are all one human race, that racism does not exist, &&but; institutionalized and cultural bigotry in general. One thing I left out: All of these alleged racial differences are fictional ideaologies forced on us by the ruling elite from all kinds of parties. A population is easier to control when divided, and yes, I admit that Obama does it too.
You can't have it both ways. Either you think we're all one race and racism doesn't exist or there are different races and racism does exist. Make up your mind.
You are misunderstaning my statements. I am saying that racism does not exist, but ethnocentrism does. Race and ethnicity are two different things. I find it ironic that I am being criticized for opposing ethnocentrism.
"Ethnocentrism is judging another culture solely by the values and standards of one's own culture. Ethnocentric individuals judge other groups relative to their own ethnic group or culture, especially with concern for language, behavior, customs, and religion. These ethnic distinctions and subdivisions serve to define each ethnicity's unique cultural identity."
So if a black American hates his next door neighbor simply because he's white, what do you call that... because it's not covered by ethnocentrism.
To be fair, very real arguments can be made that both race and gender are semi-arbitrarily designed classifications that lack legitimate, objective physical criteria.
Ma'am, there is scientific evidence that there is multiple races. As shown below, it is not racist to say so. We are a normal species like every other animal. Now it does become racist if you treat one race higher than the other.
Ma'am, there is scientific evidence that there is multiple races. As shown below, it is not racist to say so. We are a normal species like every other animal. Now it does become racist if you treat one race higher than the other.
