While I was rushing around the small local mall the other day, a man stopped me to ask "Where's the travel agency? Didn't there used to be a travel agent here?" "Yeah, it's not there any more", I replied, stating the blindingly obvious. For whatever reason, he started yakking about a new grocery discount store up the street that used to be a Safeway (big grocery chain). "Is the Safeway here being replaced?" he inquired (answer: no). And then he listed all the bargains he had just enjoyed at the new discount supermarket, thrilled to share the low cost of tomato sauce. "I bought ten cases!" he marveled. (He saved a dime a can). I usually go for convenience more than modest savings and so will continue to go to the closer store and pay the extra $00.10.

"I'll have to check it out sometime" I said, to be polite (and wanting to get going to my destination). He proceeded to say "The only problem is that it's East Indian oriented - it's filled with their food". (Recently, people have switched to saying "South Asian" instead of EI, largely due to an unfortunate negative connotation - 'East Indian' is often used in a disparaging way).

"Their food": Code for "they're not like us".

"We're the minority", he sleazed (meaning: whites).

"Fortunately for me", I shot back, "I like South Asian food". I was trying to say something positive, but not wanting to get into a dispute on the street with a stranger. Also, I didn't want him thinking I agreed with him, which silence may indicate.

The casual racism of such remarks is most unfortunate, and seems more prevalent to me than previously. The inference that I'd agree with his racist comments (albeit mild compared to more direct statements he could have made) because I'm white really bugs me and I didn't want to give that impression so I had to say something.

I don't know how it's possible but I was associated with the Mormon Church for 2+ years - four months "studying" with missionaries and two years post-baptism, trying to make it work (and feeling like I'd fallen through the looking glass, but thinking I had to live up to commitments I had made - even if I couldn't describe what they were or what they meant), without knowing about their racist doctrine before baptism or discovering it afterwards while still in the church. The first I heard of Mormons being racist was here, at RfM.

I well remember my utter shock that I would not have known about or realized the racist history and the still current doctrines that are racist. I guess they would describe it as a fleck of history, in the immortal words of GBH.

I hadn't been here long at that time, iirc, and I wrote a post concerning my distress at learning of Mormon racism. I can remember the title of it to this day: "Please Help Me - I'm in Shock". I don't remember the content of the post, other than saying that one of my sisters has biracial children, which made it even more personal to me. I felt utterly devastated, like I had betrayed them, that I had joined an organization that to that day had not renounced their racist beliefs.

I know they would obviously deny the racism, in their past or certainly in the present. But that doesn't answer for why their doctrine contains such teachings and why they still exist.

I struggle to understand why people, at least in our day, have such trouble with viewing all humans as equal in every regard. How am I better than, just because of the colour of my skin? Better than, because of where I live? Rather than accepting the genetic facts of life (my ancestors were white, hence my complexion) and my good fortune (my forbears being born in Western Europe and my parents emigrating to Canada where the field of opportunity was wide open to all of us). None of it was due to my efforts or any inherent superiority. It just is what it is.

Back to the man in the mall: True enough, in the general area we were in, many South Asian families make their homes. As well as others from Africa and the Middle East. Many still wear their distinctive clothing. To me, it makes life interesting. And how would I have a claim that I, also an immigrant, have any more right to be here than do they?

Happily for me, I find most folks around and about to be happy and friendly. Whether they look and dress like me or not.

As for the Mormon Church's racist doctrines - it's an unfortunate history. Made even worse by their so-called prophet not renouncing it.

I’d rather Mormons be seen as a bunch of Archie Bunkers.

Personally, I love spicy food, but a lot of my friends do not, because they have not grown up with it.

The key here is familiarity. Ever heard the expression, "I like what I know, and know what I like"?

It's not at all about one's taste in food.

Just saying.

The clues are referring to people as a group (as in "they") to differentiate them from another group ("us") with the obvious implication that "they" are the stranger and "we" are the ones who rightly belong.

As for the supermarkets, it's not a case of stocking items that "they" will buy but rather what the store can sell - to whoever may want it. Demand/Supply iow.

