Native Americans On Christopher Columbus

[SaintOfVirtue]

9 hours ago, Josh said:

https://youtu.be/fYTXRDtYzYc

There is brief cursing in this. Didn't catch it the first time.

No way these people are this emotional about Columbus (who lived some 500 years ago making them at least 17 generations removed from the events). 

[KnightofChrist]

4 minutes ago, Ice_nine said:

Hmm, didn't know that.

Sorry for being kind of an arse.

You're not a bad guy. I don't care what Dust says behind your back. You're alright.

I don't know I saw the last part and made a deep evil laugh. lol

[Ice_nine]

8 minutes ago, SaintOfVirtue said:

No way these people are this emotional about Columbus (who lived some 500 years ago making them at least 17 generations removed from the events). 

If you're living on the rez and you see the poverty, alcoholism, and disenfranchisement of your people, and you see Columbus as the one who initiated all of this and you also see people celebrating him, you might get a little emotional. And it's not even like anyone was openly weeping or nothing.

I think your comment was pretty ignorant dude.

[SaintOfVirtue]

2 minutes ago, Ice_nine said:

If you're living on the rez and you see the poverty, alcoholism, and disenfranchisement of your people, and you see Columbus as the one who initiated all of this and you also see people celebrating him, you might get a little emotional. And it's not even like anyone was openly weeping or nothing.

I think your comment was pretty ignorant dude.

I lived right next to a "rez" for a long time, and I think it's irrational to blame Columbus for present day problems.

[Ice_nine]

Just now, SaintOfVirtue said:

I lived right next to a "rez" for a long time, and I think it's irrational to blame Columbus for present day problems.

right next to is different than in but OK you're allowed to have your opinion. And you're allowed to tell people they shouldn't be emotional, and I'm allowed to tell you I think doing that is ignorant.

yay ~*freedom*~

[Lilllabettt]

56 minutes ago, Ice_nine said:

Are you also willing to consider that the Knights of Columbus made a pretty big error in honoring the guy? That perhaps they were a little bit racist, superior, and/or indifferent to the sufferings of natives? Because if you can't consider that than a discussion is not really worth having is it?

Way to libel the Knights of Columbus. Three cheers for you. If you think the Knights of Columbus chose their name to honor Columbus, that's ignorant. 

Lets learn our own peoples history before spouting off on their sins, shall we?  Or how about we google first, at least, before running people down. Shall we try that? The Google?

 

[SaintOfVirtue]

No one keeps them in there. They can get up in leave if they want.  All I'm saying is that blaming Columbus for present day reservations is like blaming Hitler for ISIS: no matter how bad a person Hitler actually was ISIS is not his fault and to blame him for it distracts from the real problems and creates new ones (particularly one of dialogue).

[Ice_nine]

2 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

Way to libel the Knights of Columbus. Three cheers for you. If you think the Knights of Columbus chose their name to honor Columbus, that's ignorant. 

Lets learn our own peoples history before spouting off on their sins, shall we?  Or how about we google first, at least, before running people down. Shall we try that? The Google?

 

ummm http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1929666,00.html

" It led the Knights of Columbus, an organization with a largely Italian, Roman Catholic membership, to lobby heavily for states and the Federal Government to make Columbus Day official."

Why are you so quick to accuse people of libel/slander/defamation? Is that how you get your fix? dang

Unless of course you don't think lobbying gov't for a holiday that honors Columbus as  . . . honoring Columbus.

 

6 minutes ago, SaintOfVirtue said:

No one keeps them in there. They can get up in leave if they want.  All I'm saying is that blaming Columbus for present day reservations is like blaming Hitler for ISIS: no matter how bad a person Hitler actually was ISIS is not his fault and to blame him for it distracts from the real problems and creates new ones (particularly one of dialogue).

I think it's more what Columbus represents than Columbus himself that makes people emotional.

And your analogy is flawed. I don't see how Hitler can be connected to ISIS, but I think he can be "blamed" for the ideology behind the KKK and other racial supremacist groups.

Anyway we'll have to agree to disagree.

[SaintOfVirtue]

7 minutes ago, Ice_nine said:

And your analogy is flawed.

lol, a minute ago you didn't know what an Argument from Analogy was, and now you play the card against me.

[Lilllabettt]

1 minute ago, Ice_nine said:

ummm http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1929666,00.html

" It led the Knights of Columbus, an organization with a largely Italian, Roman Catholic membership, to lobby heavily for states and the Federal Government to make Columbus Day official."

Why are you so quick to accuse people of libel/slander/defamation? Is that how you get your fix? dang

Nice try, that's them lobbying for Columbus Day.

Look up why they named themselves Columbus. Use those crack research skills kids have nowadays. 

Lets see. So I'm the one whose "quick to accuse," right? But you accused the Knights of Columbus of choosing their name because they were founded by racist bigots. You were completely ignorant of the actual reason why they chose their name. But that didn't stop you from busting out the  "racist" slur, confident that any group of mostly white Europeans must be at least vaguely racist - so why not.

You need to do some research before accusing people of racism. that's a serious charge. You seem to accuse people of being racist a LOT. is that how you get your fix?

