What Does Porterfield Mean By The Selma Marches?

On March 7, 1965, Civil Rights Protestors began the first of three major marches in Selma to campaign for African American voting rights (“Selma Marches”). These peaceful marches were ignited by the murder of Jimmie Lee Jackson, a Civil Rights protestor gunned down by Alabama state police in February of 1965 (“Selma Marches”). Attempting to stop the Civil Rights movement, marchers met opposition from segregationists across the country, including Alabama Governor George Wallace, a famous opponent to desegregation (“Selma Marches”). According to the Chicago Defender, a historically Black newspaper, Alabama state police violently suppressed the marchers, using tear gas and abusive tactics to weaken the crowd (“Terror in Alabama” 8). Despite the violence, the resolve of the

Porterfield’s speech to Alabama residents on March 24, 1965. In his speech, he claims that the preachers who support these marchers are supporting an immoral cause, claiming that the Selma Marches were not a case of “segregation vs. integration; it is not a question of civil rights; but it is morality vs. immorality” (Porterfield 4). Porterfield sought to discredit the Selma Marchers by labelling them as immoral people, and by this logic, unrighteous people cannot support a truly righteous cause. According to Porterfield, the immorality of the protestors further reveals itself because of accounts that marchers at the time were “guilty of committing fornication” in Selma on the streets (2). Porterfield’s reaction to the protests is to create a false narrative to back his own racist views on the Selma Marches. Akin to Representative Dickinson’s argument, Porterfield claims of promiscuous sex lack factual evidence. Thus, by unfairly disgracing the activists who marched at Selma, segregationists reveal their blind hatred towards African Americans. Segregationists also reacted to the Selma Marches by attempting to stir unease in Americans, making the false pretense that communism ignited the