DavidP 
Member since Aug 25, 2017


Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “A Monumental Decision

Truth is we are judging the acts of a man based on only one part in this process. These are all people, flawed. To suggest that Mark Twain should replace the McKinley statute gives forgiveness to Twain who wrote many pieces that contained racist slurs. We should correct history by pointing out the flaws of our past but taking down a monument to McKinley for one segment of his being overlooks his positive things. Where will this stop... ban the Catholic Church in the area because the Crusaders ran through Europe killing Jews? Ban the railroads because they were created on the backs of Chinese slaves? Further, who is the real judge of balancing the good and the bad of all? By the way, I am of Portuguese descent and your Vice Mayor, my daughter, is also of Portuguese descent and our ancestors are guilty of transporting the slaves from Africa to the slave traders. How evil they were, if a slave gave them trouble they just threw them over the side of the ship in the middle of the Atlantic to die horribly. Let us be honest, big mistakes were made in the past, the real discussion is how have we done since and how are we doing moving forward. The statue of McKinley should remain but should be supplemented by the negative so that those people are honored and we properly learn for the future.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by DavidP on 01/18/2018 at 12:29 PM

Re: “'A Work in Progress'

The ignorance of this all strikes at the Constitution. In Matal v. Tam, 137 S. Ct. 1744, 582 U.S. (Supreme Court 2017), the Supreme Court again emphasized long standing law: "Speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground is hateful; but the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express 'the thought that we hate.' Citing, United States v. Schwimmer, 279 U. S. 644, 655 (1929)." As much as one may find the speech and existence of neo-Nazi's, skinheads and white supremacists in our realm personally offensive, of which I am one that does find them offensive, I will defend their right to free speech and deplore any agency of the government that attempts to impinge on that Constitutionally protected freedom. When I see government employees, of which my daughter, Sofia Pereira, is one, taking steps to impinge on a Constitutional right, I am going to call it out. The Arcata "Not in Our Town" proclamation is the fancy way of saying, Constitutionally protected speech is not allowed in Arcata. Let the book burning begin.

5 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by DavidP on 08/25/2017 at 8:41 AM

Extra Extra!

Make sure you're signed up so we can inbox you the latest.

  • Weekly Update (Thursday)
  • Events This Weekend (Thursday and Friday)

Login to choose
your subscriptions!

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.
 

© 2018 North Coast Journal

Website powered by Foundation