Time for a "reverse-Ferguson?"
Quote: EvenBobThe ball will drop and everybody will go home.
Thank you for this, EB. That's exactly what will happen.
And for the cop sympathizers: When you report for your first day of work and they hand you a flack jacket and a pistol, you gotta KNOW its a dangerous job! You have no right to complain. You knew going in that this wasn't for the meek. Get out if you're afraid of confrontation. Your buddies will back you up when you kill somebody.
And for the racists among us: Just own it! I'm in my 60s and was raised racist. It took a lot of work to break out of that. Like religion, you're raised to fear an imaginary god who's gonna send you to hell. It took a lot of work to get past that brain washing, but I did it. You can be called a lot worse. Just own it and move on. It took the same amount of work to realize people were smart who weren't born white. My cousin, he owns farms, ranches and construction businesses throughout New Mexico and Texas; he told me one time that he couldn't ever move here where I live because he might have to work for a Mexican at some time. And he could never do that. You see, here, Mexicans are considered lower than Blacks! Hard to imagine. But here, they are the Niggers. Sad, very sad. That people would actually believe this BS. But they do.
Quote: texasplumrYou see, here, Mexicans are considered lower than Blacks! Hard to imagine. But here, they are the Niggers.
Say WHAT??!!
Quote: texasplumrThank you for this, EB. That's exactly what will happen.
And for the cop sympathizers: When you report for your first day of work and they hand you a flack jacket and a pistol, you gotta KNOW its a dangerous job! You have no right to complain. You knew going in that this wasn't for the meek. Get out if you're afraid of confrontation. Your buddies will back you up when you kill somebody.
And for the racists among us: Just own it! I'm in my 60s and was raised racist. It took a lot of work to break out of that. Like religion, you're raised to fear an imaginary god who's gonna send you to hell. It took a lot of work to get past that brain washing, but I did it. You can be called a lot worse. Just own it and move on. It took the same amount of work to realize people were smart who weren't born white. My cousin, he owns farms, ranches and construction businesses throughout New Mexico and Texas; he told me one time that he couldn't ever move here where I live because he might have to work for a Mexican at some time. And he could never do that. You see, here, Mexicans are considered lower than Blacks! Hard to imagine. But here, they are the Niggers. Sad, very sad. That people would actually believe this BS. But they do.
I'm so glad to see that you are no longer racist but still manage to use that word. Your cousin must be so proud. Triste, muy triste.
Quote: texasplumrT You see, here, Mexicans are considered lower than Blacks! Hard to imagine. But here, they are the Niggers. Sad, very sad. That people would actually believe this BS. But they do.
Your statement makes no sense. Mods, clarification?
Quote: rudeboyoiJust saw a pickup truck hit a line of protesters.
Good.
Quote: 1BBI'm so glad to see that you are no longer racist but still manage to use that word. Your cousin must be so proud. Triste, muy triste.
It's a word and was simply used to make a point. That does not make him a racist. Get over it.
Quote: rudeboyoiJust saw a pickup truck hit a line of protesters.
Quote: RSGood.
Yikes. I don't agree with the tactics of many of the protestors, but cheering for them to be injured? Were they attacking the cops, or were they just holding signs? I could not find any information about this on the LA Times, ABC News, Google news.
Quote: AZDuffmanIt's a word and was simply used to make a point. That does not make him a racist. Get over it.
Oh, I think we all got the point. Thanks for your response, AZ. I'm honored.
I didn't say he was racist and there's nothing to get over. It was a terrible use of the word period. Feel free to regale us with alternative words for Mexicans and tell us to get over that.
Quote: texasplumrThank you for this, EB. That's exactly what will happen.
And for the cop sympathizers: When you report for your first day of work and they hand you a flack jacket and a pistol, you gotta KNOW its a dangerous job! You have no right to complain. You knew going in that this wasn't for the meek. Get out if you're afraid of confrontation. Your buddies will back you up when you kill somebody.
