Holy Moses, is this a joke?

Jstas

I mean, is it for real?

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/23/turner.prom/index.html

Basically, a high school in Georgia is having it's first non-segregated prom.

I thought this was 2007, not 1907? :eek:

hoosier21

no joke - the wheels of progress turn slowly in Georgia.

bobman1235

Jstas wrote: »

I mean, is it for real?

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/23/turner.prom/index.html

Basically, a high school in Georgia is having it's first non-segregated prom.

I thought this was 2007, not 1907? :eek:

1907? The civil rights movement didn't even happen until the '60's. Barely 40 years ago. I think it's a good thing that we've progressed so far that it seems like 100 years, but... we tend to forget how "recent" a lot of this is, and in a place like rural Georgia... it takes a while.

Jstas

bobman1235 wrote: »

1907? The civil rights movement didn't even happen until the '60's. Barely 40 years ago. I think it's a good thing that we've progressed so far that it seems like 100 years, but... we tend to forget how "recent" a lot of this is, and in a place like rural Georgia... it takes a while.

I know when the civil rights movement started and it was more than 40 years ago now. I was exaggerating to make a point as to the backwardsness of the whole thing.

bobman1235

I agree, I just think it's a strong reminder of how recently these things changed, and how recently segregation was thought of as the norm.

Jstas

Actually, after looking in to it further, the civil rights movement in this country actually began farther back in the mid 50's, like 1955-56. It essentially started with Rosa Parks on December 1st, 1955. Not until the '60's did it start seeing much more wide-spread notoriety and awareness due to prominent people such as Martin Luther King, Malcom X and in a kind of backward, negative way, the Black Panther Party. It really came to prominece in 1964 with the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That not only ensured many black people the rights that thier non-black counter-parts already enjoyed but also forced desegregation on a national level and legislation ensuing after that point essentially made made any segregation laws on the state law books null. There are still laws on the books in some states like Alabama where "Separate schools shall be provided for white and colored children, and no child of either race shall be permitted to attend a school of the other race." They had a proposal to repeal this provision in 2004 but it was narrowly defeated.

It's kind of sad.

Wikipedia has a good article on the Civil Rights Movement. It's pretty succinct in it's reading and covers civil rights across the globe, not just in the U.S. It gives a good view of where alot of ideas came from and what ideas influenced what countries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_rights_movement

hoosier21

could say it started in 1863, with the Emancipation Proclamation, but whos counting. Georgia is slow, nuff said.

Sami

He's alive...he's alive:

"We been separated for a while. I sure appreciate how the school got all of us together, and we had a blast" said John Holmes

I'm not suprised at all, some of these southern small town people just...well, I won't say it.

Jstas

hoosier21 wrote: »

could say it started in 1863, with the Emancipation Proclamation, but whos counting. Georgia is slow, nuff said.

Not really. I see what you are saying but the Emancipation Proclamation was not a law passed by Congress. It was merely a Presidential order empowered. It didn't even really free any slaves at first because the border states were not affected nor did it free any slaves in southern states already under Union control. At first it only affected those slaves who managed to escape to the Union side. That was mainly because freed/escaped slaves that were in the service of the Union army were being taken and forced back into slavery if they were captured. The Emancipation Proclamation basically made that practice a war crime.

That practice was endorsed by the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 which basically meant that any escaped slave found was to be returned to his/her master. However, many Union generals did not enforce this law by using a loophole that said the slaves, due to thier property status, were contraband and confiscated by the Union army to be dispensed with as those concerned saw fit. However, Lincoln did not endorse this practice because, it was seen as a recognition of the CSA as a valid country and it was felt that it was imperative to the war effort that it be seen as a rebellion to be squashed, not the robbing of sovereignty of an established nation. However, after that, Union generals would declare all slaves freed and safe. On March 13th, 1862, Lincoln issued an order that forbade all Union officers from returning freed slaves. Congress then voted to forbid slavery in all new territories which essentially threw the Dred Scott decision of 1857 out the window. Shortly after that, Congress passed the Second Confiscation Act which basically liberated all slaves held by all rebels. It was a hollow effort at best because the "rebels" had formed the Confederate States of America which denounced the Union, the President and the Congress and therefore all this legislation did not apply. It also relied heavily on the definition of "rebel" which was a bit vague and very open to interpretation.

Beyond that, up until the EP was issued, slaves were property and Lincoln, being the President, had no constitutional authority to take any citizen's property. Since Congress had a large southern influence with many slave owners with alot to lose, an act of Congress to abolish slavery would never pass. The EP was a wartime document that basically took advantge of Presidential empowerment during a time of war to allow the President to act unilaterally in a time of war for the good of the nation.

