Robert Peterson
- Published in print:
- 1992
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780195076370
- eISBN:
- 9780199853786
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195076370.003.0051
- Subject:
- History, Cultural History
This chapter discusses racial discriminations that plagued Negro baseball. Their dreams of joining major leagues were fast dimming and segregation laws were enforced more strongly. The Northerners ...
More
This chapter discusses racial discriminations that plagued Negro baseball. Their dreams of joining major leagues were fast dimming and segregation laws were enforced more strongly. The Northerners recognize that something needed to be done regarding the issue of Negroes playing in the major leagues but the issue never got to fruition. The reason the color bar could not be broken was because the Northerners would not recognize that there is one. Newspaper publications had a big hand in letting the issue simmer to the surface. However, by 1944, the New York State Legislature began considering the Ives-Quinn Bill to forbid discrimination in hiring on the basis of race, creed, color, or national origin.Less
This chapter discusses racial discriminations that plagued Negro baseball. Their dreams of joining major leagues were fast dimming and segregation laws were enforced more strongly. The Northerners recognize that something needed to be done regarding the issue of Negroes playing in the major leagues but the issue never got to fruition. The reason the color bar could not be broken was because the Northerners would not recognize that there is one. Newspaper publications had a big hand in letting the issue simmer to the surface. However, by 1944, the New York State Legislature began considering the Ives-Quinn Bill to forbid discrimination in hiring on the basis of race, creed, color, or national origin.
Nona Willis Aronowitz
- Published in print:
- 2014
- Published Online:
- August 2015
- ISBN:
- 9780816681204
- eISBN:
- 9781452949048
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- University of Minnesota Press
- DOI:
- 10.5749/minnesota/9780816681204.003.0006
- Subject:
- Literature, Criticism/Theory
This chapter focuses on the abortion hearing held by the New York State Legislature in 1969. State Assemblyman Albert H. Blumenthal introduced a bill that would reform the state’s eighty-six-year-old ...
More
This chapter focuses on the abortion hearing held by the New York State Legislature in 1969. State Assemblyman Albert H. Blumenthal introduced a bill that would reform the state’s eighty-six-year-old criminal-abortion statute, which permits an abortion only when the operation is necessary to preserve a pregnant woman’s life. The Blumenthal bill would amend “life” to “health,” and give relief to women who are physically or mentally unequipped to care for a child or who risk bearing a deformed child, to victims of rape and incest, and to the very young. A second bill, sponsored by Assemblywoman Constance Cook, would repeal the abortion law entirely and make abortion available on the same basis as any other medical treatment. Whatever their ideological differences, feminists have put up a united front in opposing Blumenthal’s reforms—or any reforms—and demand total repeal. Three women were permitted to speak at the hearing. They talked about their experiences and demanded a public hearing that would be devoted entirely to the expert testimony of women.Less
This chapter focuses on the abortion hearing held by the New York State Legislature in 1969. State Assemblyman Albert H. Blumenthal introduced a bill that would reform the state’s eighty-six-year-old criminal-abortion statute, which permits an abortion only when the operation is necessary to preserve a pregnant woman’s life. The Blumenthal bill would amend “life” to “health,” and give relief to women who are physically or mentally unequipped to care for a child or who risk bearing a deformed child, to victims of rape and incest, and to the very young. A second bill, sponsored by Assemblywoman Constance Cook, would repeal the abortion law entirely and make abortion available on the same basis as any other medical treatment. Whatever their ideological differences, feminists have put up a united front in opposing Blumenthal’s reforms—or any reforms—and demand total repeal. Three women were permitted to speak at the hearing. They talked about their experiences and demanded a public hearing that would be devoted entirely to the expert testimony of women.