And for the racists among us: Just own it! I'm in my 60s and was raised racist. It took a lot of work to break out of that. Like religion, you're raised to fear an imaginary god who's gonna send you to hell. It took a lot of work to get past that brain washing, but I did it. You can be called a lot worse. Just own it and move on. It took the same amount of work to realize people were smart who weren't born white. My cousin, he owns farms, ranches and construction businesses throughout New Mexico and Texas; he told me one time that he couldn't ever move here where I live because he might have to work for a Mexican at some time. And he could never do that. You see, here, Mexicans are considered lower than Blacks! Hard to imagine. But here, they are the Niggers. Sad, very sad. That people would actually believe this BS. But they do.
My friend, you are not allowed to use the N word....because you are not black.
Quote: 1BBOh, I think we all got the point. Thanks for your response, AZ. I'm honored.
I didn't say he was racist and there's nothing to get over. It was a terrible use of the word period. Feel free to regale us with alternative words for Mexicans and tell us to get over that.
I am sure you can just google a few, but yes, get over it! I am a mick-hunky-kraut. Feel free to call me any or all of those. People confuse me for middle-eastern looking, so feel free to call me any of those as well. In return you will get a "try to imagine how much I care!" And as I have said before, the charge of "racist" is meaningless in this day and age.
Banning of words is a dangerous thing, but we are headed down that road.
Quote: 1BBI'm so glad to see that you are no longer racist but still manage to use that word. Your cousin must be so proud. Triste, muy triste.
This ties into the reason I wanted this post to stand. Exposure. Realization.
Look at the reactions texas got. Look at them! Gasp! Shock! Horror! What was texas even saying, anyways?
He pointed out bigotry in his part of the world. He used that word to describe it. It was used to make a point, and texas is on that point. But there's no comments on that, just a reaction over a word. A word!
Mickeycrimm in this same thread described a Native friend of his and his views on other tribes. His friend views those others as "savages". Savages! He said it clear as day! And the response? Utter silence.
This membership is full of honkys, crackers, peckerwoods, and palefaces. And the reaction when these words are heard? I dunno about you, but I giggle. Peckerwood, lol, really? That used to be a thing? Whatever.
I'm all for reasonable PC. Despite that AZ doesn't mind being called a "kraut", I won't call him it. Forget "racism", it's just not polite. Nor do I think any of these words should be used towards another member, as they can be hurtful. But to just use the word in context, to dare speak it aloud? Is that something we should lose our minds over?
I don't think so. I think to do so is dangerous. I'd not mind a counterpoint, if anyone wishes to argue for a bit.
Quote: DaddydocYikes. I don't agree with the tactics of many of the protestors, but cheering for them to be injured? Were they attacking the cops, or were they just holding signs? I could not find any information about this on the LA Times, ABC News, Google news.
They were just standing in a line holding hands across hollywood blvd chanting. They looked like young college aged kids. Once something more pops up today about it ill post it.
Quote: FaceThis ties into the reason I wanted this post to stand. Exposure. Realization.
Look at the reactions texas got. Look at them! Gasp! Shock! Horror! What was texas even saying, anyways?
He pointed out bigotry in his part of the world. He used that word to describe it. It was used to make a point, and texas is on that point. But there's no comments on that, just a reaction over a word. A word!
Mickeycrimm in this same thread described a Native friend of his and his views on other tribes. His friend views those others as "savages". Savages! He said it clear as day! And the response? Utter silence.
This membership is full of honkys, crackers, peckerwoods, and palefaces. And the reaction when these words are heard? I dunno about you, but I giggle. Peckerwood, lol, really? That used to be a thing? Whatever.
I'm all for reasonable PC. Despite that AZ doesn't mind being called a "kraut", I won't call him it. Forget "racism", it's just not polite. Nor do I think any of these words should be used towards another member, as they can be hurtful. But to just use the word in context, to dare speak it aloud? Is that something we should lose our minds over?
I don't think so. I think to do so is dangerous. I'd not mind a counterpoint, if anyone wishes to argue for a bit.
Peckerwood has transformed from a derogatory term into one of pride within the prison system.
Found a video from afar of what happened. I was watching a stream from the line itself last night.
