https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-health-race-and-ethnicity-racial-injustice-madison-251ffe2672b6c40ca7b8a0a7341959f2

The AP today wrote a long an emphatic embrace of institutionalized racism and discrimination based on skin color.
They wrote that white people don't deserve limited covid treatments, blaming "republicans pounce" for any opposition to blatant violations of the civil rights act of 1964 that ended Jim Crow.
Without writing a single word about how its directly violating the ban on discriminating against people based on their race or color, the AP identify the states that used race and color as a reason to deny people life-saving treatment. In Utah and Minnesota, you needed 4 points on a scale to get monoclonal antibodies, and you got 2 points for being "not white". In Illinois, Missouri, Oklahoma and Wisconsin, you needed 20 points on a scale that gave "not whites" 7 points automatically. If you had 2/4 or 13/20 points from other factors, you'd get life-saving treatment if you were black, but not white. In response, civil rights groups have brought the threat of lawsuits against the states and health networks who adopted these policies of explicit discrimination based on race, and would obviously win the legal challenges. Utah, Minnesota and the SSM network covering the other four states all dropped their policies when it became public knowledge and the threat of lawsuits loomed. New York, however, has not, and a lawsuit has now been filed today by America First Legal.

Somehow, the AP, the supposedly neutral and credible wire service that serves as the epitome of respectable journalism, has no problem writing entirely one-sided pieces defending Nuremberg code laws, without any criticism or exploration of the relevant laws that make it wildly unconstitutional. For example, a journalist with integrity might have asked these health providers questions like "How do you prove you aren't white, do you need a DNA test, or 1 out of 8 white ancestors, or a single drop of white blood, or just hold your face up next to a piece of cheesecake"?

But instead, the headline is a very literal "republicans pounce" trope in the most full throated and shameless fashion, the entire article is just muh republicans pouncing, and any reader with even a semblance of self-awareness is left with the takeaway of 'what, they discriminated based on race, isn't that illegal?'

Sounds like you are just mad that the science came to a conclusion you don't like. An underserved population having a higher risk of problems from a contagious disease isn't controversial in the slightest. I'd imagine rural whites have similar problems.

This post was edited by NetflixAdaptationWidow on Jan 23 2022 01:32pm

Ah yes, the "science" of institutionalized racism. Brought to us by the people who also brought us phrenology and eugenics.
Tell me, how much melanin must I have in my skin before I'm allowed live-saving treatment? Can I just dust myself with some shoe polish, or will they check my ancestry to see if I had a single white great-grandfather?
Do we DNA test every applicant, or could Talcum X and Nkechi Amare Diallo receive the antibodies?

Discriminating against people on the basis of race and color isn't just controversial, its illegal, and obviously unconstitutional. It violates the civil rights act of 1964. Too bad the civil rights movement wasn't forward-thinking enough to push for a law that said 'oops, this doesn't apply to whites'.

Posting in a white fragility thread.

White people will twist themselves into knots to feel victimized. My god.

How pathetic.

They are presenting their data and making their case and you're getting all triggered.

correlation does not mean causation.

Absolutely.

Too bad that doesn't really matter here. It's well documented that minority communities are underserved relative to their equivilant white counterparts. We can ignore race and just do it by zip code if you want. You'd get the same result even using a race-neutral marker, because zip code also correlates with race due to discrimination and red-lining.

first the masters, only after the slaves.

Weren't your gypsy ancestors slaves for many centuries in Europe?