Fundamentally though, the EP was a wartime document with no clout because the southern states had secceeded from the Union and were governing themselves under the Confederate States of America. Therefore, they did not recognize the EP as valid. Only after the war was over did the full affect of the EP get put into place because it was part of the states reparations that were made to rejoin the Union. However, the EP did not provide for civil rights to ex-slaves and made no provisions to prevent states from enacting specific laws to limit the rights and liberties of those free states.

The EP did alot for civil rights, no doubt. But after the war was over, the "Jim Crow" laws got way out of hand, up until about 1905 when the southern states reach a peak of enactment. It leveled off until 1913 when Woodrow Wilson enacted federal segregation which would essentially stay in place until the early 60's and finally being stamped out in 1964 with the Civil Rights Act.

The law I referenced in an earlier post from Alabama is a relic of a Jim Crow law left over from a more ignorant and backward time.

The EP as civil rights though? The idea behind it, yes, it was. As far as the actual effectivness, that was non-existent at the time. The EP is more often view as the kindling of a more enlightened state of mind. It took, literally, 101 years for it to come to fruition and what's even more pathetic is that it's still not resolved and it's fueled from both sides too.

disneyjoe7

Welcome to da SOUTH bro.

F1nut

Jstas wrote: »

Not really. I see what you are saying but the Emancipation Proclamation was not a law passed by Congress. It was merely a Presidential order empowered. It didn't even really free any slaves at first because the border states were not affected nor did it free any slaves in southern states already under Union control. At first it only affected those slaves who managed to escape to the Union side. That was mainly because freed/escaped slaves that were in the service of the Union army were being taken and forced back into slavery if they were captured. The Emancipation Proclamation basically made that practice a war crime.

That practice was endorsed by the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 which basically meant that any escaped slave found was to be returned to his/her master. However, many Union generals did not enforce this law by using a loophole that said the slaves, due to thier property status, were contraband and confiscated by the Union army to be dispensed with as those concerned saw fit. However, Lincoln did not endorse this practice because, it was seen as a recognition of the CSA as a valid country and it was felt that it was imperative to the war effort that it be seen as a rebellion to be squashed, not the robbing of sovereignty of an established nation. However, after that, Union generals would declare all slaves freed and safe. On March 13th, 1862, Lincoln issued an order that forbade all Union officers from returning freed slaves. Congress then voted to forbid slavery in all new territories which essentially threw the Dred Scott decision of 1857 out the window. Shortly after that, Congress passed the Second Confiscation Act which basically liberated all slaves held by all rebels. It was a hollow effort at best because the "rebels" had formed the Confederate States of America which denounced the Union, the President and the Congress and therefore all this legislation did not apply. It also relied heavily on the definition of "rebel" which was a bit vague and very open to interpretation.

Beyond that, up until the EP was issued, slaves were property and Lincoln, being the President, had no constitutional authority to take any citizen's property. Since Congress had a large southern influence with many slave owners with alot to lose, an act of Congress to abolish slavery would never pass. The EP was a wartime document that basically took advantge of Presidential empowerment during a time of war to allow the President to act unilaterally in a time of war for the good of the nation.

Fundamentally though, the EP was a wartime document with no clout because the southern states had secceeded from the Union and were governing themselves under the Confederate States of America. Therefore, they did not recognize the EP as valid. Only after the war was over did the full affect of the EP get put into place because it was part of the states reparations that were made to rejoin the Union. However, the EP did not provide for civil rights to ex-slaves and made no provisions to prevent states from enacting specific laws to limit the rights and liberties of those free states.

The EP did alot for civil rights, no doubt. But after the war was over, the "Jim Crow" laws got way out of hand, up until about 1905 when the southern states reach a peak of enactment. It leveled off until 1913 when Woodrow Wilson enacted federal segregation which would essentially stay in place until the early 60's and finally being stamped out in 1964 with the Civil Rights Act.

The law I referenced in an earlier post from Alabama is a relic of a Jim Crow law left over from a more ignorant and backward time.

The EP as civil rights though? The idea behind it, yes, it was. As far as the actual effectivness, that was non-existent at the time. The EP is more often view as the kindling of a more enlightened state of mind. It took, literally, 101 years for it to come to fruition and what's even more pathetic is that it's still not resolved and it's fueled from both sides too.

Is there anything you don't pretend to know about?

