Replies

AHA! Got it! "Forced!" Sorry, it's still early. ;^) I guess I was making the extra effort to demonstrate that I wasn't opposed to voluntary integration, and put you as pro-forced-integration to be more clearly on the other side. My apologies.

Of course there is no reason to find alternatives to voluntary integration. Free peoples living where they wish doesn't NEED an alternative, it is the desired end-result. The sticky problems come in when pockets of people decide they want to exclude certain peoples for whatever reasons. Ownership rights explicitly contain the right to exclude others from the use and enjoyment of that property (land or otherwise). It seems odd to me that the federal government has decided which exclusions are acceptable and which are not. It also offends my Freedom-loving mind to think about how this power can extend to any preferential decision.

I hope that makes my view a little clearer... especially since my stance is less-than-PC. We non-Lefties have to be really careful when we do that. (*cough* Lott!! *cough*)

Wow. I did not expect such a response.
Yes, I am Dr. David A. Yeagley, former adjunct professor of humanities and psychology at Oklahoma State University, OKC campus. Former columnist for David Horowitz' FrontPageMagazine. I now am an adjunct at OU's College of Liberal Studies, and speak for Young America's Foundation (www.yaf.org).

Bad Eagle (quin-ne kash-soo-it) is the Comanche name (personal or family?) of my ancestor, who when the Indian rolls were created, signed on as Bad Eagle. Hard to know if he was using a family name, as was often the case, or whether it was his personal name. And yes, I have a website called BadEagle.com It is about American patriotism.

On race: by either the evolutionary explanation, or by the biblical explanation, our obsession with integration in this country is contrary--to nature, or to religious principle. I'm beginning to deal with this on my Patriotism Forum. Check it out.

Integration and intermarriage is not a sign of Christian transcendence, but rather a cheap shot. I call it quick-fix Christianity. Has nothing to do with religion. Marry whom you will, but not in the name of Christ. Man continually tries to bring together that which God has separated, and man continually tries to separate what God hath joined together.

Makes you wonder whether or not the Bible is absolutely true!! Scarey thought, actually.

There is something obviously destructive in interracial marriage. Why do people do it? They're into their own personal, emotional, sexual fantasy. That's fine. They have every right to do so. But, what about the kids? Studies show the kids are crippled, confused, and frustrated. Yes, I'm talking about dramatic racial intermarriages, not between say, a German and a Czech. I mean a Negro and a Korean, or even a White and an Indian.
These kinds of marriages are tough on kids.

It seems to me that sex must be understood in a greater social context than just the personal psychological context. Think about the children. Think about the society.
Think big, not small and personal.

This may be mistaken. I'm asserting an opinion. I know. I could be just plain wrong. The intellectual process however, just consider all angles.