Everyone here is quick to call Clarence Thomas, who is highly conservative and the only Black Supreme Court Justice, a coon. Yet, when it comes to the fates of convicted Black criminals BGOL members side with Justice Thomas. How is that not "cooning?"
As a point of reference, I refer to the USC shooter thread. http://www.bgol.us/board/showthread.php?t=791615
In that thread, most who replied agreed with sentencing a young 21 year Black man to forty years--even though he didn't take a life. That's just one instance though.
With few exceptions, throughout the years, when it comes to Black convicts, and the sentences they receive, BGOL seems to believe they got what they deserved. When it's pointed out that white convicts who committed similar crimes receive less harsh sentences the BGOL consensus opines that Black's should accept that, because that's just the way it is. How is that view materially dissimilar to Clarence Thomas's view?
Clarence Thomas thinks that because he's a successful Black man, and didn't make many mistakes, that other Blacks have the same opportunities. That's why, he would say, there is no need for distinctions based on race; nor is there need for distributive justice. Moreover, he does not believe in helping disadvantaged groups. That's why I think he's a coon.
With few exceptions, in accordance with Thomas, most of BGOL believes that Black convicts don't deserve leniency. Moreover, despite blatant sentencing disparities between Blacks and other races, most BGOL members believe Black convicts deserve whatever sentences they receive, no matter how harsh. How is that not cooning like Justice Thomas?
As a point of reference, I refer to the USC shooter thread. http://www.bgol.us/board/showthread.php?t=791615
In that thread, most who replied agreed with sentencing a young 21 year Black man to forty years--even though he didn't take a life. That's just one instance though.
With few exceptions, throughout the years, when it comes to Black convicts, and the sentences they receive, BGOL seems to believe they got what they deserved. When it's pointed out that white convicts who committed similar crimes receive less harsh sentences the BGOL consensus opines that Black's should accept that, because that's just the way it is. How is that view materially dissimilar to Clarence Thomas's view?
Clarence Thomas thinks that because he's a successful Black man, and didn't make many mistakes, that other Blacks have the same opportunities. That's why, he would say, there is no need for distinctions based on race; nor is there need for distributive justice. Moreover, he does not believe in helping disadvantaged groups. That's why I think he's a coon.
With few exceptions, in accordance with Thomas, most of BGOL believes that Black convicts don't deserve leniency. Moreover, despite blatant sentencing disparities between Blacks and other races, most BGOL members believe Black convicts deserve whatever sentences they receive, no matter how harsh. How is that not cooning like Justice Thomas?
Last edited: