Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 15th Dec 2012 19:11 UTC
Permalink for comment 545353
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 17:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2007-02-18
Here's yet another angle on this:
Rosa Parks was not the first person to publicly oppose the segregation culture. There had been a few before her. So why is her name in the history books and not the others?
Because community leaders who wanted to organize a mass protest recognized the need for a person with a good public image. They would not have gotten as far if they had used the pregnant teenager who did the same before her.
As a result of this, Rosa Parks had a disproportionate amount of credit and special treatment, for those cynics and I-hate-political-correctness-types amongst us.
Would the people here say that they'd rather not have racial equality if it meant two people, Rosa Parks and MLK, got more recognition than the others? Like it or not, this is the same attitude being applied to Turing. You'd rather have nothing happen that try to START something.