The key here is familiarity. Ever heard the expression, "I like what I know, and know what I like"?
Of the family

My parent's racism wasn't malicious, just the product of growing up in rural Utah. When they were young, the world was as it was presented to them by others who'd rarely been outside the comfort of their little valley of white and delightsome Mormons.

They had lived all over the country and in Canada by the time I came along, so they were less ignorant, but some things stuck. Like pitying non-whites because God was punishing their lack of valor in the war in heaven, or for Cain's screw up.

My mother's sense of what skin pigmentation meant even included southern Europeans. She was concerned about my college-age brother's Italian girlfriend. "But if you marry, your sons won't be allowed to hold the priesthood!"

A repairman came to the house one day. When he left, Mom said, "He'd be quite a handsome man if he were white."

Nightingale Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> The casual racism of such remarks is most
> unfortunate, and seems more prevalent to me than
> previously. The inference that I'd agree with his
> racist comments (albeit mild compared to more
> direct statements he could have made) because I'm
> white really bugs me and I didn't want to give
> that impression so I had to say something.

I hate this too. Like Vancouver, Calgary has a large immigrant population. And Calgary, old Calgary, is still “redneck” racist, especially among the working class. I hate when it is assumed I share their prejudices.



> Back to the man in the mall: True enough, in the
> general area we were in, many South Asian families
> make their homes. As well as others from Africa
> and the Middle East. Many still wear their
> distinctive clothing. To me, it makes life
> interesting.

You see this a lot in Calgary too, especially in the NE. Yes, it’s interesting, and it’s noticeable that their school children are dressed in the usual clothes of Canadian school children. But the assuming casual racist loves to make a point that “those people” wouldn’t be such a problem if they’d at least dress like us (and cut out the curry, they might add). I always answer this one with, “what the fuck is it to you what they wear? Who gives a shit?” Casual racist guy and gal are often flummoxed by this, because, really, why give a shit about that of all things?

(Will think well of you, Nightingale, as we drive through your corner of Canada on our way to a few weeks on Pender Island.)

So, you are virtuously not “casually racist,” but you’re overtly prejudiced against “rednecks” and working folks. ??

The racist ones, ya.

Human Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> (Will think well of you, Nightingale, as we drive
> through your corner of Canada on our way to a few
> weeks on Pender Island.)


Oh, lucky you. Pender Island is so beautiful (as are all the Gulf Islands). I know I'm biased, but it is a lovely area.

Hope you have a wonderful trip.

The casual racism is the most prevalent in Mormonism. I have seen overt racism with Mormons, but it's rare compared to the casual stuff. For example, I was playing miniature golf with a Mormon once, and we were held up by a large family in front of us. "They sure are slow," I said. And my Mormon companion said, "what do you expect? They're Chinese."

We have a lot of Asian people in the Sacramento region, and they come from all over Asia. There was no way to tell where the Asian family was from. They may have all been born locally.

Causal racism is all over the place.

Many older people seem to like it. Just today a woman told me that India was the last place on earth she would like to see but the people from there are so smart.

What if she’d said the phillipines were too hot for her taste but the people are so friendly?

I don’t want to split threads but I’m trying to be heard.

“Their distinctive clothing”? Code for?

It can get confusing sometimes. What if you don’t like their clothing but do like their food?

Today my wife talked about how Asians negotiate more than white Americans. I wondered how to respond.

jay Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I wondered how to
> respond.

Blanket statements cover you too much. Any response would be muffled.

jay Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> “Their distinctive clothing”? Code for?

I know - I thought twice about having written that. But I was rushing my post (on my way out) and in my ignorance I'm not sure that I know the correct names for the different forms of national dress. (Is the latter term acceptable, accurate?).