Quote: rudeboyoiProtesters in Hollywood block road: http://youtu.be/GDtQ8PylPQQ
Found a video from afar of what happened. I was watching a stream from the line itself last night.
Well, after having viewed that, I would not say that he (or she) drove through the protesters. They went intentionally in front of his vehicle, and he slowed down enough to give them an opportunity to get out of the way. I can imagine feeling threatened in that situation, and exiting the scene is the best way to eliminate the threat. I don't see how the driver could be faulted for his behavior.
Quote: Face
I'm all for reasonable PC. Despite that AZ doesn't mind being called a "kraut", I won't call him it. Forget "racism", it's just not polite. Nor do I think any of these words should be used towards another member, as they can be hurtful. But to just use the word in context, to dare speak it aloud? Is that something we should lose our minds over?
I don't think so. I think to do so is dangerous.
OK, so then by your logic it's fine to refer to Jews as "Kikes," Mexicans as "Spics" and Asians as "slopes," so long as the individual referred to is not a member.
Maybe you should codify it as a new rule?
Quote: DaddydocWell, after having viewed that, I would not say that he (or she) drove through the protesters. They went intentionally in front of his vehicle, and he slowed down enough to give them an opportunity to get out of the way. I can imagine feeling threatened in that situation, and exiting the scene is the best way to eliminate the threat. I don't see how the driver could be faulted for his behavior.
Theres more that wasnt captured in this particular video. From what I saw a point of view directly on the white car, that white car went around a line of cars to purposely try to plow his way through the protesters. The people were holding hands in a line across the street. More videos from different angles will likely pop up.
Quote: rudeboyoi
Peckerwood has transformed from a derogatory term into one of pride within the prison system.
White people learn that complaining about a word will get them nowhere so they adapt. Sticks and stones.
Quote: MrV
OK, so then by your logic it's fine to refer to Jews as "Kikes," Mexicans as "Spics" and Asians as "slopes," so long as the individual referred to is not a member.
Maybe you should codify it as a new rule?
Not at all, and I know you're way too smart to think so. I even stated "these words shouldn't be used against another member".
I'm just putting my beliefs out there to be judged, because I think my view is important. There are words that hurt, and these words shouldn't be used as weapons. BUT, those who find offense, I think, also have a responsibility to take their power from them. It's a two way street.
"Nigger" had a long and dirty history. No one denies that. But much of its current power, i believe, is not just because it's still used, but because the offended allow it to have that power.
Yes, I realize you can warp my view and believe I'm saying "is the victim's fault". Honestly, I can't argue that. I do believe that it's partly the victim's fault. Whether that's right or not is not something I'm concerned with. I don't care. All I know is I dealt with racism my entire life. My face is scarred and crooked as the result of slurs just like these. But the moment I stopped caring what a bigot said about me was the moment I was set free. That was the day I took the power back.
Power of self. If you give the power to others, even for the intention of "protection", then you lose it all.
Quote: 1BBFace, wasn't it you that said calling a team Redskins was "the height of offense"?
Yes, I said that. And it is. And one of the people who absolutely refuses to adjust his use of it is AZD, a man who I respect and call "friend".
This is what I mean. I don't need to beat AZD down. I don't need to threaten him or other members with suspensions, I don't need to legislate for new rules. If I try to build a wall of protection around myself, that wall is built entirely on the idea that "redskin" hurts me. I succeed in increasing its power over me. I point out to everyone that a way to hurt me is exactly this. To my enemies, I hand them the weapon.
Why would I do that? Why would anyone? That's my argument.
Regarding "new rules", I'm more the judicial branch. Making new rules isn't my bag. And honestly, nothing in this thread should be construed as "this is how is going to be". These are just my views, and it's a discussion I wanted to have. If my views are judged to be dispicible or harmful, then you've no fear of being exposed to them for much longer.
Quote: FaceQuote:If my views are judged to be dispicible or harmful, then you've no fear of being exposed to them for much longer.
Will the outcome be the same if your views are not viewed as harmful? Sometimes you are the lone voice of reason in a sea of the absurd. Or was that Freudian?
It looks like it's time to get that dog Face.
blacks about blacks, or to other blacks.
It's a way of constantly saying 'we are
not as good as other people', so lets
repeatedly remind ourselves of it. You
never hear a group of white guys talking
where they constantly disparage their
own race, and why is that.
Both Frank Sinatra and Dean Martin had
parents that came here from Italy. They
grew up hearing the word 'wop' everyday
in their neighborhoods. In private they
often called each other wop, not to put
themselves down, but to remind them
of where they came from.
Blacks don't do it for that reason.
Quote: rudeboyoiFerguson Protester hit by car: http://youtu.be/XIaat_ic4f0
heres a video.
There's a bunch of hippies holding hands blocking traffic. What do you expect people to want to do? Continue on their way, perhaps?
Nobody was run over. The white SUV went around the traffic, up to the line (hitting no one), then slowly went through. Once the hippies got out of the way, he went for it.
More people should do that.
Quote: FaceThis ties into the reason I wanted this post to stand. Exposure. Realization.
Look at the reactions texas got. Look at them! Gasp! Shock! Horror! What was texas even saying, anyways?
He pointed out bigotry in his part of the world. He used that word to describe it. It was used to make a point, and texas is on that point. But there's no comments on that, just a reaction over a word. A word!
Mickeycrimm in this same thread described a Native friend of his and his views on other tribes. His friend views those others as "savages". Savages! He said it clear as day! And the response? Utter silence.
This membership is full of honkys, crackers, peckerwoods, and palefaces. And the reaction when these words are heard? I dunno about you, but I giggle. Peckerwood, lol, really? That used to be a thing? Whatever.
I'm all for reasonable PC. Despite that AZ doesn't mind being called a "kraut", I won't call him it. Forget "racism", it's just not polite. Nor do I think any of these words should be used towards another member, as they can be hurtful. But to just use the word in context, to dare speak it aloud? Is that something we should lose our minds over?
I don't think so. I think to do so is dangerous. I'd not mind a counterpoint, if anyone wishes to argue for a bit.
No counterpoint from me. I think you're beautifully on point.
Quote: EvenBobThe N word is at it's worst when used by
blacks about blacks, or to other blacks.
It's a way of constantly saying 'we are
not as good as other people', so lets
repeatedly remind ourselves of it. You
never hear a group of white guys talking
where they constantly disparage their
own race, and why is that.
Both Frank Sinatra and Dean Martin had
parents that came here from Italy. They
grew up hearing the word 'wop' everyday
in their neighborhoods. In private they
often called each other wop, not to put
themselves down, but to remind them
of where they came from.
Blacks don't do it for that reason.
Quote: Face"Nigger" had a long and dirty history. No one denies that. But much of its current power, i believe, is not just because it's still used, but because the offended allow it to have that power.
I'm learning a lot in this thread. It's okay to say "Jimmy the Greek", but not "Denzel the Black".
Jews are a race in this thread, not a religion. Are Catholics a race also?
Quote: zippyboyI'm learning a lot in this thread. It's okay to say "Jimmy the Greek", but not "Denzel the Black".
Jews are a race in this thread, not a religion. Are Catholics a race also?
Follow the money.
Quote: zippyboyQuote:"Denzel the Black".
"Denzel the Black" sounds pretty cool. Official trailer of "Eli" http://youtu.be/DHRwo48twyE
Quote: zippyboyI'm learning a lot in this thread. It's okay to say "Jimmy the Greek", but not "Denzel the Black".
Jews are a race in this thread, not a religion. Are Catholics a race also?
People frequently regard Jews as a race.
It is a common tactic by anti-Semites.
There are a lot of atheists in Hollywood who have Jewish blood. And the second they defend Israel people jump all over them "Its because your a Jew, look your mother is a Jew therefore you are". But I guess its not surprising because people with that view are the type to generalize about people in general.
If you have "Jewish blood" (as if this is even a thing) and are an atheist but have a view that they find unacceptable its "because you are Jewish".
