Can you answer any of these questions posed by other users? Think of it as a civic good deed. See 9 more questions posed on this topic or submit your own question on the Q&A page.

Answered by a visitor on Jun 20, 2009 5:45 AM - yeah great..and teach our children how not to be responsible. What about 1776-1865 and the 1960s when many black and white had to take a stand together to stop the inhumanity? So ignorant...AND white descendants were not slaves but indentured servants and it's just not the same. How do you know these people anyway were slaves...at least they can trace their history unlike blacks. we know in 1700s blacks and indians were the only slaves. welfare is a right of everyone by law and is the way it is cause your government. Different battle so don't confuse and insinuate we are they only ones using it.

Answered by a visitor on Jul 17, 2009 8:41 AM - No, the indentured servants were so for a reason ie crimes, debt, etc. Black were enslaved for no reason other than the fact that whites felt they were superior, and blacks were different. Racial discrimination didn't end with slavery. Because of slavery for 400 or so years, blacks weren't allowed to read, own property, even own themselves or claim their children. The only people who understand this has to racist. The playing field even today isn't level. I have to deal with it on a daily bases. Blacks are still being denied jobs, loans, admission to colleges, disability, raises, etc simply because of the color of their skin. If you don't see it, it's probably because you're not the one being discriminated against.

Read 4 more answers on the Q&A page. Add another answer.

Answered by a visitor on Apr 8, 2009 9:37 PM - During the battle of Dunbar where the Scots were fighting for independence they were defeated by the English and received horrible treatment. They were marched without food or water and those who survived were put aboard ships in terrible conditions. Those that survived the trip to the New World were forced to work for a number of years as "servants" or I guess they could be rightfully called slaves. As a person of Scottish descendant and since our ancesters were not free will I think it is fitting and proper for us to be compensated for the time our forefathers were forced to work without just compensation. Now I believe that would settle the score owed to us by America.

Answered by a visitor on Apr 16, 2009 12:47 PM - To answer the first question, the idea of reparations has come up before. It was even passed once for the japanese-american detainment during WWII. If youre going by law-in-the-letter than you will need a team of lawyers armed with a fine-toothed comb to really get into the nitty gritty in terms of reparations and how the government goes about paying them (if they do at all).

The question I see though is not if the constitution allows reparations but rather what if it didnt? What would we do if the constitution specifically stated against government sponsered reparations? We know that its been done in this country before. Do we simply ignore the constitution and do it anyway? Unless its brought up to the supreme court and they find it unconstitutional then theres nothing to stop it from being done. So the way I see it... under which constitutional authority does this fall under? Probably under the PEOPLE. If they really want it passed then it can be done. That being said, this bill has shown little life as is so maybe we need not worry about it at all.