[Nfbf-l] picking and choosing NFB policiesandconstitutional requirements

[Sherri]

Actually, I think that's very well put. Seriously, the organizations are 
different enough that if you do choose to join both, loyalty always leans 
towards one or the other. The philosophies are different enough that most 
people are social members of one and really involved members of the other. I 
still ask why do we come down so hard on this policy and an actual 
constitutional requirement is seemingly ignored. And i have no more to say 
on the matter. I've cause enough trouble for one week.

Sherri
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Brian Norton" <benorton at samobile.net>
To: <nfbf-l at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 04, 2014 11:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Nfbf-l] picking and choosing NFB policiesandconstitutional 
requirements


The NFB rule prohibiting dual membership apparently is still
controversial from the numerous emails recently discussing  this topic.
I believe that this exclusionary membership rule  has an additional
problem, at least with regard to  its impact on the blind community of
my small southern city of ‘Tallahassee. Unfortunately, here the chapter
membership in the two blind organizations are divided primarily along
separate rracial lines. Although I do not believe that either group has
any purposeful discriminatory intent in their membership
recruitment,and I have no knowledge of the historical roots which
caused this result, from the viewpoint of a newcomer to these two
beneficial and well intentioned associations, I was surprised to
encounter such apparent racial segregation still in existence.
I was involved in civil rights litigation in North Florida 30 years ago
when purposeful racial discrimination was more prevalent. Although the
conservate Supreme Court has recently eroded some of the legal
principals of discrimination, I believe that this NFB rule of exclusion
may have a discriminatory effect and impact,  possibly in violation of
Title 7, of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  Further, this exclusionary
rule  creates an unnecessary barrier for these two admirable
Quasi-public blind organizations progressing towards more eventual
intergration of their social/politcal goals, purposes, and activities.
The exclusionary rule disallowing dual membership will perpetuate
existing de facto segregation of the Tallahassee blind community, and
does not promote any rational purpose.
I hope that the NFB will re-evaluate its rule in light of this
obviously racially discriminatory impact which penalizes blind persons
choosing to socially interact with both of these diverse groups for a
common harmonious purpose. In fact, there might be substantial benefits
if dual membership was encouraged. Obviously, many countries easily
manage legitimate dual citizenship without much problem, and I am
certain the NFB can similarly reasonably accomodate dual membership
without jeopardy. The NFB and the FCB should promote sharing, caring,
and diversity as well as independence,, equality, and freedom, and
eliminate rules which inhibit achievement of these goals.
_______________________________________________
Nfbf-l mailing list
Nfbf-l at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
Nfbf-l:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nfbf-l_nfbnet.org/flmom2006%40gmail.com