Should "blackface" be illegal?

[bloom]

http://colorblind.typepad.com/the_colorblind_society/blackface/

http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~wwu/truth/racism.shtml

http://www.erinoconnor.org/archives/000014.html

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Blackface


yes/no/why/why not?


And/or should Universities/businesses/employee handbooks have written policies specifically against it?

Is it enough to say that people should never be racist? How enforceable is that?



Ok - one argument for a law is the example of the NYC firefighters who wore blackface AND were doing other seriously racist things. They were fired and then later a judge overturned it. A written law may have had more enforceability.

http://www.nydailynews.com/front/breaking_news/story/257571p-220605c.html

[Walt Starr]

1. Piffle

Fizz

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

2. Absolutely not.

Blackface does not directly advocate, in any reasonable way, behavior that is physically harmful or illegal. Therefore, it is protected free speech, as reprehesible as it is.

[Warpy]

20. No kidding, and blackface long predates Jim Crow

It was the combination of blackface and a prison uniform that got the judge into trouble. That was over the top, and the combination was racist, and it showed something on his part that shouldn't be sitting on the bench in judgment of other people.

Burnt cork blackface was a Halloween costume staple when I was growing up. It was never meant to be racist. It was a way of altering appearance back when only rich kids got costumes from Woolworth's. Now there's a whole range of colors of face paint out there, and I see them all in my poor neighborhood.

Blackface with a wild fantasy costume can't be considered particularly racist. Blackface with any stereotypical costume like prison garb, pimp suits, or sharecropper farmer rags is racist. That really should be where the line is.

[DrWeird]

3. Should being repeatedly late for work be illegal?

nt

[VOX]

11. Whoa, I would be doing hard time in Quentin for this one...

Mea maxima culpa.

[Bucky]

4. Of course not. You shouldn't censor ideas, even obnoxious ones.

An employer should reserve the right to fire employees for unprofessional conduct on the job, but firing some guys for being racists--that is, for having racist opinions--well, that's a hell of a lot more dangerous than bigots unmasking themselves by putting on greasepaint.

[patdem]

5. Should saying 'Merry Christmas' be outlawed??

I think some people want everything to be their way..they complain when they are supressed but have no problem supressing other people..

I think the swastika should be outlawed too. It is not political speach, it is political hatred!

But it is just me...they say the more outrageous the speach the more it needs to be protected. I guess I have to go along with that one!!

[Liberal Veteran]

13. I wouldn't go that far, but "Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer"...

...should definitely be outlawed.

[kmla]

15. I would back that amendment...

I hate that song. It is my goal each year to go through the entire Christmas season without hearing that song...

[Forkboy]

6. No

[New Democrat]

7. No it shouldn't

I believe in freedom of speech. Everyone in America has a right to say what they want no matter how hateful it from Mr. Rogers to David Duke.

[Bucky]

19. Good examples

Fred Rodgers often got away with his obnoxious hateful ways.

[Bouncy Ball]

8. No.

[Burma Jones]

9. No It Shoudn't

Reason One - It's a highly offensive form of Speech, but offensive speech deserves protection too. Flag Burning is offensive, but I would defend anyone's RIGHT to burn the flag.

Reason Two - It helps to "out" racists



Certain Organizations, such as the Boy Scouts as well as Universities and Colleges, have sets of rules to which you must adhere in order to be part of that Organization. So, if the Boy Scouts can ban Gays, then other Organizations certainly have the right to ban racist behavior - what's good for the Conservative Goose is good for the Intelligent Gander. But, the government shouldn't be in the business of controlling speech, regardless of its offensiveness.

[kmla]

10. Absolutely not.

As stupid, repulsive, racist, and morally repugnant as it is, it is still covered by the right of free speech.

We are duty bound to defend all free speech, even if it diametrically opposed to the very truths that we hold dear.

If we try to filter everything through the truth and good taste machine before letting everyone listen, that would render approximately 60% of *'s press conferences unfit for human comsumption. As well as all of his SOTU adresses. And every word spoken by Rush Limbaugh since "Hi! This is Jeff Christie!".

