Black Lives Matter Messaging at "The Stadium"

[Brueggs]

19 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

Who does? Who's a "leftist elite"?

Absolutely.  There are 6 major news outlets in the US that control 90% of the media.  All owned by leftist elites.  Fox news is also moving in that direction over the last year.  Campuses around the country have been censoring conservative viewpoints routinely while liberal platforms are not challenged.  What happened to the debate between two sides, where actual solutions are created?  Hollywood?  Constantly promoting liberal view points.  How much conservatism have you heard in Hollywood over the last decade?  

[Bill from NYC]

1 hour ago, BullBuchanan said:

Sure. America ranks 27th when it comes to a poor person's ability to improve their economic standing:
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/ranked-the-social-mobility-of-82-countries/

Right behind Lithuania.

Why, because that left wing page says so?

 

Btw, how many screen names do you have on this board?

Edited July 30, 2020 by Bill from NYC

[SoTier]

21 hours ago, StHustle said:

I'm DONE with this team. With The Stadium. With the NFL. How dare they post messaging that says black lives matter. What about the other entitled races who hate anything they dont feel included in? Its boils my blood anytime I hear the phrase "Black Lives Matter" HOW DARE THEY LEAVE US OUT ?

 

-The overtly covert racist

 

 

 

Adios.  Arrividerci.   Auf weidersehen.  Aurevoir.    Don't let the door hit ya where you keep your brain   

[RiotAct]

1 hour ago, BullBuchanan said:

Sure. America ranks 27th when it comes to a poor person's ability to improve their economic standing:
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/ranked-the-social-mobility-of-82-countries/

Right behind Lithuania.

man, the millions of immigrants and refugees coming here every year have it all wrong then!

[BullBuchanan]

11 minutes ago, Bill from NYC said:

Why, because that left wing page says so?

 

Btw, how many screen names do you have on this board?

What about the page tells you that it's left wing?
Did you read that the data is a visualization of the annual report from the World Economic Forum?
Are you suggesting their data is incorrect and intentionally politically biased?
If so, do you have data to support your claims?
Do you have data to support an improved social mobility score for the USA?
 

[teef]

jesus...some of you guys have far too much time on your hands.

[BullBuchanan]

8 minutes ago, RiotAct said:

man, the millions of immigrants and refugees coming here every year have it all wrong then!

 You can be from the 54th country on the list and 27 is still an improvement. Why people immigrate and where from is a whole separate discussion.

[dwight in philly]

14 hours ago, swimtoga said:

Link?

Go to "black lives matter" 

17 hours ago, Logic said:

Since my good friends @dwight in philly and @Buffalo716 decided to somehow rope Antifa into this thread, I thought I'd share this article with them:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/27/us-rightwing-extremists-attacks-deaths-database-leftwing-antifa

Deaths cased by anti-fascist violence since 1994: 0
Deaths cased by far-right violence since 1994: 329

But please...do go on about how dangerous anti-fascists are. 

Nothing like parroting the breathless, fact-free pearl clutching of such visionaries as Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity! 

If you find the leader of Antifa or can locate any of their weekly meetings or official creeds, please let me know.

As to the subject that this thread is about: Good for the Bills organization.

I can't imagine actually being upset that a sports team feels that the lives of the players that make up the majority of its roster actually MATTER. The Gall!

 

All due respect , i think you are full of sh @#t its not about antifa.. its about what "black lives matter" actually is . 

[Buffalo716]

2 hours ago, Mango said:

That park was admittedly snarky. 
 

I was refuting you’re claim that you had a better chance of socioeconomic mobility in America than “any other place on earth.” Taken quite the step back, eh? 
 

Most resources qualify 25-30 countries as first world. Your claim of 20th isn’t so great amongst isn’t so great amongst its peers, is it? 
 

Since this is a football board, let’s make it anecdotal to football. 
 

You: K’Lavon Chaisson was the first pick in the NFL draft. 
Me: Actually he wasn’t, here are the order of draft picks. 
You: There were what, 255 draft picks in the 2020 draft? 20 is still really good. 
Me: Sure, but that’s not what you said, nor what the conversation was about. 
 

