(06-29-2015 08:55 AM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 10:26 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 10:19 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 10:02 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  I live a sheltered life. I've never known a black person that was anything but protestant, other than someone that converted to Islam.

You should come to Texas. Or Louisiana.

I was 19 before I realized that all black people's last names didn't begin with Mc.

I didn't realize that there were poor white people until I was in college. I wasn't even sheltered.

I've also never met a black person's last name that started with Mc.

Steve McNair. Donovan McNabb.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

(06-29-2015 09:04 AM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(06-29-2015 08:53 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  There are a good number of blacks in my Catholic parish. Probably about 20-25% by my eye test estimate.

I wonder how they came to be Catholic. Do you know if they're converts?

I know some are. Can't speak for all of them.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

(06-29-2015 08:05 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(06-29-2015 08:55 AM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 10:26 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 10:19 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 10:02 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  I live a sheltered life. I've never known a black person that was anything but protestant, other than someone that converted to Islam.

You should come to Texas. Or Louisiana.

I was 19 before I realized that all black people's last names didn't begin with Mc.

I didn't realize that there were poor white people until I was in college. I wasn't even sheltered.

I've also never met a black person's last name that started with Mc.

nomad, I was raised and still live in the Upper Cape Fear region of NC. It was first settled by Highland Scots. Since slaves took the last names of the slaveholder most black folk were McLean's, McNeill's, McDougald's, McKoy's, with a few Campbell's thrown in there.

Understandable. Just thinking about it there aren't even many Mc-white last names around my area. We have a lot of black surnames that came from presidents.

(06-29-2015 08:08 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(06-29-2015 08:55 AM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 10:26 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 10:19 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 10:02 PM)dawgitall Wrote:  I live a sheltered life. I've never known a black person that was anything but protestant, other than someone that converted to Islam.

You should come to Texas. Or Louisiana.

I was 19 before I realized that all black people's last names didn't begin with Mc.

I didn't realize that there were poor white people until I was in college. I wasn't even sheltered.

I've also never met a black person's last name that started with Mc.

Steve McNair. Donovan McNabb.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

I never said I wasn't aware of them.

(06-29-2015 09:04 AM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(06-29-2015 08:53 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  There are a good number of blacks in my Catholic parish. Probably about 20-25% by my eye test estimate.

I wonder how they came to be Catholic. Do you know if they're converts?

There were many Irish slaveowners in the south perhaps they were forced to be Catholics. Remember that the Catholic church sometimes uses coercion to bring members into the religion.

As a matter of fact the Catholic church was very involved in the Civil War. This very interesting autobiography tells a lot about it's involvement.
It's a long read: http://www.biblebelievers.com/chiniquy/

Same thing with Pope Pius during WWII. Both times the Catholic church was endeavoring to become the official church if the South won and the Nazis won. Read any good bio on Pope Pius to find out just how much they were involved in the German plan for expansionism.

As long as the separation between church and state is preserved, I'm not sure how religious affiliation would have effected the interpretation of the law.

(06-30-2015 06:48 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  As long as the separation between church and state is preserved, I'm not sure how religious affiliation would have effected the interpretation of the law.

It mostly is to show the same twisted logic that diversity for diversity's sake alone is important, and valuable.

(06-30-2015 06:50 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(06-30-2015 06:48 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  As long as the separation between church and state is preserved, I'm not sure how religious affiliation would have effected the interpretation of the law.

It mostly is to show the same twisted logic that diversity for diversity's sake alone is important, and valuable.

Yes, the idea that only a black can represent blacks, or only an Hispanic can represent Hispanics is foolish. That's why I posted this thread.

(06-26-2015 08:01 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(06-26-2015 07:50 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  Minorities go ballistic when their representation on city councils does not equate to their numbers in the general population. And even though a majority of Americans are non-Catholic Christians, we have no voice on the Supreme Court.

Just another reason to not take anything seriously that comes out of Washington, DC.

Isn't Kennedy Episcopal (or Presbyterian)? I've seen a site claiming he is Catholic, but I've seen different elsewhere. But after over a century with no Catholics or Jews, the Supreme Court is 5 Catholics, 3 Jews and at most, 1 liberal protestant.

All 9 of the Supreme Court Justices attended Harvard or Yale Law School (Ginsburg later transferred to Princeton).

4 of the justices were born in NY, 2 in NJ, 2 in CA and 1 in GA.

6 of the 9 spent nearly all their careers in Boston, New York or DC. 2 others coupled their northeast time with some time in Chicago. Kennedy is the only one who spent substantial time elsewhere (California).

I hadn't realized Scalia had pointed much of this out in his dissent on the same sex marriage case:

http://www.desertsun.com/story/opinion/c.../29665617/

But, much as we might hate to admit it, Scalia was right when, in the same dissent, he argued that California isn't part of the American West. And in so doing, he raised—almost certainly unwittingly—an important question about California's future.

Scalia made his point via a swipe at his colleagues for being unrepresentative of the United States as a whole (and thus being foolish to impose their views on marriage equality on the entire country). After noting that all nine justices attended Harvard or Yale law schools and that only one grew up in the Midwest, he wrote: "Not a single Southwesterner or even, to tell the truth, a genuine Westerner." But what about Justice Anthony Kennedy, who is from Sacramento? Scalia's answer came parenthetically in the next line: "California does not count."