(Not to mention Ashcroft's rendition of "Let the Eagle Soar". Eeeps. That is STILL painful to watch...)

[neuvocat]

12. No because it can go both ways.

Imagine a comedian who can't make fun of white people because he could get arrested. That being said however, a judge has a strict set of standards he must adhere to. In this case, his prejudice interferes with his work and he cannot be impartial.

[Squatch]

14. No...

[sui generis]

16. hell no

unless you make it illegal to be a racist.

Now, do I think public servants should go around dressed like the KKK or wearing blackface? No, there should be broad policy covering inappropriate presentation and appearance that would also prevent them from showing up wearing swastika armbands and pointy hats.

[UdoKier]

17. No.

It's not overtly threatening or intimidating.

It is offensive to many people however, and people who don blackface should be ready to deal with whatever hostility it may cause.

There are all kinds of plays and movies that could legitimately incorporate blackface in a historical context, anyway...

I thought the "All in the Family" episode with Archie in blackface was hilarious.

[Karenina]

18. Nah, let the wackos

expose themselves in peace.

What would be REALLY COOL is that every white American be required to spend 90 days as a member of another race. :evilgrin:

[bloom]

21. From what I have found on the web...

Blackface as a Halloween costume (sometimes w/KKK outfits as well) has been getting a lot more common recently. (Maybe this was common knowledge around here - but not to me).

There are groups trying to fight it through education. Like tolerance.org.

Apparently there has been more than one case where people were convicted/fired/suspended and then been reinstated because of 1st & 14th amendment rights.

"Even when a student's behavior is absolutely appalling to a university official, the student
is protected and must be afforded "due process" even if his or her immediate suspension
appears to be the best course of action for the university to try to protect the student from
harm or retaliation. At Auburn University, the two fraternities who were involved in
blackface incidents, and 15 students, were suspended. Ten of those students sued Auburn
for monetary damages for violating their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights. A
judge later ruled that ?Auburn violated its rules of fairness and required the school to
readmit the students. The university settled the lawsuit out of court on May 15 (2002),
and agreed to allow the fraternity and its members back on campus? (Sorkin, 11/22/02).
As troubling as these issues are, these matters will not go away. As educators (whether
advisors, volunteers, or employees), we must work to educate students so they understand
why particular actions are not appropriate. Although we are not going to be with students
to watch their every behavior, we need to make sure we have given them the resources to
aid in their decision making process.
Association of Fraternity Advisors, Issues in Focus - October 2003"

http://www.tolerance.org/news/article_tol.jsp?id=885

see:
Blackface on Campus: A Resource for Awareness and Education.

[Bridget Burke]

22. No, unless somebody's doing a "historical" performance.

In mosts contexts--if somebody wants to reveal themselves as a racist ass, that's their right.

[ComerPerro]

23. No. Of course not

[tx_dem41]

24. No...it should not be "illegal". Yes, some occupations have the ...

right to make it a fireable offense.

[rhyfeddu]

25. Should we lock Ted Danson away??

(Referring to his "joke" at Whoopi's roast that went bad..)



Can't arrest folks for bad taste. There would be few, if any, of us left.

If blackface is used with intimidation, aggression etc., that puts it in a seperate column, and can be handled accordingly...

[MrSlayer]

26. No.

What a silly idea.

[0rganism]

27. No, but depending on the context it could be regarded as hateful speech

To the extent that it causes serious disruption of, e.g., a work environment, an employer could restrict it just like they could restrict harassment of other sorts. Just because the KKK has a right to march down the street doesn't mean they can wear their hoods to work without repercussions.

[ixat]

28. No, unless it's direct incitement to racial violence, it should be legal.

[Fenris]

29. No. The First Amendment protects this form of expression.

No matter how tasteless and racist we may find it.

[Cuban_Liberal]

30. No.

Poor taste and offensive behavior is protected by the 1st Amendment.

[mitchum]

31. As the great-grandson of a minstrel performer (I even have the gloves...

he wore as a "Tarbrush Serenader"), I say no