Or maybe you should just call Auburn National Champs. I get they weren’t number 1, but they were top 10% and that’s pretty good! 
 

 

I don't think there's probably a huge difference between number 1 and number 15 or 20. Both have tons of economic freedom

 

Also look at the size differences of those countries. America is massive compared to Denmark and most of those top countries population wise

 

We have a lot more people to worry about economically. 

 

and historically first world second world and third world has nothing to do with economic status. It was a labeling system during the Cold war

 

First world countries were countries that supported the allies. Second world countries were communist Bloc, and third world countries were neutral.. 

 

The terms were not economic. All Western European nations are first world countries by grouping.

 

Whatever people have done with the term over the last 30 years I'm indifferent towards, But First world countries were specifically the allied Bloc during the Cold war. That was the original use

 

And America's GDP ls still #1

 

 

 

 

Edited July 30, 2020 by Buffalo716

[Bill from NYC]

14 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

 You can be from the 54th country on the list and 27 is still an improvement. Why people immigrate and where from is a whole separate discussion.

Do you have the data on that?

[BullBuchanan]

10 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

I don't think there's probably a huge difference between number 1 and number 15 or 20. Both have tons of economic freedom

 

Also look at the size differences of those countries. America is massive compared to Denmark and most of those top countries population wise

 

We have a lot more people to worry about economically. 

 

and historically first world second world and third world has nothing to do with economic status. It was a labeling system during the Cold war

 

First world countries were countries that supported the allies. Second world countries were communist Bloc, and third world countries were neutral

 

The terms were not economic. All Western European nations are first world countries by grouping

The difference between Denmark(85.2) and the USA(70.4) is roughly the same as the USA and Thailand(55.4).

In other words, The USA is Denmark's Thailand.

[DE Bills Fan]

7 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

How do you know the bills don’t simply support the point that the lives of blacks matter?  It’s an important discussion piece.  African -American players are more likely to want to play in an area in which they are accepted and respected not just for what the accomplish on the field, but for who they are as human beings.  The Pegulas made a good move here.  It was a solid football and human decision to post that message.

Sorry. It’s fine to support helping the black community but NOT supporting an organization who has anti-social goals in their mission statement. Whatever pandering the Bills are trying to gain is going to be counter-balanced by the backlash of people who have researched the BLM platform and deplore it. Just look at this thread. 

[SectionC3]

Just now, DE Bills Fan said:

Sorry. It’s fine to support helping the black community but NOT supporting an organization who has anti-social goals in their mission statement. Whatever pandering the Bills are trying to gain is going to be counter-balanced by the backlash of people who have researched the BLM platform and deplore it. Just look at this thread. 

How come you assume that saying "Black Lives Matter" is equivalent to support for a website that (to my knowledge) was started after the phrase became part of modern lexicon?  In other words, what if the Bills simply support the point that the lives of black people matter?  And what if that "pandering" is good for the football and business sides of the organization?  Would your principles be compromised by supporting that position?

[Royale with Cheese]

41 minutes ago, teef said:

jesus...some of you guys have far too much time on your hands.

Do you think Robert Stack of Unsolved Mysteries is one of the greatest hosts of all time?

[BullBuchanan]

Just now, Royale with Cheese said:

Do you think Robert Stack of Unsolved Mysteries is one of the greatest hosts of all time?

Is this rhetorical? 

[4_kidd_4]

1 minute ago, Royale with Cheese said:

Do you think Robert Stack of Unsolved Mysteries is one of the greatest hosts of all time?

 

Bob Barker or gtfo.

[Royale with Cheese]

1 minute ago, BullBuchanan said:

Is this rhetorical? 

 

No.  He legitimately was perfect for the show.  His voice and demeanor was legendary.

[BullBuchanan]

9 minutes ago, DE Bills Fan said:

Sorry. It’s fine to support helping the black community but NOT supporting an organization who has anti-social goals in their mission statement. Whatever pandering the Bills are trying to gain is going to be counter-balanced by the backlash of people who have researched the BLM platform and deplore it. Just look at this thread. 

You made it clear that it's actually you with the anti-social goals since you believe certain groups of people don't qualify as "family". How does denying their idea of a family make yours stronger?

