Why just one month?

Morgan Freeman, the oscar-winning actor recently made public his feelings on the concept of Black History month on primetime Tv's '60 Minutes'. Freeman told Mike Wallace, "I don't want a Black History Month. Black history is American history!" and stirred a controversy with his words.

In case you live in a jar and are not aware, February is Black History month, and as long as I can remember knowing this fact, I've had a nagging question:

Why does one group of Americans get a month dedicated to their history?

I'm assuming that Black History month is an American concept, so I am writing this piece based on that assumption, and please, if I am wrong in my assumption do correct me.

It makes sense to assume that African Americans and their history are just as much a part of basic American history as any other group. Their journey to America helped shape today's America as much as the Native Americans, English, Irish, Italians and Germans among others.

Take for instance the American Civil War. Could anyone fully understand this huge turning point in American history if they left out African American history? Why is African American history considered and treated as different from general American history? If African-American history is something that ought to have a month and category all by itself, then why not Native American history month? Or Irish American history month? Or Chinese American history month? Each of these groups I've mentioned have made contributions to the make-up of today's America, and their history is America's history, to separate them into sub-categories is an injustice to them, as well as history itself.

From AOL Blackvoices http://blackvoices.aol.com/black_news/black_history_month/articlecanvas?id=20060202185809990001)