| Upvotes | Title | Category | Author | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|
| Upvotes | Comment on | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Flip the Script: No consequences for herOK, then explain to me why a massive part of our agricultural sector is based on minority labor which is illegal under the text of the law, but is not enforced. Tell me where in the laws about traffic stops and civil forfeiture it says "hey go after black people disproportionately". Tell me how minorities, who must often rely on a state attorney due to economic inequality, have the same "equal protections under the law" as someone much wealthier who can hire a private lawyer, pay people off with… | /r/MensRights | 28/12/17 05:53 AM |
| 1 | Flip the Script: No consequences for herPaid attorneys can get you out of a lot of stuff overworked state attorneys might not be able to. Plus, if you're rich you can often settle out of court. I mean, there's a reason Scientology hasn't been legally busted for any of their crazy shit yet - they can afford the legal fees to delay warrants, dispute cases, etc. essentially as long as they like | /r/MensRights | 28/12/17 05:33 AM |
| 5 | Flip the Script: No consequences for herThat's part of it too, but there's also crack. The CIA helped the Contras ship cocaine, Oh yeah, and Edgar Hoover used COINTELPRO to target black civil rights leaders, and tried to get MLK to commit suicide. Those aren't the "law" in the same sense that banning pot is a law, but if a country's officials all decide to base their actions on some doctrine, it is essentially an unwritten law | /r/MensRights | 28/12/17 04:07 AM |
| 1 | Flip the Script: No consequences for herThe law is biased based on wealth distribution, so indirectly it is a characteristic of the law. | /r/MensRights | 28/12/17 04:04 AM |
| 1 | Flip the Script: No consequences for herAnd I'm arguing that since the law is meaningless without enforcement(ex: federal weed laws) or can be enforced sporadically(traffic stops), the enforcement of the law is what matters. So yeah, if by under the eyes of the law you mean the literal text in the law you're correct, but the text of the law is barely relevant to the actual treatment of minorities in the legal process. I mean, they were "equal under the eyes of the law" during segregation according to your definition, but they still re… | /r/MensRights | 28/12/17 01:25 AM |
| 2 | Flip the Script: No consequences for herLmao you're the one arguing semantics, you literally said "yes you can make that argument in practice". By making a fuss about the distinction between law and execution of the law you are arguing semantics | /r/MensRights | 28/12/17 12:45 AM |
| -3 | Flip the Script: No consequences for herUnder the law they absolutely have. In practice is where they still have an argument. The way a law is executed is what matters, not what it says. Law in practice is the law, for all intents and purposes | /r/MensRights | 28/12/17 12:12 AM |
| -6 | Flip the Script: No consequences for herThey have 1/8th the average wealth of white people, for starters, which is a direct repercussion of inheriting less due to having less during segregation | /r/MensRights | 28/12/17 12:11 AM |
| -3 | Flip the Script: No consequences for herBLM is definitely not about black supremacy.. lol. They sill haven't achieved their goals of equality under the law yet you dense motherfucker | /r/MensRights | 27/12/17 09:16 PM |
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter