so there has been rumblings in Atlanta about a billboard that has been displayed showing the picture of an African-American baby next to the words, “Black children are an endangered species.” it is in clear opposition to abortion, and is as blunt as you can get. question is, was it smart for the group behind this billboard to bring such a strong sentiment to this issue as to call out race? this is where the controversy has been brewing. Atlanta’s population consists of a majority of African-Americans, and this billboard only expresses concern for this single ethnic group. this is exactly the issue that has been brought up against whites for decades. whites have always owned the majority of the population within the country; because of minority suppression, the days of Jim Crow laws and civil rights, the efforts to increase minority rights were born to oppose such actions as this one. this sign is the same blueprint used against minority’s for decades, and because African-Americans are the majority there, this can be looked at negatively. I think it is a justified perception, even though it is not necessarily right.
controversy makes the airwaves, so though they are a majority in Atlanta, they are still a minority in the country. this billboard was created to inflict outrage, and as a result, it has reached countless other people across the country who may have got the message. personally, I think the best way they could have displayed the billboard was to have the same baby with the message “An endangered species,” without the specific race identified. if you are against abortion, it has to be abortion from all races, unless you do consider yourself racist cause that’s exactly where that’s headed. putting African-Americans, or other minorities, on the forefronts of media without mentioning race is a positive effect that will assist in diminishing the stigma of seeing a minority on a billboard without an ulterior motive.