For those who want to participate or even bear witness, the very public plans for disruptions on Times Square and in eight other cities are at https://sites.google.com/site/weekofoutrage/rock-in-the-new-year-with-resistance-to-police-murder-3.Quote: GandlerI don't think anyone said the majority of protesters are violent. But some are. Enough are that many businesses got looted, people got mugged, property defaced...And I could be missing it but I have not once heard one slogan that their marches are "protesting violence". They always talk about police profiling, police brutality, and rascsism...
And for important support for the protesters along with one version of historical reality, check out no less an authority than Revolution Newspaper.
Quote: SanchoPanzaFor those who want to participate or even bear witness, the very public plans for disruptions on Times Square
LOL! You guys crack me up. Pissing in the
wind. Good luck with that.
Quote: SanchoPanzaFor those who want to participate or even bear witness, the very public plans for disruptions on Times Square and in eight other cities are at https://sites.google.com/site/weekofoutrage/rock-in-the-new-year-with-resistance-to-police-murder-3.
And for important support for the protesters along with one version of historical reality, check out no less an authority than Revolution Newspaper.
The communist aspect cracks me up to no end.
They are protesting police brutality and police profiling while calling for a communist revolution... I don't think that they even understand the irony...
Face, I used to say the N word was just a word like any other word. Then I realized that was kind of unfair. Now, I say it's a curse word, just like any other curse word. That might help explain some of the shock and horror at the use of the word. What would a moderator do if someone started using the forbidden S word on the forum, or even worse the dreaded F word.
The biggest difference I've found is some guys are "street" guys, we use "street" language. The hard thing to realize, at least, I suppose, for us Peckerwoods, and maybe just for "street" guys in general, is that the majority of Black, Asian, Hispanic people aren't "street" guys, they're good, hard working, religious folk, that have a very low tolerance for "street" language from any race.
I don't find alot of this stuff racist, I'm not a hippie, I don't expect everyone to get along, but when someone says that "It's in their genes" or "they're born like that", that's racist to me. That has nothing to do with anything someone did or didn't do or what people are being taught or what music they are listening to or anything else, it's just, hey that guy is this color, he's a gangster or thug or stupid or whatever. And that's B.S.
Anyway, I've said my piece. I'm hoping the new owners will get a younger hipper crowd around here. That might even draw in a gambler or two. Just saying.
Quote: TwirdmanAgain very few are denying that genetics plays a role in IQ what people are questioning is the role genes play in determining IQ differences amongst races. You need more proof then you have to say genes determine racial difference in IQ.
Right now your argument goes as follow.
Genes determine intelligence
genes determine genetic race
therefore genetic race determines intelligence
this is an A implies B A implies C therefore B implies C and that is not a logically sound argument.
A implies B, A implies C, therefore A implies C is not a logically sound argument. But I don't think the argument is quite that way.
What if the genes that made you whatever race you are (Asian, white, black, etc.) are the same genes that show how smart you're likely to be. Or rather, if someone has gene A (Asian gene) then they are very likely to have gene S (smart & hard working). If someone has gene B (black/African) then they are very likely to have gene D (dumb, scared of dogs, and lazy). If someone has gene W then they are very likely to have gene N (bad at dancing, good at hockey, likes avocados).
So it's more like A = B, A implies C, therefore A implies C.
In other words
White gene = white skin.
White gene implies you're likely to enjoy hockey NASCAR & avocados.
Therefore white skin implies you're likely to enjoy hockey NASCAR & avocados.
Quote: RSA implies B, A implies C, therefore A implies C is not a logically sound argument. But I don't think the argument is quite that way.
What if the genes that made you whatever race you are (Asian, white, black, etc.) are the same genes that show how smart you're likely to be. Or rather, if someone has gene A (Asian gene) then they are very likely to have gene S (smart & hard working). If someone has gene B (black/African) then they are very likely to have gene D (dumb, scared of dogs, and lazy). If someone has gene W then they are very likely to have gene N (bad at dancing, good at hockey, likes avocados).
So it's more like A = B, A implies C, therefore A implies C.
In other words
White gene = white skin.
