Jump to content

Multiethnic summer camp group denied entrance to Philly Pool


Rehab
 Share

Recommended Posts

AOL news is an aggregator, so they're not really biased.

I have to admit, this was so fantastic that I assumed there must have been something no one was saying when it broke, but follow-up stories have indicated nothing of the sort. The closest you'll get is that the pool isn't outrageously large - when 65 obvious outsiders, kids in particular, showed up, it probably disturbed the private pool's normal occupants. Racism is an easy handle to go for when you're already an asshole and you're upset. I don't think this was a case of race-motivated hate so much as hate-motivated racism.

Regardless, it's not going to be pretty. It wouldn't be pretty even if the race aspect didn't exist.

Edited by Der Kommissar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

List of non-biased papers:

Touche, though I was, in entirety, mor epuncing at the fact that the seond link (not the AOL to which SS alludes to) was moreso completely outward above it. At least an image of fairmindedness makes stories seem far more plausible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

How wonderful that you've brought this topic was brought back to life with your insightful post.

To play devil's advocate though, does the article explicitly state that this was a public pool club? I only ask because if the club were private, would it not be the right of the club owner to deny entry to customers he does not wish to serve, even for racist reasons? Of course if this club was on land zoned for public use, or received public funding or tax breaks for opening its doors to the community then it would be obliged to follow federal anti-discriminatory regulation. But assuming it was privately owned, would they not as private club have the right to make the choice of denying these kids entry for whatever reason they choose, and accept the possible consequences of racist actions in the 21st century?

The reason I mention this is because a while back a Church in New Jersey lost funding because they refused to allow a gay wedding ceremony to take place on its premises, which of course got conservatives in a tizzy because they claimed it "violated the private rights of the church make its own choices," and this was held up as an example of how the gay agenda is destroying American values. Of course it later came to light that the church was only receiving this funding because they zoned the church as a "community center" to take advantage of extra tax breaks, which meant they had to follow New Jersey anti-discrimination statues. This led me to wonder if this pool was taking advantage of similar public funding, and if it was not, whether there's really anything anyone can do about it beside make a shit storm and generate bad press to keep people away from the place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume the pool is privately owned because it has a president. It sounds like his reason for asking the kids to stay away is because the club's patrons are racist, though he himself probably is not. It's probably not the right moral choice, but it makes a lot of sense from a business point of view. Lose your regulars (steady income) for letting them stay, or lose some face for making them go?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...