[Royale with Cheese]

1 minute ago, 4_kidd_4 said:

 

Bob Barker or gtfo.

 

The only people who are in Robert Stack's level is Alex Trebek and Steve Harvey.

[4_kidd_4]

Just now, Royale with Cheese said:

 

The only people who are in Robert Stack's level is Alex Trebek and Steve Harvey.

 

?

 

Welp, I can see this conversation is definitely not going to be as congenial as the rest of this thread.

[Royale with Cheese]

2 minutes ago, 4_kidd_4 said:

 

?

 

Welp, I can see this conversation is definitely not going to be as congenial as the rest of this thread.

 

Now that's funny!

 

[dwight in philly]

6 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

You made it clear that it's actually you with the anti-social goals since you believe certain groups of people don't qualify as "family". How does denying their idea of a family make yours stronger?

He is perfectly correct! A tenet of BLM does not believe in the nuclear family.. 

Edited July 30, 2020 by dwight in philly

[BullBuchanan]

4 minutes ago, dwight in philly said:

He is perfectly correct! A tenet of BLM does not believe in the nuclear family.. 

That's false.

Edited July 30, 2020 by BullBuchanan

[DE Bills Fan]

7 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

You made it clear that it's actually you with the anti-social goals since you believe certain groups of people don't qualify as "family". How does denying their idea of a family make yours stronger?

Just look at all of the facts that Marcellus Wiley quotes in his response. The family is key to moving your life forward in general and should be praised and supported and not demeaned. Really tough to see the Bills supporting an organization that ultimately will make the black community worse instead of better. 

[Doc Brown]

20 minutes ago, DE Bills Fan said:

Sorry. It’s fine to support helping the black community but NOT supporting an organization who has anti-social goals in their mission statement. Whatever pandering the Bills are trying to gain is going to be counter-balanced by the backlash of people who have researched the BLM platform and deplore it. Just look at this thread. 

Correct.  I'd be much more comfortable with the Bills supporting and celebrating traditional civil rights organizations like the NAACP.

[BullBuchanan]

1 minute ago, DE Bills Fan said:

Just look at all of the facts that Marcellus Wiley quotes in his response. The family is key to moving your life forward in general and should be praised and supported and not demeaned. Really tough to see the Bills supporting an organization that ultimately will make the black community worse instead of better. 

Then why would you promote anti-family stances?

[DE Bills Fan]

2 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

Correct.  I'd be much more comfortable with the Bills supporting and celebrating traditional civil rights organizations like the NAACP.

Makes sense...,

[dwight in philly]

11 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

That's false.

Really ? you read their website?

Edited July 30, 2020 by dwight in philly

[BullBuchanan]

Just now, dwight in philly said:

Really ? you read tgheir website?

Yes.

[dwight in philly]

3 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

Yes.

Guess you missed it   "

We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.

We foster a *****‐affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking, or rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual (unless s/he or they disclose otherwise).

Edited July 30, 2020 by dwight in philly

[LabattBlue]

Just curious...Seeing that this is a county owned facility, did the Pegula's have to get approval from Erie County prior to deciding they want to proclaim their support for BLM?

[BullBuchanan]

Just now, dwight in philly said:

Guess you missed it 

No, you just miscomprehended the statement. It's quite clear.

"We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable."

What that part means, is that they believe you don't have to fit one definition of a family to be a family. They are much more family-friendly than those that only support one type.

[dwight in philly]

2 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

No, you just miscomprehended the statement. It's quite clear.

"We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable."

What that part means, is that they believe you don't have to fit one definition of a family to be a family. They are much more family-friendly than those that only support one type.

For crissakes are you serious? in this country , the father is part of the nuclear family.. enough with your nonsense.. 

Edited July 30, 2020 by dwight in philly

[BullBuchanan]

3 minutes ago, dwight in philly said:

For crissakes are you serious? in this country , the father is part of the nuclear family.. enough with your nonsense.. 

Except when they aren't?

Are you saying a single mother cannot be a family?

Are you saying a child raised by their grandparents are not a family? I just want to be clear.