White gene implies you're likely to enjoy hockey NASCAR & avocados.
Therefore white skin implies you're likely to enjoy hockey NASCAR & avocados.
Okay, here ya go ya racist bastard.
"For the past 500 years, people have been taught how to interpret and understand racism. We have been told that there are very specific things that relate to race, such as intelligence, sexual behavior, birth rates, infant care, work ethics and abilities, personal restraint, lifespan, law-abidingness, aggression, altruism, economic and business practices, family cohesion, and even brain size.
We have learned that races are structured in a hierarchical order and that some races are better than others. Even if you are not a racist, your life is affected by this ordered structure. We are born into a racist society.
What many people do not realize is that this racial structure is not based on reality. Anthropologists have shown for many years now that there is no biological reality to human race. There are no major complex behaviors that directly correlate with what might be considered human “racial” characteristics.
There is no inherent relationship between intelligence, law- abidingness, or economic practices and race, just as there is no relationship between nose size, height, blood group, or skin color and any set of complex human behaviors.
However, over the past 500 years, we have been taught by an informal, mutually reinforcing consortium of intellectuals, politicians, statesmen, business and economic leaders and their books that human racial biology is real and that certain races are biologically better than others."
http://www.newsweek.com/there-no-such-thing-race-283123
type 1950 unesco statement on race into google. Type in the history of race, or the origins of race, or historical race concepts, or the creation of race. You'll find this stuff is all of 500 years old. You'll find we're all just human, environment is what is the cause for the difference in appearances. Who would have guessed.
Might find something like historical race concepts:
Classical civilizations from Rome to China tended to invest the most importance in familial or tribal affiliation than an individual's physical appearance (Dikötter 1992; Goldenberg 2003). Societies still tended to equate physical characteristics, such as hair and eye colour, with psychological and moral qualities, usually assigning the highest qualities to their own people and lower qualities to the "Other", either lower classes or outsiders to their society. For example, an historian of the 3rd century Han Dynasty in the territory of present-day China describes barbarians of blond hair and green eyes as resembling "the monkeys from which they are descended."[2]
Also, it will explain why you don't hear about white people being slaves for thousands of years in Europe, mostly, because there was no such thing as white people until around the 1700's, so how could there be white slaves.
So, as I was saying RS, Nazi's are morons.
Quote: JyBrd0403You're saying black people are less intelligent because of their genetics, Bob. That's racist, or what I like to call moronic. You're saying black people are this or that because of their skin color, nothing else, just skin color. That's blatantly racist (and moronic), plain and simple.
You understand that's what nazi's believe, that's what KKK guys think. You think the same way they do, and you quote the same studies they do. I don't know if you know that about yourself or not, but you can start donning your nazi baseball cap, and white sheets, those guys need all the members they can get, because whether you know it or not, in the U.S. we hate those S.O.B.'s. REally, we fought wars against 'em. And, would again.
It's been proven black people are more muscular than white people. They also have a lower standardized average IQ. I'm not sure anyone is confusing correlation with causation when noticing other differences between races, as you strongly imply. Your logic dictates that the racial profile of the NBA is due to random chance. The only thing blatantly moronic is to label everything racist. The KKK were ignorant hillbillies. The Nazis thought eugenics justified genocide. Neo-Nazis are racist; traditional Nazis had an intricate hierarchy that was arguably not racist, and at the bottom were groups of Caucasians. I really don't think you know what you're talking about in the slightest.
Quote: JyBrd0403
I don't find alot of this stuff racist, I'm not a hippie, I don't expect everyone to get along, but when someone says that "It's in their genes" or "they're born like that", that's racist to me.
You had better be careful, you just called everyone who supports the homophile agenda a racist!
Quote: SonuvabishIt's been proven black people are more muscular than white people. They also have a lower standardized average IQ. I'm not sure anyone is confusing correlation with causation when noticing other differences between races, as you strongly imply. Your logic dictates that the racial profile of the NBA is due to random chance. The only thing blatantly moronic is to label everything racist. The KKK were ignorant hillbillies. The Nazis thought eugenics justified genocide. Neo-Nazis are racist; traditional Nazis had an intricate hierarchy that was arguably not racist, and at the bottom were groups of Caucasians. I really don't think you know what you're talking about in the slightest.
