I got it from CNN.com. It's hardly a secret, Nathan. This was a public vote, and 40% voted to keep interracial marriage illegal.NF_Utvol wrote:Might I ask where you get your information?Darth Wong wrote:Explain 40% of Alabamans voting to keep interracial marriage illegal ...
Actually, according to adherents.com, the South is overrepresented in that dubious honour. I don't know about Tennessee, but Alabama, Georgia, and Louisiana are simply infamous.Also, If you notice, you hear just as much about white supremacy groups and militia groups in the western mountain states, with, relatively few in the south (my information is concerning Tennessee, so, it might not apply for the rest of the south.)
Perhaps because no charismatic black contendors happened to vie for the position in Illinois? You're reaching pretty hard, Nathan. A segregationist "respect but do not integrate" mentality is often regarded by its adherents as not being racist, but this is not true.Another oddity, why aren't there any African American governers in Illinois, yet, the first was in Virginia (the place that the Confederacy started)...
No, an unreasonable generalization is based upon a small population set, not a set of MILLIONS. I backed it up with HARD FUCKING DATA, and you have NO RESPONSE, Nathan. Instead, you simply try to attack the messenger.Again, there you go with your stereotypical generalizations.Darth Wong wrote:... And again, I remind you of that 40% bigot vote in Alabama.
Wow, attempting to refute a statement made based on data collected from MILLIONS of voters by looking at one particular high school in an obviously segregated fucking neighbourhood, since there were almost no blacks! Thanks for inadvertently proving my point, Nathan.In my high school, there were, lets see about 5 black students. Do you know why? Because there is an incredibly low rate of African American's living in my county. No one bothered them, no one really cared what color they were, as a matter of fact. The entire time I was in school, not one of them was picked on or singled out because of race.
I like the way you leap to defend that which you do not know. How can you have segregated dances if everyone is white? In order to segregate black and white dances, you obviously need enough blacks to make it worthwhile to hold a separate dance! Think before you knee-jerk, Nathan. And click here while you're at it (hint: you'll like the last paragraph). You might also want to click here, and here, although I'm sure you can find more if you Google around.Have you ever stopped to think that the reason that the first interracial dance in that school might have been because that there simply were no black students living in the area that that school drew students from?
Maybe the fact that Pennsylvania has the population of Georgia and Alabama combined? You're throwing stones from a glass house by even mentioning the KKK, since you should know which state they were founded in (yes, that's right; your righteous home state of Tennessee).I just recalled the KKK statement. But, how do you explain the second largest KKK concentration is in Pennsylvania?
A generalization based on hard data is the sort of thing that SHOULD make you reconsider your knee-jerk defense of Southern racism rather than lashing out at the messenger. As for stereotypical statements, I dare you to find any statement where I claim that every individual person in the South is a racist.No, it might not change the facts. You do make me sick, though, with your rapid generalizations and stereotypical statements.
PS. I have noted that rather than being ashamed of any of these racial issues I point out, you try to minimize them, make excuses for them, or look for barren sheepfucker regions in the midwest to attack in retaliation, as if you figure I would defend those places. Why? Do you think knee-jerk loyalty to a region and its cultural attitudes should be more important than the principles of racial equality and integration?