Here's the thing. Atheist Rob Sherman was subjected to an inexcusibly vicious anti-atheist verbal tirade by Illinois state representative Monique Davis. But the retard had to reply with this bit of nonsense:
Now that Negroes like Representative Monique Davis have political power, it seems that they have no problem at all with discrimination, just as long as it isn’t them who are being discriminated against.(Sherman has apparently removed this paragraph from his web site. He's been QFT'd by numerous sources; I'm relying on Hemant Mehta.)
Just using the term "Negro" seems like a bit of a side issue. "Negro" is tone-deaf and grating, but the more important point is that the passage doesn't get even a tiny bit better if we substitute an alternative label such as "African-American".
The problem is that the passage as written asserts that black people — regardless of label — have no problem discriminating. This assertion is facially racist and factually untrue. It attributes a negative characteristic to people on the basis of the color of their skin. The last I checked epidermal melanin does not substantially contribute to one's neurological or cognitive function.
Sherman tries to wriggle out of the charge of racism with the excuse that
They have demanded that I apologize to Rep. Davis for not using a euphemism, such as Black or African-American, when referring to her in the context of her being a member of a group that suffered past discrimination.The technical term in serious analytic philosophy for this sort of statement is "complete bullshit" (some philosophers might prefer "bollocks").
If Sherman had meant to say, "member of a group that has suffered past discrimination," he should have said... let me think... how about... "member of a group that has suffered past discrimination." The term "Negro", in addition to being archaic and grating, does not mean "member of a group that has suffered past discrimination," it means "black person", and any association with a characteristic associates that characteristic with race, not history.
Sorry, Rob, your problem is obvious:
A pretty clear case of recto-cranial inversion.
[Update: I also just noticed that Sherman digs his hole a little deeper by calling the terms "Black" and "African-American" euphemisms. They are not euphemisms, they are (mostly) descriptive terms, preferred by those being labeled, which we use as a matter of common civilized courtesy. They are not "euphemisms" any more than "atheist" is a euphemism for "god-hating communist devil-worshiper".]