RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (1000) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: Official Uncommonly Dense Discussion Thread< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 21 2007,14:04   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Mar. 21 2007,12:55)
 
Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 21 2007,13:16)
UD jumps Fonzie who's jumping the shark:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/evoluti....urrency

Reda the whole thing.. but I like this bit:

       
Quote
Which brings up the reason I keep posting juicy bigotted and racist quotes by Darwin and his disciples here at UD. While the intellectual community may know them, the general public does not. Suppose the public decided that every time it accepted a “Darwin” (a 10-pound note) in payment or in change for a purchase, it was implicitly endorsing those terrible quotes? People would likely say, “No thanks, I’d rather have two fivers. I don’t take money that praises racists and bigots — and neither should you.”

I have to wonder if Dembski, as an American, refuses to use the $20 bill, but rather says "No thanks, I'd rather have two tens." The twenty features Andrew Jackson, a slaveholder.

Of course not, Dembski would consider that 'political correctness'. Slave owning is nice and scriptural, keep in mind.

Jackson also was responsible for one of America's worse episodes of ethnic cleansing:

 
Quote
Perhaps the most controversial aspect of Andrew Jackson's presidency was his policy regarding American Indians.[16] Jackson was a leading advocate of a policy known as "Indian Removal," signing the Indian Removal Act into law in 1830. The Act authorized the President to negotiate treaties to purchase tribal lands in the east in exchange for lands further west, outside of existing U.S. state borders.
Jackson never publicly advocated removing American Indians by force, but he devoted considerable energies to the negotiation of removal treaties. Nearly seventy Indian treaties—many of them land sales—were ratified during his presidency, the most of any administration.
While frequently frowned upon in the North, the Removal Act was popular in the South, where population growth and the discovery of gold on Cherokee land had increased pressure on tribal lands. The state of Georgia became involved in a contentious jurisdictional dispute with the Cherokees, culminating in the 1832 U.S. Supreme Court decision (Worcester v. Georgia) which ruled that Georgia could not impose its laws upon Cherokee tribal lands. Jackson is often quoted (regarding the decision) as having said, "John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it!" Whether or not he actually said it is disputed.[17]

In any case, Jackson used the Georgia crisis to pressure Cherokee leaders to sign a removal treaty. A small faction of Cherokees led by Chief John Ross negotiated the Treaty of New Echota with Jackson's administration. Ross was not a recognized leader of the Cherokee Nation, and this document was rejected by most Cherokees as illegitimate.[18] Over 15,000 Cherokee signed a petition in protest; it was ignored by the Supreme Court.[19] In 1838, 1,600 Cherokee remained on their lands. The terms of the treaty were then enforced by Jackson's successor, Martin Van Buren, who ordered 7,000 armed troops to remove them.[20] This resulted in the deaths of over 4,000 Cherokee on the "Trail of Tears."

In all, more than 45,000 American Indians were relocated to the West during Jackson's administration. During this time, the administration purchased about 100 million acres (400,000 km˛) of Indian land for about $68 million and 32 million acres (130,000 km˛) of western land. Jackson was criticized at the time for his role in these events, and the criticism has grown over the years. Remini characterizes the Indian Removal era as "one of the unhappiest chapters in American history."[21]


Also:

Quote
Which brings up the reason I keep posting juicy bigotted and racist quotes by Darwin and his disciples here at UD. While the intellectual community may know them, the general public does not. Suppose the public decided that every time it accepted a “Darwin” (a 10-pound note) in payment or in change for a purchase, it was implicitly endorsing those terrible quotes? People would likely say, “No thanks, I’d rather have two fivers. I don’t take money that praises racists and bigots — and neither should you.”


So much for putting Dave Scot on the new dollar coin.  :(

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
  29999 replies since Jan. 16 2006,11:43 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (1000) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]