Ive made several arguments- so which one is it that you dont find to be true?

The arguments i raised are as follows

1. I challenged the notion that Blacks are morally obligated to vote because of a large number of Black people who died for that right. My argument- Black people died for a variety of rights many of which we dont use and none of which are presented as the priority. Our moral obligation to vote is greatly diminished by the same legacy that urges resistance. That moral obligation is also diminished by the fact that other rights like the right to bear arms and enlist are NOT encouraged by our community despite the fact that Black people died for those rights just the same.

2. I challenged the notion that non participation is not something that hasnt been fought and died for by our people. The Underground Railroad, the Maroon, the Move- the works of Marcus Garvey all these things demonstrate quite clearly the notion of resistance and separatism and represents a much larger portion of the moral obligation that encourages assimilation and cooperation.

3. I challenged the idea that there was no good reason to not vote as there are plenty of good reasons- some may be singular excuses and beyond that there are many ideologies that stress non participation. I challenged the notion that non-voters were categorically idiots and not contributing to the struggle.

now what about those arguments do you dispute?

K