All I can say, even now, is that some women from the Middle East wear the clothing they would wear in their countries of origin, long dresses and hijabs to be more exact. There are women likely from Africa wearing long, thick, black robes and even more complete head coverings than the hijabs I see on others. Some wear beautiful vibrant colours, others all black. Some very young girls are also dressed in similar fashion, whereas my friends from the Middle East put their children in Western dress, as someone mentioned above. (However, likely at least some of those girls will "graduate" to the hijab as they approach adolescence - that is my understanding. My neighbour's little girl chose to start wearing one at age 9. After a few months she went back to going without a head covering. Her parents didn't seem to object one way or the other.

Again, the reasons for my choice of phrasing re the clothing were (1) I am not sure of the correct terminology and (2) I was in a rush and didn't have the time to look it up.

Sorry for any misunderstanding - no offence intended. I believe I would reference my own "Western style" clothing if I was in another country as being "distinctive" only in the sense that it is a sign of one's home country. Of course, depending where I was, I might have no choice but to go with the flow and don the hijab and other acceptable garb. Even then, by my face I would obviously be seen as coming from a Western country.

PS: By "distinctive clothing" I also meant that it would be obvious by the appearance of an adult female that they are likely not originally from this area. That is just a statement of fact, not a judgement. Especially some patterns and types of clothing/coverings I have never seen around here before.

The one thing that is a judgement is that it somewhat bugs me that many women are wearing very heavy, black clothing in the height of our hot summer weather (some so long it even covers their feet to the point that they trip over the material) while their husbands are in Western-style shorts! Shorts! Not fair! What is amusing to me is that some of the women in slightly shorter dresses show glimpses of bare feet. Haha. A little bit of "rebellion" perhaps. Or maybe survival instinct. They need to keep cooler somehow. I couldn't even breathe in my car this afternoon it was so hot - needed the windows open for a breeze as well as the AC cranked. Could not imagine being covered head to toe. Especially in black.

But what we/they will do for our customs, never mind religious beliefs. I used to cover my head as a JW if I was teaching a man who was nearly ready for baptism, due to the JW injunction against women teaching men.

Another example of what I mean by 'casual' racism or sexism and how our beliefs affect our most mundane choices in life.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/28/2019 09:05PM by Nightingale.

What if we lighten up, Why is casual racism just so really baaad? It's terrible but I like off color jokes. I like porn too.

Hey I'm just being honest, people.

The word 'casual' in the phrase 'casual racism' does not mean that "it's not so bad". Rather, what I meant was that it seems to come so easily and, as you demonstrate, be seen as no big deal.

On another note, as exmo BICs explain so well, the origins of the racist attitudes of (some) Mormons lie in the Mormon doctrine. It becomes so second nature to members that they don't even realize it's racist, and highly offensive.

Just as I, a convert, didn't recognize it. When I heard the term "white and delightsome" never for a moment did I think of that as racist. I guess I never stopped to think what it meant. And in my whole life til then, 'white' was used to denote good and 'dark' or 'black' to signal bad. I just thought it was the English language, not that the origins were, or could be, racist.

So, yeah, it really is so 'baaad'. It laces the language with signals, intended or otherwise. It gets into your lexicon and seeps into your attitudes.

And if you're on the down side of it (i.e. not 'white and delightsome') and it affects your position, in employment or in your religion or in society in general, yeah - baaad.

Great response. Thought stopping is a cult tactic. Heaven forbid we grow inured and immune to casually reducing large groups of people into prejudiced thoughts even tacitly in accepting it as normal and acceptable behavior.

Our past of "us" and "them" needs constant vigilance against into slipping into our worst natures.

And as I said in another thread, when people leave a highly racist community like Mormonism, they often unwittingly bring their casual racism with them. Because it is casual, or unspoken and unrecognized, they don't even know they remain tainted by it. But it manifests as inaccurate impressions of "facts," subtle presumptions in favor of one group and against another, etc.

In truth, everyone has subconscious prejudices that come from family, childhood, ambient culture, etc. And those visceral tendenecies cause problems. One indication of emotional IQ is the degree to which any particular person has learned to recognize and counteract her unspoken assumptions about other groups of people.