RuSsMaN

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

John is our resident 'Cliff Claven'.

"It's a little known fact that.........."

I was shocked when Troy told me they don't acknowledge Martin Luther King day in South Carolina. I thought he was just pulling my leg, he wasn't.

Cheers,
Russ

MacLeod

This has been in the news before, and its not as bad as its being made out. Its not a bunch of toothless hillbillies burning crosses in people front yards doing this, it has been pretty much a mutual thing. I mean, its not politically correct to say this but blacks and whites like different things. Go to a club in a black part of town and then go to a club in a white part of town. Its two TOTALLY different things going on. Besides, the majority of the students at that school are BLACK! So if anything its the whites being oppressed by the man!!

Ive lived in the south all my life and am here to tell you that all the stories you read about all the hate and racism going on down here is grossly overexaggerated. At least in my area of SE Tennessee/NW Georgia, the mix is about 51/49 white to black. We dont really have "white" neighborhoods or "black" neighorhoods and we live side by side. There are several black people in elected offices and our police chief (and a damn good one by the way) is black. I cant remember any hate crimes ever happening here either.

Im sure youve got your cave dwellers that are Platinum Club members of the KKK but I they are the minority. Hell, if it were so bad here, why would the black spring break or Freak-nic or whatever its called be held in Atlanta? Im not saying this is a racial utopia, but I guarantee you its just as good if not better than a lot of other places in the country.

MacLeod

RuSsMaN wrote: »

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

John is our resident 'Cliff Claven'.

"It's a little known fact that.........."

LMAO!!! Too funny!

Quick! Somebody break out Photoshop! I wanna see John's head pasted on Cliff's body sitting at the bar!

janmike

RuSsMaN wrote: »

... I was shocked when Troy told me they don't acknowledge Martin Luther King day in South Carolina. I thought he was just pulling my leg, he wasn't.

Cheers,
Russ

Now that is sad. Who the hell is running the show there?

Dennis Gardner

MacLeod wrote: »

LMAO!!! Too funny!

Quick! Somebody break out Photoshop! I wanna see John's head pasted on Cliff's body sitting at the bar!

Forget the bar........he's got a whole new gig.

Early B.

MacLeod wrote: »

Hell, if it were so bad here, why would the black spring break or Freak-nic or whatever its called be held in Atlanta?.

Hasn't really occurred in the past decade since Atlanta city officials (with pressure from the business community) made it very clear that those black kids aren't welcomed here. It was a big racial issue back then. Nevertheless, your point has been well made.

Jstas

Sorry Jesse, I don't post about things I don't know about. I'm interested in my country's history and by understanding where we were, one can get a better view of where we are going. I would think that a wise (sic) old man such as yourself would understand that.

I had something to offer, I shared it. If you don't like it, stay out of it. I don't dump in your threads and degrade your conversations, don't do it to mine.

Lastly, Cliff Clavin I am not. Check anything I have said here. I am accurate in my statements and because of jackasses like Jesse, I find it necessary to research what I am writing about and then post the facts in detail so that mudslinging contests cannot be waged against me. It's really sad that such discussions cannot be had without the juvenille element being injected.

F1nut

LOL....you don't get it and never will as you're far to busy being a blowhard. Research that.

ninerbj

Jesse calling someone else a blowhard? Am I the only one who see's the humor in that?
Sorry Jesse, we are all guilty in some way, shape, or form.

F1nut

Eh, show me where I ramble, rant and post short novels like he does.

TroyD

Cliff Claven...WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Doesn't fit though, Cliffy wasn't a paranoid, conspiracy theorist.

Actually, SC does now recognize MLK day, however, we also have Confederate Memorial Day. Lest we get on a rant about the Civil War and so forth....the Civil War had, at the outset, zero to do with slavery. It was about money.

Lastly, I've been to a number of American cities. North, South, East and West. The south is no more segregated at this point than anyplace else. Racial tensions are no worse here than anywhere else. The South got it's come uppance over racisim, and rightfully so, in the 60's and on out and the South has, generally, gone out of it's way to distance itself from that. So, I'll go on record and say that racisim is no more prevelant (sp) here than it is anywhere.

BDT

read-alot

I was born in and a resident of Spartanburg South Carolina for 19 years.
I was in high school during the desegragation of schools, if ever there was to be racial tension it should have been then but guess what?
It never happened.
I agree with BDT, I too have traveled to many cities and it seems that we all get along better here in the South until Jesse Jackson comes to town to try and make everyone believe otherwise.