Conversations Of A Sistah, Tracy L. Bell, Tracy L. Bell - Blog Talk Radio, Tracy L. Bell Host Conversations Of A Sistah

Border Separation has chilling historical echoes of slavery… Tonight on ‘Conversation Of A Sistah’


The Trump administration decided to work around the time restriction imposed by courts, by no longer treating families as units at these borders. Therefore parents are detained and children are “put into foster care or wherever,” in the infamously blasé words of White House Chief of Staff John Kelly. Now images of these children sleeping on mats placed on the floor inside of a cage is heart breaking when shown around the country.

As with much of the administration’s actions, it’s difficult to parse how much of this policy is a new moral low for the country and how much of it builds on historical precedent.

As is generally the case, the answer is both.

Forced separation of families was, of course, central to the American regime of slavery. In a system that allowed for hereditary enslavement, children were transformed into property at birth.

As the system of human trafficking grew over the early 19th century, children were regularly sold away from their families for both economic and punitive reasons. Supporters of slavery dismissed moral arguments against this separation, asserting that black people lacked the emotional capacity to truly feel the pain of losing a child or parent.

This historical fact seems to be repeated as we see the Trump administration’s policies regarding immigrants and the U.S. border.

Join Host Tracy L. Bell at 6:30 p.m. EST onConversations Of A Sistahvia Blog Talk Radio for her commentary on “The chilling historical echoes of Slavery in the border separation of immigrant families”

Alllinks in this postmake it possible to access the show!!!

Advertisements
Conversations Of A Sistah, Discrimination, Tracy L. Bell - Blog Talk Radio, Tracy L. Bell Host Conversations Of A Sistah

Religious Belief or Discrimination? Tonight on “Conversations Of A Sistah”


The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Colorado baker who refused to make a wedding cake for a same-sex couple on the basis of his religious beliefs.

Critics argue the baker’s decision to deny service based on a couple’s sexual orientation is discriminatory, and therefore illegal. But religious freedom advocates say the baker has every right to not bake a cake that goes against his religious beliefs, and a private business should be free to refuse service to anyone. Is this considered discriminatory?

Critics argue businesses are not legally allowed to discriminate, so why should this case be any different? Could a business refuse to bake a cake for a black couple? No. So why shouldn’t same-sex couples be allowed the same protection?

You’re free to believe whatever you want, but you’re not free to refuse service to someone because of who they are. In this case, the baker is refusing service to the gay couple because of who they are. They are engaging in a gay marriage ceremony because they are gay men who want to get married. It’s fundamentally about who they are as people. Is this is discrimination, plain and simple?

Freedom of speech and freedom of religion do not exempt business owners from public accommodations laws, which require them to serve customers equally. However, the Supreme Court ruled in the bakery owners favor.

Tune in tonight at 6:30 p.m. est with host, Tracy L. Bell on “Conversations Of A Sistah” via blog talk radio. Use “all links” in this post to access the show.

Not everyone is in favor of same sex unions, on that note, we welcome your opinion.