British Columbia is one of the most diverse places I've been to. I'm surprised the guy (a complete stranger to you,) would say something so blatantly bigoted to someone he doesn't know at all. Maybe he was hoping to get some positive reinforcement. Well, now he knows he's in an even smaller minority than he was before. ;)

I agree that Mormons are given to "casual racism" as are many others. But we so often sweep with a broad brush and attribute motives to people that do not exist.

I agree with Thedesertrat1 that "I like what I know and know what I like".

Have we gone too far?

I'm going to reposition this.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/29/2019 03:20AM by Lot's Wife.

Well, I think there comes a point when "their food" becomes "everyone's food," but it can take a while. When I grew up, there were no Chinese, Thai, or Indian restaurants nearby. Now you would be hard pressed to find a town without a Chinese takeout.

I used to shop at a supermarket that was next to a part of town in which the Hispanic population was growing. I was fascinated by the foods that were added to the market as a result, particularly the bakery items, but also the cuts of meat. At first many of the items were kept in a special section, and then eventually they were scattered throughout the store.

As people try new things, those things become more normal to them.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/29/2019 02:14AM by summer.

It's important to note that "casual racism"--I'd prefer a different phrase, something like "unconscious racism"--is not about motive. Motive requires consciousness, a decision. Conscious racism is generally malicious, since there is thought and intent between racist impulse and racist action. Unconscious racism, or what we are calling "casual racism," is less odious because it doesn't involve willful choice.

To give an example, many years ago I was invited to a graduation party at a major college, which we can call University of X. My brother and I attended and were surprised to see we were the only people of our race. After half an hour, one of my closest friends brought his parents over and introduced us. We chatted for a few minutes and then his mother, who had little experience outside her own community, said, "you know, there are all these people here from around the world and I feel right at home with them, but there's something about you people from X that makes me feel uncomfortable."

My friend was deeply embarrassed and said, "Mom, they aren't from X. They came here when I did." He felt terrible and, as we walked away, tried to apologize. I laughed and said my parents would have done the same thing, which is true. None of these people are maliciously racist; none of them would intentionally discriminate against anyone.

But the unconsciously racist feel slightly out of place with people from different ethnic backgrounds and with foreign (to them) accents. I bear none of them any ill will. Ultimately unconscious racism matters because it influences who gets hired for jobs, who gets scholarships, who is chosen as a roommate--not because of anything nefarious but because the decision makers are opting for the people with whom they feel most comfortable.

In a racially neutral society such things would not happen: physical characteristics would not affect personnel decisions. So ultimately unconscious racism needs to be eradicated. Yet it is critical to differentiate between overt, conscious racists on the one hand; and on the other, people who are doing their best but because of their backgrounds and experiences are marginally and unintentionally biased.

The latter, those who are doing their best, are the allies of equality. They just need a little more time, a little more experience, and some patience. It is the overt, conscious racists and misogynists, the ones who know why they feel the way they do and who willfully choose to express their bigotry in ways that harm others, that are the real problem. There are both sorts in the Mormon community and, unsurprisingly, in the ex-Mormon world as well.

“So ultimately unconscious racism needs to be eradicated.”

Which is as easy as eradicating your Mormon thinking.

I would go farther and say that eradicating racism is the same thing as "eradicating your Mormon thinking," at least for people who are or were Mormon.

The notion that people can grow up in a racist culture and organization, one from which people from one or more other cultures are discouraged from participating, and not absorb racist thinking is of course naive. Racism and misogyny and other forms of xenophobia stem from many sources; Mormons do not have a monopoly. But I would venture that there unique strands of racism--everything from messianic belief in European cultural superiority and Manifest Destiny, to Mormon (Biblical+) views on the Gathering of Israel and Zion, and then to the proposition that racial differences are morally or familiarly significant (thanks, Bruce)--that in one degree or another characterize most people who have been Mormon for a significant period of time.

One of the challenges for ex-Mormons is to escape not only Mormonism (capitalized, meaning the religious teachings and hierarchy) but also mormonism (small case, meaning the culture). It is possible to achieve the former without making much progress with the latter. Doing so may take more than one generation.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 07/29/2019 06:33AM by Lot's Wife.