 

What about grandparents that live with the their children and grandchildren?

Are they not a family because they are multi-generational?

Edited July 30, 2020 by BullBuchanan

[dwight in philly]

Just now, BullBuchanan said:

Except when they aren't?

Are you saying a single mother cannot be a family? Are you saying a child raised by their grandparents are not a family? I just want to be clear.

Of course not , (btw your pic is a disgrace, flag upside down) they purposely leave out the father in the equation.. 

[JoshAllenHasBigHands]

5 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

Except when they aren't?

Are you saying a single mother cannot be a family? Are you saying a child raised by their grandparents are not a family? I just want to be clear. What about grandparents that live with the their children and grandchildren? Are they not a family because they are multi-generational?

 

This statement tells me you misunderstand what they are advocating. He is right; you are wrong here.  I'm not even advocating one or the other. I'm just saying you don't understand what you are reading. 

Edited July 30, 2020 by JoshAllenHasBigHands

[MJS]

19 minutes ago, BullBuchanan said:

That's false.

They aren't quite as explicit as their partner organization M4BL (Movement for Black Lives) who calls for:

 

1) Abolishing all police and all prisons.

2) Progressive restructuring of tax codes at the local, state, and federal levels to ensure a radical redistribution of wealth.

3) Retroactive decriminalization, immediate release, and record expungement of all drug-related offenses and prostitution and reparations for the devastating impact of the 'war on drugs' and criminalization of prostitution.

 

And the leaders of the Black Lives Matter organization are Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, and Opal Tometiln who are self-proclaimed Marxists. BLM has been around since 2013.

[HamSandwhich]

19 hours ago, Mark Vader said:

All true.

 

I believe that black lives matter, but I do not support the Black Lives Matter organization.

This is the right viewpoint, in my opinion, but if you have a different opinion, I won’t smash you over the head with a bike lock. Instead, I will seek clarification on your position in order find common ground or perhaps agree to disagree. You know, act like a rational adult. 

[MJS]

8 minutes ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:

 

This statement tells me you misunderstand what they are advocating. He is right; you are wrong here.  I'm not even advocating one or the other. I'm just saying you don't understand what you are reading. 

Yep. Abolition of the nuclear family is part of the broader BLM and M4BL movement. This is well known.

1 minute ago, HamSandwhich said:

This is the right viewpoint, in my opinion, but if you have a different opinion, I won’t smash you over the head with a bike lock. Instead, I will seek clarification on your position in order find common ground or perhaps agree to disagree. You know, act like a rational adult. 

Haha, I don't think that is in the cards these days.

Edited July 30, 2020 by MJS

[Mango]

1 hour ago, Buffalo716 said:

I don't think there's probably a huge difference between number 1 and number 15 or 20. Both have tons of economic freedom

 

Also look at the size differences of those countries. America is massive compared to Denmark and most of those top countries population wise

 

We have a lot more people to worry about economically. 

 

and historically first world second world and third world has nothing to do with economic status. It was a labeling system during the Cold war

 

First world countries were countries that supported the allies. Second world countries were communist Bloc, and third world countries were neutral.. 

 

The terms were not economic. All Western European nations are first world countries by grouping.

 

Whatever people have done with the term over the last 30 years I'm indifferent towards, But First world countries were specifically the allied Bloc during the Cold war. That was the original use

 

And America's GDP ls still #1

 

 

 

 

I interchanged post-industrialized and first world, the understanding of the term first world changed over the years. But I digress from the ad hominem. 
 

To the point, 42% of people in the US born in the bottom 20% of income earners stay in the same income brackets as adults. And even then, 65% stay in  bottom 40 % of earners. Other countries like Canada and Denmark have numbers as low as 25% of those born into the bottom 5th staying in the same income bracket as adults. 
 

To your point about GDP, that is precisely part of the problem. The US has a gigantic GDP and a huge income/wage gap, which makes it much more difficult (see unlikely) to climb the socioeconomic ladder. 
 

Just to summarize. America is not number one for opportunity when it comes to stratifying the socio economic ladder. They are near the bottom of post industrialized nations. And no, the gap between the best and the worst is not small.