There are no major complex behaviors that directly correlate with what might be considered human “racial” characteristics.
There is no inherent relationship between intelligence, law- abidingness, or economic practices and race, just as there is no relationship between nose size, height, blood group, or skin color and any set of complex human behaviors.
Do you understand the above statement. Black people are more muscular that white people, that's not a genetic fact. Their skin color does not cause bigger muscles. Black people have lower standardized IQ's, not due to genetics, their skin color does not have anything to do with intelligence. NBA players are more athletic because they are Black, again not a genetic fact, skin color does not determine basketball skills. Your basing these things on race, that is racism. I know you don't like the word, but that's what you are. And that is moronic. What your looking to say is that your studies show that black CULTURE, and NOT black genes, produces more muscular, athletic kids. Maybe, you should learn WTF you're talking about before you speak.
Quote: JyBrd0403There are no major complex behaviors that directly correlate with what might be considered human “racial” characteristics.
There is no inherent relationship between intelligence, law- abidingness, or economic practices and race, just as there is no relationship between nose size, height, blood group, or skin color and any set of complex human behaviors.
Do you understand the above statement. Black people are more muscular that white people, that's not a genetic fact. Their skin color does not cause bigger muscles. Black people have lower standardized IQ's, not due to genetics, their skin color does not have anything to do with intelligence. NBA players are more athletic because they are Black, again not a genetic fact, skin color does not determine basketball skills. Your basing these things on race, that is racism. I know you don't like the word, but that's what you are. And that is moronic. What your looking to say is that your studies show that black CULTURE, and NOT black genes, produces more muscular, athletic kids. Maybe, you should learn WTF you're talking about before you speak.
How long have you been a scientist of genetics? And it looks like your belief in tolerance has led to your intolerance.
The OP's attitude is even worse than that. By discounting the factor of genetics, that position amounts to nothing less than an outright condemnation of all negative actions by whatever group is being discussed. If that was the case, lack of education, unwed pregnancy, drug use, violent criminality and so on are ENTIRELY due to the actions of the people today. And that is an odd reminder of the campaign of homosexuals to change the phrase "sexual preference" to "sexual orientation."Quote: mickeycrimmHow long have you been a scientist of genetics? And it looks like your belief in tolerance has led to your intolerance.
Anyone who takes evolution to be true must necessarily also take to be true, whether naturally or artificially, that messing with genes can make changes in humans. FWIW, I think evolution is true, so I think that some theoretical "superman" is possible through genetic manipulation. Given mankind's capability of being both stupid and ambitious, eugenics will arise again, only under a different guise.
Maybe the holding of certain faiths or political philosophies will be the target this time, rather than Jews or the disabled. Maybe it will be held as a mental illness or denial of (what's held to be) "scientific fact." Maybe it starts with tax agency targeting. As humans, conservatives are surely capable of it. But only liberals actually do these things.
So the question becomes, if/when we're capable of it, *should* we do it?
So far, we continue to learn the negative lessons of Hitler and say "no," at least with regard to a master race. But I have heard rumblings that conservatives suffer from a kind of mental illnesses that cause them to deny (what are held to be) readily apparent and/or scientific "fact."
If the question is, do predilections exist, then whatever the science behind it is, the answer is, of course, yes. I would list temper, artistic talent, and (yes) homosexuality among them.
So the question becomes, since I'm capable of it, *should* I do it?
But having a predilection is not an excuse for behavior. Just because you're prone to a short temper does not give you an excuse to yell at someone. Just because you're born with a talent to play piano doesn't give you an excuse for not becoming a great artist. Predilections, whether positive or negative, require behavior to realize their potential.
As best I understand the Christians, they carry this principal on to homosexuality. Just because you have the preference does not provide an excuse for the behavior. And, Christian behavior means sex with one person only, for life.
I definitely agree that short-tempered people don't have an excuse to yell at someone. I'm not sure I agree with the extension to homosexuality, but the thinking is, at least, consistent ... which is more than I can say for liberalism (which promotes diversity, except of opinion).
Quote: MrWarmthBut I have heard rumblings that conservatives suffer from a kind of mental illnesses that cause them to deny (what are held to be) readily apparent and/or scientific "fact."
Rumblings on MSNBC?
Yes, it is called "free thinking." If six people tell me the moon is in the sky at noon when I can see it is the sun, or that the sky is green I am not going to believe them, even if they are "scientists." I am going to check their information and compare it to what else I know and have experienced. If it does not wash, I am going to not believe.
Another way of putting it is be a sheepdog and not one of the sheep.
Quote: RSA implies B, A implies C, therefore A implies C is not a logically sound argument. But I don't think the argument is quite that way.
What if the genes that made you whatever race you are (Asian, white, black, etc.) are the same genes that show how smart you're likely to be. Or rather, if someone has gene A (Asian gene) then they are very likely to have gene S (smart & hard working). If someone has gene B (black/African) then they are very likely to have gene D (dumb, scared of dogs, and lazy). If someone has gene W then they are very likely to have gene N (bad at dancing, good at hockey, likes avocados).
So it's more like A = B, A implies C, therefore A implies C.
In other words
White gene = white skin.
White gene implies you're likely to enjoy hockey NASCAR & avocados.
Therefore white skin implies you're likely to enjoy hockey NASCAR & avocados.
This is entirely possible but there is no evidence of it. All we have evidence of is A implies B if you think A=B then the argument is sound but then you need to give evidence that A=B and again no evidence has been presented to support that.
Quote: AZDuffmanRumblings on MSNBC?
Yes, it is called "free thinking." If six people tell me the moon is in the sky at noon when I can see it is the sun, or that the sky is green I am not going to believe them, even if they are "scientists." I am going to check their information and compare it to what else I know and have experienced. If it does not wash, I am going to not believe.
Another way of putting it is be a sheepdog and not one of the sheep.
Rejecting readily apparent science does not make you a free thinker it makes you a fool. Evolution is as an established a scientific theory as the theory of gravity, actually evolution is more established but lets go with equally, and yet conservatives reject that for no other reason then a non science book tells them to. We would roundly mock someone who said oh no gravity isn't real we are just held down by angels so we have every right to roundly mock the people who say evolution doesn't happen.
Also a loser analogy would be having never seen the sky, since these people have no knowledge or training to understand the underlying data, having 6,000+ scientist tell you the sky is blue and then going nope definitely not the sky is clearly purple because it says so in this fairytale. There are plenty of other equally ridiculous things conservative GOP members say like rape not causing pregnancy.
But keep thinking of yourself as an enlightened person who doesn't need to follow the established science and story its the way every conspiracy theorist shroud themselve's. Oh you believe the Twin Towers were brought down by planes and not controlled demolition well clearly you are just a sheep walking through the world with your eyes closed. Same with moon landing, Kennedy assassination, and oh so many more. interestingly science denialism does share many similarities with those conspiracy theories.
Quote: Twirdman
But keep thinking of yourself as an enlightened person who doesn't need to follow the established science and story its the way every conspiracy theorist shroud themselve's. Oh you believe the Twin Towers were brought down by planes and not controlled demolition well clearly you are just a sheep walking through the world with your eyes closed. Same with moon landing, Kennedy assassination, and oh so many more. interestingly science denialism does share many similarities with those conspiracy theories.
You had me until the Twin Towers thing. There is clear, unambiguous and scientific proof that the towers came down through structural weakness in the central core of pillars caused by the extreme fire temperatures of burning fuel when each plane hit the towers. The many elevator shafts acted as chimneys, helping to fuel the fire through air movement. Once the center core gave way in the vicinity of each strike, the sheer weight of the building above the break caused a chain-reaction collapse of floors underneath as each pancaked down onto the next. It was, in the final analysis, both a design flaw and a failure of materials.
Or perhaps I'm misunderstanding what you wrote ("who you're quoting") and that's what you meant, but it came out the opposite?