Here's a funny story -- when I first decided to go into the teaching profession, I decided to take a couple of undergraduate education classes at a local public HBCU (historically black college/university.) It was a good experience for me as it got me out of my comfort zone. But the funny part is that, as a white person, I was eligible for a minority partial scholarship to that school. The state of Maryland was doing that at the time to encourage integration. It blew my mind that I was in any way considered a "minority."

One day I was attending a conference at another public HBCU. I went to the school's cafeteria at lunchtime, and I noticed a clear (albeit unintentional) racial demarcation -- the black students were sitting on one side of the cafeteria, and the white students on another. They were sticking to their own comfort zones when given the choice about it.

At the schools that I've worked at, racial groups mix together comfortably for work purposes, but sometimes retreat to their comfort zones when it comes to socializing.

My dad says that when he taught at BYU-Hawaii, the students in his class self-segregated their seating arrangements according to race. The Haoles or whites typically sat on one side of a room, the Polynesians on the other side, with the Asians usually front and center. The Maori students were often seated in the middle, behind the Asians; most have them would have been ethnically at least half European. Students tended to sit in the same seats each class session after about the second meeting of the class.

Samoans and Tongans historically haven't blended well, but at that time in Laie, or at least on campus, there was an unspoken temporary detente. I hear that they're now back to having separate wards for the two groups.

Well said, Lot's Wife. I appreciate the input and the thought-provoking response.

Thanks to everyone!

I sure wish we had more ethnic diversity in my area. I AM HUNGRY! Truly one of the best things about living in San Francisco.

I think the most racially diverse city I've seen (in North America) is Toronto. That city is like a large scale United Nations.

The racist dog whistles are loud.

I was back at the shopping centre this afternoon. I actually tripped into the open door of - guess what? The *travel agency*. LOL - it was there all along. Both the man who asked me about it and I must have had a blank moment when neither one of us could see it - just three doors down from where we had been standing.

It made me laugh. Small silly things greatly amuse me.

Meanwhile, I had some good ol' North American style food tonight - McDonald's, on a whim, and being in a rush. Blech. Truly awful. Absolutely pickled. No wonder our modern bodies break down with dread diseases affecting our hearts and livers and maybe our minds as well. Rigid arteries - cannot be good!

So I'll make up for it tonight with fresh raspberries and a big bunch of green grapes. I love this time of year with the abundance of fresh fruit and veg. Potatoes and tomatoes are local, as in just down the road. Most of the summer fruit is from up country right here in my own province. And California is a great fallback for us, with more fruit than you could eat in a week coming from that area.

Amazing (to some) - our South Asian and Middle Eastern friends revel in it too. The kids in our neighbourhood, from a war-torn area, fall onto any fruit I take them and I'm thrilled to share it. I have absolutely nothing to do with Canadian agricultural pursuits and yet I feel inordinately proud of such bounty.

And let us not forget, multitudes of people with similar ancestry are born right here. They're not "foreigners" just because they appear different from some of the rest of us.

From some of your comments and other posts here and in the archives I have learned more than I maybe wanted to have to think about re Mormon doctrine and its true meaning. It helps to try and visualize what it would be like for little kids to grow up with those beliefs and attitudes being taught to them. We are at least somewhat at the mercy of our upbringings and it can take an effort to overcome the more negative aspects. I appreciate the exmos here who help us understand more about the effects of what they've been taught. Converts may miss a lot of it (as I did) and nevermos even more so. Many have challenges to overcome from their childhood but those facing ex-members of relatively closed groups even more so.

Ditto azsteve

Ditto azsteve...I think people do a disservice by immediately accusing someone of "racism" at any level, before they fully understand. I am also frustrated by illegal immigration because of the disrespect it shows for a countries laws. I have observed that if a person disrespects immigration law from the outset, then other laws don't seem to get respect either, i.e. traffic laws, insurance laws, drug laws, criminal laws, and on and on. My daughter is a victim of illegal immigration. Am I racist? No, not at all. If it walks, talks, breathes, thinks - it's a human being. I don't see races...I see human beings only. I see culture though. I prefer some cultural items over others. Perhaps the man referred to by the OP was simply stating his dietary cultural preferences...doesn't mean he's a racist.