[SaintOfVirtue]

.deleted.

Edited November 25, 2015 by SaintOfVirtue

[Lilllabettt]

Oh look, I googled and found a wikipedia article describing why the Knights of Columbus are called the Knights of Columbus:

The Order was intended as a mutual benefit society. As a parish priest in an immigrant community, McGivney saw what could happen to a family when the main income earner died, and wanted to provide insurance to care for the widows and orphans left behind. He also had to temporarily leave his seminary studies to care for his family when his father died.^[12] While Roman Catholics In the late 19th century were regularly excluded from labor unions, popular fraternal organizations and other organized groups that provided social services,^[13] papal encyclicals issued by the Holy See prohibited Roman Catholics participating as lodge members withinFreemasonry. McGivney wished to provide them an alternative. He also believed that Catholicism and fraternalism were not incompatible and wanted to found a society to encourage men to be proud of their American-Catholic heritage.^[14]

McGivney traveled to Boston to examine the Massachusetts Catholic Order of Foresters and to Brooklyn to learn about the recently established Catholic Benevolent League, both of which offered insurance benefits. He found the latter to be lacking the excitement he thought was needed if his organization were to compete with the secret societies of the day. He expressed an interest in establishing a New Haven Court of the Foresters, but the charter of Massachusetts Foresters prevented them from operating outside their Commonwealth. McGivney's committee of St. Mary's parishioners decided to form a club that was entirely original.^[15]

The name of Columbus was also partially intended as a mild rebuke to Anglo-Saxon Protestantleaders, who upheld the explorer (a Catholic Genovese Italian working for Catholic Spain) as an American hero, yet simultaneously sought to marginalize recent Catholic immigrants. In taking Columbus as their patron, they were expressing their belief that not only could Catholics be full members of American society, but were instrumental in its foundation.^[16] McGivney had originally conceived of the name "Sons of Columbus", but James T. Mullen, who would become the firstSupreme Knight, successfully suggested that "Knights of Columbus" would better capture the ritualistic nature of the new organization.^[17
 

 

[Peace]

9 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

But that didn't stop you from busting out the  "racist" slur, confident that any group of mostly white Europeans must be at least vaguely racist - so why not.

LOL. Europeans are pretty racist though. At least in comparison to Americans, IMHO.

[Lilllabettt]

1 minute ago, Lilllabettt said:

Oh look, I googled and found a wikipedia article describing why the Knights of Columbus are called the Knights of Columbus:

The Order was intended as a mutual benefit society. As a parish priest in an immigrant community, McGivney saw what could happen to a family when the main income earner died, and wanted to provide insurance to care for the widows and orphans left behind. He also had to temporarily leave his seminary studies to care for his family when his father died.^[12] While Roman Catholics In the late 19th century were regularly excluded from labor unions, popular fraternal organizations and other organized groups that provided social services,^[13] papal encyclicals issued by the Holy See prohibited Roman Catholics participating as lodge members withinFreemasonry. McGivney wished to provide them an alternative. He also believed that Catholicism and fraternalism were not incompatible and wanted to found a society to encourage men to be proud of their American-Catholic heritage.^[14]

McGivney traveled to Boston to examine the Massachusetts Catholic Order of Foresters and to Brooklyn to learn about the recently established Catholic Benevolent League, both of which offered insurance benefits. He found the latter to be lacking the excitement he thought was needed if his organization were to compete with the secret societies of the day. He expressed an interest in establishing a New Haven Court of the Foresters, but the charter of Massachusetts Foresters prevented them from operating outside their Commonwealth. McGivney's committee of St. Mary's parishioners decided to form a club that was entirely original.^[15]

The name of Columbus was also partially intended as a mild rebuke to Anglo-Saxon Protestantleaders, who upheld the explorer (a Catholic Genovese Italian working for Catholic Spain) as an American hero, yet simultaneously sought to marginalize recent Catholic immigrants. In taking Columbus as their patron, they were expressing their belief that not only could Catholics be full members of American society, but were instrumental in its foundation.^[16] McGivney had originally conceived of the name "Sons of Columbus", but James T. Mullen, who would become the firstSupreme Knight, successfully suggested that "Knights of Columbus" would better capture the ritualistic nature of the new organization.^[17
 

 

The above is basic information for people who are even a tiny bit familiar with the history of Catholic people in the United States. You know, if you call everything racist without anything to back it up, eventually people stop taking the accusation seriously.

[Peace]

5 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

The above is basic information for people who are even a tiny bit familiar with the history of Catholic people in the United States. You know, if you call everything racist without anything to back it up, eventually people stop taking the accusation seriously.

Hmm. The quote says "partially intended." That would seem to imply other reasons. What were the other reasons?

If I created a group called "Knights of Obama" most people are probably going to think that I intend to honor him in some sense by choosing that name. . . is that unreasonable?

[Lilllabettt]

2 minutes ago, Peace said:

Hmm. The quote says "partially intended." That would seem to imply other reasons. What were the other reasons?

If I created a group called "Knights of Obama" most people are probably going to think that I intend to honor him in some sense by choosing that name. . . is that unreasonable?