(06-28-2015 09:42 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 08:27 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  And there are no atheists. And there are no trannies. And there are no autistic. And there are no veterans. And there are no disabled. And there are no Buddist. And there are no Daoist. And...... and...... and.........


I get your point ... but the argument to go with here isn't complaining that some other group isn't represented .... it is to point out how petty, inane, and stupid it is to demand what is an impossibility even if you think it is worthy of merit (which it isn't): represent the entire population in 7 people.

That was my point. I'd like to have half the court Protestant; the country is at least 50% Protestant and to have none on the court seems absurd. That's still not a big deal to me. But you know if we didn't have a black, Jew, Hispanic, or woman on the court there would be hell to pay.

People are so petty.

We should have had 11 Catholic presidents since we are 25 percent of the population. We've only seen 1 so far. That's bullish!t...

(07-05-2015 10:21 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 09:42 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 08:27 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  And there are no atheists. And there are no trannies. And there are no autistic. And there are no veterans. And there are no disabled. And there are no Buddist. And there are no Daoist. And...... and...... and.........


I get your point ... but the argument to go with here isn't complaining that some other group isn't represented .... it is to point out how petty, inane, and stupid it is to demand what is an impossibility even if you think it is worthy of merit (which it isn't): represent the entire population in 7 people.

That was my point. I'd like to have half the court Protestant; the country is at least 50% Protestant and to have none on the court seems absurd. That's still not a big deal to me. But you know if we didn't have a black, Jew, Hispanic, or woman on the court there would be hell to pay.

People are so petty.

We should have had 11 Catholic presidents since we are 25 percent of the population. We've only seen 1 so far. That's bullish!t...

Catholics were late arrivers. The Irish in the 1840's and the Italians around 1900.

Your point has validity, although it's overplayed.

(07-06-2015 07:59 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(07-05-2015 10:21 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 09:42 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 08:27 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  And there are no atheists. And there are no trannies. And there are no autistic. And there are no veterans. And there are no disabled. And there are no Buddist. And there are no Daoist. And...... and...... and.........


I get your point ... but the argument to go with here isn't complaining that some other group isn't represented .... it is to point out how petty, inane, and stupid it is to demand what is an impossibility even if you think it is worthy of merit (which it isn't): represent the entire population in 7 people.

That was my point. I'd like to have half the court Protestant; the country is at least 50% Protestant and to have none on the court seems absurd. That's still not a big deal to me. But you know if we didn't have a black, Jew, Hispanic, or woman on the court there would be hell to pay.

People are so petty.

We should have had 11 Catholic presidents since we are 25 percent of the population. We've only seen 1 so far. That's bullish!t...

Catholics were late arrivers. The Irish in the 1840's and the Italians around 1900.

Your point has validity, although it's overplayed.

Not quite. There have been Catholics in the U.S. since it's founding. The state of Maryland was a "Catholic State" similar to how Pennsylvania was a "Quaker State".

just to respond to the topic as scripted by the op........

.....aren't any lgbts or atheists either.....edit: (admitted)

"where is my cheeze whiz, girl?"

(07-06-2015 11:06 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(07-06-2015 07:59 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(07-05-2015 10:21 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 09:42 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(06-28-2015 08:27 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  And there are no atheists. And there are no trannies. And there are no autistic. And there are no veterans. And there are no disabled. And there are no Buddist. And there are no Daoist. And...... and...... and.........


I get your point ... but the argument to go with here isn't complaining that some other group isn't represented .... it is to point out how petty, inane, and stupid it is to demand what is an impossibility even if you think it is worthy of merit (which it isn't): represent the entire population in 7 people.

That was my point. I'd like to have half the court Protestant; the country is at least 50% Protestant and to have none on the court seems absurd. That's still not a big deal to me. But you know if we didn't have a black, Jew, Hispanic, or woman on the court there would be hell to pay.

People are so petty.

We should have had 11 Catholic presidents since we are 25 percent of the population. We've only seen 1 so far. That's bullish!t...

Catholics were late arrivers. The Irish in the 1840's and the Italians around 1900.

Your point has validity, although it's overplayed.

Not quite. There have been Catholics in the U.S. since it's founding. The state of Maryland was a "Catholic State" similar to how Pennsylvania was a "Quaker State".

just to respond to the last post (since I was fairly certian it wouldn't have anything to do with the subject matter laid out by the op/or chose to expose the dyslexic portion so I could work it in reverse).....

cathoilcs/jews/nazis/buddhists/aborigines/idolators/those also named "bubba"/dana carvey as the church lady, and the buddy christ christie were all at 2:1
isis/jeff-todd-build bridges at 4:1
grease original cast reunion hosted by jimmy fallon/greece tellin' 'em to shove it 10:1
jimmy carter was relevant at 50:1
jimmy the greek pulling a lazarus at 1M:1
potent potables/turd ferguson at 4M:1

the field (tonto/atheists/those that were once "bruce", but we now call it something that begins with a "c"/or any other reference of offense) 1:5

....but I digress......