I agree with you, azsteve and Ted. My husband was claimed by his sister and waited the required 4 years to come to the U.S. as a legal immigrant. He became a U.S. citizen. He received two college degrees and all the studying was done using his second language skills (English). He was employed by a Department of Defense government contractor which requires a strict security clearance and it's required to be a U.S. citizen. It's not well known, but he has made a huge contribution to our society, both in the medical field, and navigation systems. I am very frustrated and so is my husband with illegal immigration because it gives him and others who have obeyed the laws of the land, a bad name. It doesn't matter what a person's skin color is or ethnicity; what sets a person apart is the contribution to the country they have made. There are good reasons for rules on immigration, not the least of which is to make sure that contagious and formerly eradicated diseases are not brought here. Criminal background checks are a part of the process also. Those who come illegally do not have physical checkups or background checks. Feeling that people should obey the laws of the land does not make one racist.

Ted: "Perhaps the man referred to by the OP was simply stating his dietary cultural preferences...doesn't mean he's a racist."

You may be right in some instances. In the one I describe, this is not true. The subject of his comment was that he was thrilled at the cost savings he snagged at a big new super-store in our area. But then he threw in the observation that "it's filled with *their* food", accompanied by a grimace (which I didn't mention in my OP) and a metaphoric wink and nod to me as if he assumed that, of course, I would know what he meant and that I would agree with him.

In no way was he casually mentioning his dietary preferences as a topic he would raise with a total stranger (me). It was more like "I like the new store but..." (not happy with some of the items they sell as in "their food", i.e. not "ours").

Yet he found what he wanted there - tomato sauce. So what's the problem?


valkyriequeen: "Feeling that people should obey the laws of the land does not make one racist."

Correct. I agree.

To be clear: My post/s are not the least bit about American societal ills nor (especially) US political arguments.

This topic has gone in a way I did not intend.

Which I regret.

I was trying (and obviously failing) to relate the subject to racism found in Mormon doctrine, an aspect of my time in the church which is among the main things that upset me about Mormonism.

I appreciate the comments that stick more closely to that theme. It's an aspect of the religion I chose (impulsively and unthinkingly, without doing a deep dive into its origins, background and doctrine). In fact, the friend that got me into it insisted that prospective converts are only allowed to read the BoM as the other standard texts are too "sacred" and/or complex to be read until one is converted.

I still smack myself in the head for falling for that pitiful line. Because I "obeyed" that supposed rule.

However, if one actually reads and comprehends the thing, the racism is apparent in the BoM also.

As I said, I did not notice it, did not read the text/s as referring to the superiority of one race over another. Sometimes you only see what your preconceptions emphasize.

Please folks, don't divert into contentious US political debate. I don't want my thread to be disappeared due to going off the rails.

I would hope we could broach these difficult subjects in a less partisan, more human-oriented way.

In the context and body language that you explain about the man, I agree that seems like racism. I like the way you handled that too. You bet, the BOM reeks of racism throughout. Amazing NAACP even considered having Nelson speak.

I like to think most enlightened people have moved beyond judging a person based on ethnicity or skin color. I favor people who share my values and beliefs. I can't help but believe that culture, traditions and being able to communicate also factor in as well. I could have happily accepted Ben Carson (Black) as my president had he been elected in 2012 because he shared my beliefs and values.

Azsteve and Ted are correct when they speak about the rull

Computer glitch!!

Ted is correct regarding the rule of law. It is primarily this that sets our country apart from other countries. Selectively enforcing laws i.e. not enforcing the laws one doesn't agree with is a slippery slope.

Allowing people to enter the country without going through a port of entry and following an established legal process and then remain in said country is not consistent with the rule of law.

And yet the US has established laws and treaties that contradict what you say. Foreigners are statutorily permitted to seek asylum no matter how they arrived in the States. What you are proposing is itself illegal; it is a violation of established law.

Then there are the laws and treaties that the US has adopted that govern, or purport to govern, the treatment of legals and illegals once they are here. There are processes in place to amend or abolish such laws, but "I changed my mind" isn't one of them.

Any country is in trouble when its citizens confuse their personal preferences with the rule of law.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/30/2019 03:35PM by Lot's Wife.

Here are some bits of silliness:

Any infant born on American soil is a United States citizen. Including, since 1924, children of America's original inhabitants, the alleged Native Americans!! I'm told that only the USA and Canada have this policy. What a dent in the economy if this privilege is ever revoked! All those Anchor Babies put some real zip into our tourist industry.

But there is an exception of the above rule: The children of credentialed diplomats of other countries born in the USA are NOT granted US citizens, based on the notion that their diplomatic immunity takes them outside of the 14th Amendment, from which springs the "...if you're born here, you're in the same boat we are..." basis for the granting of citizenship.

Finally, I think it's a 50,000 person lottery that the USA puts on every year. The only requirements are that you be from one of a list of countries, be a high school graduate, and have no criminal record and be physically fit enough to work. You can already be here in the country, illegally, and still claim your prize.

Anyway, I would like to propose building a wall. I say, let's keep those grizzly bears and Canadians OUT, along with there g.d. maple syrup!" They're killing the Vermont Maple Syrup industry!

I have long been an advocate of a wall with Canada. It is as easy for illegals to enter from that country as from the south. And yet for some reason Canada is perceived differently.

Go figure.

It's porque their cuisine no tiene chiles.

That's a REALLY strange thing to say, Felix. My experience shows that the rule of law is respected in MOST comparable countries (I'm assuming you're speaking from and about the USA...). In France, the UK, Germany - oh yes and in Sweden, something at least one person who probably "shares your beliefs and values" doesn't seem to have understood.

The 'rule of law' is in no way an exclusively American thing. In countries where it does not apply, its absence or imperfection is often linked to many other factors, such as economics, political stability and corruption. But I can tell you that, even in those unfortunate countries, there are people working and fighting to establish the rule of law, however great the odds against them.

Stigmatizing immigrants (or anyone) simply because of their origin or their difference is not consistent with the rule of law either.

Tom in Paris

Tom, get a grip. You are from the UK and you live in France. How does that possibly equip you to tell us what things are like in Europe?

Seriously, there are lots of indices available from leftish and rightish institutions that evaluate countries on their degree of freedom, rule of law, etc., and in virtually none of them does the US come at the top. There are always 5-15 countries that score higher. I realize that is blasphemy in the the land of Our-Country-Is-The-Best, but that article of faith is as much a religious conviction as anything in Mormonism or evangelical Christianity.

More generally, I'm surprised this discussion is even allowed. There is NOTHING in azsteve's post that has to do with Mormonism. Moreover, he elides the question of language and his own comfort with people from different cultures with illegality. As a general rule, if the distinction between the two is lost, you aren't really talking about legality. I think the mods need to think carefully about political posts without even the pretense of a connection to Mormonism.

Yes. Thank you Tom. LW, agreed re off topic. Hence my dismay at the direction. If we can't discuss Mo doctrine without bringing up US hot button political issues we could be doomed to fail.

Corruption of the rule of law creeps in on many fronts, including immigration. Ignoring the corruption of laws is the slippery slope I am talking about. I would argue that corrupt and rogue activities unaccountable to the nations (American) citizens, and to a great extent off the public radar, contribute to the destabilization of the Latin American countries. Iran Contra is just an example.

I have reason to believe the same covert criminal activities aren still occurring. I don't blame the immigrants for wanting to escape a desperate situation. I believe, to a large degree, the problems originate here at home. We must hold our own government accountable for the activities it engages in at home and abroad.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/rampage/wp/2015/08/28/founding-fathers-trashing-immigrants/

"Benjamin Franklin, in 1751, referring to the Swedes, French and other Europeans as insufficiently white, and expressing his growing annoyance at the German immigration boom:

'[W]hy should the Palatine Boors be suffered to swarm into our Settlements and, by herding together, establish their Language and Manners, to the Exclusion of ours? Why should Pennsylvania, founded by the English, become a Colony of Aliens, who will shortly be so numerous as to Germanize us instead of our Anglifying them, and will never adopt our Language or Customs any more than they can acquire our Complexion?

'Which leads me to add one Remark, that the Number of purely white People in the World is proportionably very small. All Africa is black or tawny; Asia chiefly tawny; America (exclusive of the new Comers) wholly so. And in Europe, the Spaniards, Italians, French, Russians, and Swedes, are generally of what we call a swarthy Complexion; as are the Germans also, the Saxons only excepted, who, with the English, make the principal Body of White People on the Face of the Earth. I could wish their Numbers were increased. And while we are, as I may call it, Scouring our Planet, by clearing America of Woods, and so making this Side of our Globe reflect a brighter Light to the Eyes of Inhabitants in Mars or Venus, why should we, in the Sight of Superior Beings, darken its People? Why increase the Sons of Africa, by planting them in America, where we have so fair an Opportunity, by excluding all Blacks and Tawneys, of increasing the lovely White and Red? But perhaps I am partial to the Complexion of my Country, for such Kind of Partiality is natural to Mankind.'"

Well, that should put Tom in his place!

Oh, I'm all in favour of Mr. Franklin and am very fond of his Discourse on Farting (look it up ;-), but he was a man of his time and background.

I'm not sure which "race" I belong to (although I know I'm not winning it ;-). I am resolutely pink.

Tom in Paris

Franklin was a piece of work.

Besides the gem you mention, he performed a series of biblical hoaxes, including the fabrication of a new chapter of Genesis. He personally composed the new material, had it printed into a run of Bibles, and donated them to his local congregation. Then when he gave a sermon, he instructed the audience to turn to that chapter as the textual basis of his comments.

You can imagine the reactions from his auditors. Some knew it was false, some suspected it was, and some were too embarrassed to admit they did not know.

Some days I lose all hope. If it's natural to feel superior due to one's heritage, which is not ours by merit but merely genetics, the clash will never end. And "Saxons" enjoy position and privilege by default. Which is inherently unfair. So what's to feel superior about?

I (dating) have a question:

When I'm looking thru a dating site ... if I decide I don't want to date African women, ? Does that mean I'm a racist?

GNPE1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I (dating) have a question:
>
> When I'm looking thru a dating site ... if I
> decide I don't want to date African women, ? Does
> that mean I'm a racist?

Not necessarily, but it COULD--it all depends on what is going on inside yourself (and I am assuming you mean African-American women, and not "women from Africa"--because many "women from Africa" are white, and I am assuming that this is NOT what you mean).

Another data point would be "how black is 'black' for YOU? One "drop"? If so, you're probably a racist.

If you would date a white-looking woman who was, in fact, three-quarters black, then you maybe would NOT be a racist.

In the U.S., there is an interplay between American history, American culture, and American sociological factors considered as a whole, and the minutiae of "what" constitutes racism for any given person often comes down to a very fuzzy, personal, "line"....which frequently, and simultaneously, contains many anomalies (some of which you may be consciously unaware of).

This is not an easy question in American culture, and there are few American "easy" answers.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/30/2019 03:43PM by Tevai.

Racism is making a decision about a group of people, for good or for ill, based solely on their perceived race. So, yes, making a dating decision solely on race is clearly racist, though the person might in fact be doing them a favor, so there's that. ;) Certainly not illegal, and arguably not even unethical, but I think someone making that as a blanket decision could fairly be considered xenophobic.

Paul Toscano used to joke that in Utah, it was impossible to get elected if your last name ended in a vowel. Not totally true (SLC Mayor Jackie Biskupski, Mia Love), but people with southern or eastern European names, which do tend to end in vowels, are at a disadvantage in Utah. NW European names tend to end with consonants. Not precisely racism, but pretty close.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/30/2019 03:45PM by Brother Of Jerry.