Its referring to the first paragraph. The other reason was that the priest wanted them to be proud Americans, know they can be Americans and Catholic etc.

The Knights of Columbus were founded as a result of anti-Catholic xenophobia, and the name was chosen specifically for that reason. Racist  sentiment against "natives" had nothing to do with it.

Edited November 26, 2015 by Lilllabettt

[Ice_nine]

15 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

Nice try, that's them lobbying for Columbus Day.

Look up why they named themselves Columbus. Use those crack research skills kids have nowadays. 

Lets see. So I'm the one whose "quick to accuse," right? But you accused the Knights of Columbus of choosing their name because they were founded by racist bigots. You were completely ignorant of the actual reason why they chose their name. But that didn't stop you from busting out the  "racist" slur, confident that any group of mostly white Europeans must be at least vaguely racist - so why not.

You need to do some research before accusing people of racism. that's a serious charge. You seem to accuse people of being racist a LOT. is that how you get your fix?

Ok Lilla, where did I say that the Knights of Columbus chose their name because of Christopher Columbus? You will see that I said that nowhere. I said they honored him [by instituting Columbus day as a national holiday]. I didn't say the last part, but that's exactly what I had in mind when I wrote it. You can believe me on that count or not, that's your perogative, and I don't really care. But again, I never said they chose their name because of good ole Chris.

Nor is saying, "would you consider that some of the members were racist" synonymous with saying "ermagerd The Knights of Columbus were so racist!" I think a lot of people back in the day probably held racist sentiments. My late grampy, God rest his soul, said lots of racist carp. Doesn't mean he was a bad person. Hell I've held racist sentiments. Maybe you use "racist" to be synonymous with "horrible evil monster" but I don't. People can be a little racist, or prejudiced, and still be not bad decent people.

Can't you admit when you are wrong and you're being an arse? I did it not even a few hours ago, in this very thread I believe.

[Peace]

18 minutes ago, Lilllabettt said:

Its referring to the first paragraph. The other reason was that the priest wanted them to be proud Americans, know they can be Americans and Catholic etc.

The Knights of Columbus were founded as a result of anti-Catholic xenophobia, and the name was chosen specifically for that reason. Racist  sentiment against "natives" had nothing to do with it.

I had read that paragraph as giving the reason why the Order was established, but not specifically relating to the reason why they called it "Knights of Columbus" as opposed to "Knights of Cortez" or some other name.

This seems to be the article that your quotes comes from:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knights_of_Columbus

The top of the article states:

The Knights of Columbus is the world's largest Catholic fraternal service organization. Founded by Father Michael J. McGivney in New Haven, Connecticut, in 1882, it was named in honor of the mariner Christopher Columbus. Originally serving as a mutual benefit society to low-income immigrant Catholics, it developed into a fraternal benefit society dedicated to providing charitable services, promoting Catholic education and actively defending Roman Catholicism in various nations.^[1][2]

That seems to suggest that the name was chosen to honor Christopher Columbus, does it not? Do you think that when the article states "partially intended" it is making reference to this other reason (honoring Columbus)?

I don't doubt that the name was not explicitly chosen as a sign of racist hate towards Native Americans. I think the point that Ice9 was attempting to make was that perhaps the choice of that name, as opposed to another name, could indicate racism in another form - a disregard for the things that Columbus did to Native Americans. I don't know if I totally agree with her, but I don't think she is being all that unreasonable, do you?

Edited November 26, 2015 by Peace

[Lilllabettt]

1 minute ago, Ice_nine said:

Ok Lilla, where did I say that the Knights of Columbus chose their name because of Christopher Columbus? You will see that I said that nowhere. I said they honored him [by instituting Columbus day as a national holiday]. I didn't say the last part, but that's exactly what I had in mind when I wrote it. You can believe me on that count or not, that's your perogative, and I don't really care. But again, I never said they chose their name because of good ole Chris.

Nor is saying, "would you consider that some of the members were racist" synonymous with saying "ermagerd The Knights of Columbus were so racist!" I think a lot of people back in the day probably held racist sentiments. My late grampy, God rest his soul, said lots of racist carp. Doesn't mean he was a bad person. Hell I've held racist sentiments. Maybe you use "racist" to be synonymous with "horrible evil monster" but I don't. People can be a little racist, or prejudiced, and still be not bad decent people.

I will admit I have some trouble buying what you're selling, because you didn't correct my "misunderstanding" until I had you up a crick. I guess I have to give you the benefit of the doubt.

But it doesn't actually matter whether you were referring to them lobbying for the day or for how they chose their name. The Knights of Columbus lobbied for Columbus Day, and named themselves after Columbus, because of anti-Catholic xenophobia. The organization was created to prove that Catholics can be Americans. They picked the name to tell people that they could be Americans. They lobbied for the day to prove that they could be Americans. Racism against American Indians did not figure into it. At All.  

So you feel confident calling people racist as a kind of casual aside, speaking directly out of your bottom as you do so. That's kind of appalling don't you think?

 

 

[dominicansoul]

dang....I ran out of props.  :sad2: