ScottSA

What's with all the sophomoric mysticism? How come you like to blurt out these meaningless and usually trite slogans?

And how am I contradicting any of these? I don't recall killing anyone this week, so do you mind being a bit more specific?

Again. Protect those who deserve it. Actively encouraging Meth Addicts or Alcoholics (in other words, those blatantly not suitable to raise children in adequate conditions) of "ANY RACE" or ethnicity to have children is not the brightest idea. Let the incentives be based on merit, and let them go out to those worthy, whatever "race" they hail from. This is a completely different issue. I take it you have backed away from attacking all whites on the basis of the "white trash" you know, and have moved on to merit-based procreation? I think you're going to find yourself neck deep in conceptual quicksand if you keep trundling along that path for very much longer, so why don't we return to your specific objections to me wanting to preserve the Caucasian race? Do you have any?

Would you agree if a Palestinian militant raped a Jewish girl in the West Bank, and then a Israeli policeman would rape a Palestinian girl in Jerusalem? Or if a rapist raped a girl, the girl's father would rape the rapist's daughter? Incidentally, the logic (or actually illogic) above is always advocated by those militants. If we adopted this, we would really go back to the stone age thousands years ago. I think xul, that you need to learn english before embarking on a philosophical discussion using it. You have comprehensively missed not only the point in the "illogic" above, but each and every particular of it too. Unfortunately I don't know mandarin, or I'd explain it to you.

Speaking of closed minds...

And your mother probably wears army boots.

Racist against blonds? Now I know you must be blond too! But really you can't be racist against yourself.....except for blonds...right? No, the racism I'm refering to is the following hate filled spew. At least it would be a hate filled spew if you made any sense at all. You seem to be on about how it has nothing to do with genetics and all about ego and marinating the line and preserving shrimp, but the hate is hard to miss even if the expression of it is unintelligible: IN the end those arguing for protection of the caucas are just superficial egoists. They are more concerned about looks and marinating the pure line than they are about humanity, or genetics. I mean these people are intent on preserving small penis shrimps. I mean real men are descendants of mixed cultures and when the white boys are out trying to polish their whiteness, the rest of us are making babies with their wives. Of course few pure whites ever get dates unless you want to count pouring beer on their hands trying to get their dates drunk...... I think you're missing something rather obvious here. We already are divided along racial lines. That's why I have more or less whitish skin and Jesse Jackson has brownish skin. I'm not sure what Michael Jackson's excuse is, but Jesse is at perfect liberty to marry a Black woman, have Black kids, continue his career based on race-baiting, all the while secure in the knowledge that no one will call him racist. But let a caucasian dare suggest that caucasianhood is worthy of preservation, and all of a sudden, great belches of hypocritical santimonious outrage fill the room. Do you not even begin to glimpse how silly you are being here? Kimmy, I suppose that is true. So what you are really telling us is that YOUR mother was blond too. I notice the blond genetic flaw in your tone. I'm surprised that you wouldn't want to break that genetic inferiority and marry out of your gene pool. However, I do understand your dilemma....no one wants to be accused as being the first to marry out of your family. And this. What is this? Kimmy could lose half her cortex in an industrial meatgrinding accident and she'd still be smarter than you. WTF?

I can't get over theists who contradict the doctrine of God. *snort* And what might be the "doctrine of God" that I'm contradicting?

If you follow the column up from the bottom to the title Left side Right side You will see my original(amateur) work on it. http://technocrat.net/d/2006/11/3/10052 Oh dear. I thought political 'studies' won out over political 'science' a decade ago.

Well, its like saying "dogs breed dogs," or "macaroni breeds macaroni." It's meaningless, it has no corrective utility, its emminently reductive, and it's just stupid. But at least it's short enough that there's room on a bumper sticker to put a cannabis leaf next to it.

You're in China, right? Is that the rational the venerable leaders use to avoid democracy there? Once all 700 billion Chinamen and women get Phds, the government will turn over power to the people, but not a moment sooner? Sounds reasonable. Of course if the rabble in its currently ignorant state gets uppity and starts building paper mache statues of liberty and stuff you can always run over a few hundred of them with tanks.

I am sure there are many people who don't know I'm gay and many more who don't care. I merely provided that info with respect to this thread to add a basis to my position on Vitter's anti-family posturing. Nope, I'm not a victim at all. I am not oppressed. I am an attorney, live in a gorgeous home, am well within the top 5% of wage earners in the US, am an active donor to political causes, have a wonderful group of friends, and two fantastic kids. I like being gay and couldn't imagine the sad, grey life I'd live if I was stuck in the straight world. Bad clothes, bad haircuts, terrible pot bellies. Yeesh, you can have all that and more. What I object to is people who, like you, wish gay people would either just go away or accept the crumbs of inequality you want to dole out. I'm very comfortable, but that doesn't mean that social injustice doesn't bother me. As I said, I only mentioned my being gay to explain why Vitter's comments, like those of countless homophobes, bug me so much. (For the record, I don't know who on this site knows my story, but, ScottSA, I'll consider you one who is, strangely, interested. Clearly, you do care where I whet my whistle, but I shan't mention it in your presence again.) In terms of "lifestyle choice", if "lifestyle" is a choice, can you tell me when it was that you decided to be straight? Seriously, if orientation is a choice, then we each reached a point where we decided to go one way or another. If you think I reached that point and went one way. Tell me about your choice and how you decided you wouldn't be gay. ...Or not. I frankly could not care less about who you schtupp in the privacy of your home and it's fully within your rights to boast over a beer about the hot babe you bagged. Furthermore, it's fully within your rights to not like people like me. I wouldn't dream of asking you to change, you're more than welcome to co-exist in my world. Frankly, I don't give two sh*ts whether you or Vitter think I ought to co-exist in yours. I and people like me already live in your neighborhood. Get used to the idea that your kids will grow up in world more open than you've shown them. Get used to the idea that you're wrong. Acceptance of the practise of homosexuality is an episodic event in the cyclical nature of civilization. It comes and goes, and mostly goes. Don't think, foolishly, that the sad state of morality in the west will ever be thus. I personally find homosexuals to be an insult to manhood. Even so, I really don't care what you do in the privacy of your gorgeous and peachy house, but I do find it odd that you need to trumpet your bedroom antics on a public web board. I don't recall anyone else here making an issue of who they like to boink. Why do you feel the need?

When useful fools hold forth... I'm trying to note the 'absence of jerkhoodness', but it's difficult. Sorry. I was just noting the useful foolishness of perpetuating the ridiculous myth that some "illegal attack" took place. I guess I shouldn't assume that foolish things always have to originate in the mouth of a fool.

What, specifically, do you think he'll be surprised by? And what makes you think that? I don't think it. I know it. And if you don't know what I'm talking about him being surprised by, this conversation is not for you.

This is pure hate filled racism. If anyone were to say the same thing about Blacks or about you, you'd be snivelling and shrieking in outrage. WTF is wrong with you?

Well, you're actually the one reducing this to a mere question of skin color. My definition involves something not quite as superficial, although you have shown so far no capacity for understanding subtlety, so you may never get it. Caucasians, as a category of race, and as the topical category of race in this thread, share skin color as one aspect of their phenotype, but skin color is not the sum total of caucasianhood, nor is caucasian synonymous with white skin. If that were the case, Michael Jackson would be caucasian, and he's not. So it may be sentimental, but it's certainly not as superficial as you would like to think. And frankly there are other reasons, reasons already discussed here. I see no good reason for caucasians to agree to become minorities in their own homeland. No country in Asia or Africa would agree to a massive influx of caucasians to their homelands, and I see no moral imperitive for caucasians to extinguish themselves in a spasm of apology and self-hate, although I understand that you and your ilk hold opposing views. And this "fundamental value" you speak of. What fundamental value are you talking about?

Simple. They are nothing special. As I stated earlier, I may be biased since I am surrounded by "White Trash", but I see nothing "caucasianess" on it's own as nothing special, nothing worth getting your panties in a whirl. Protecting "Johnny Methhead & Co." for the simple fact he and his family are white is futile. I would rather put energy and resources in helping someone who is beneficial to our culture/society, regardless of skin. But caucasians don't have to be something special in order for me to want to preserve them. I am a caucasian, I'm proud of being a caucasian, and that's all the reason I need. I'm also concerned that as a minority, caucasians may end up being treated somewhat less kindly than our current society treats other minorities. I don't see one good, or even reasonable arguemnt against preserving caucasians. If you want to raise an angry mob of self-righteous leftists on the strength of that, go for it. I need a good laugh.

I can't get over the bizarre fixation evangelical atheists have with all aspects of religion.

"Hate breeds hate". What a profoundly trite observation. Before we go getting all deeply philosophical though, what d'you spose would happen if the situation were reversed and this happened in the West Bank to Jewish girls? Do you spose whichever faction of Palestinian strongmen that happens to be in control that week would stand between the catfighters like that? I suspect they'd rape them and leave the remains for the ululating witches to clean up on.

I think that's been explained at some legnth by several people. The real question though is why wouldn't you want to protect caucasians?

Excellent, how wonderful for you. Now that your lineage has protected itself from the threat of a disappearing ozone layer, I almost hate to break the news to you that the disappearing ozone layer was last decade's non-existent threat, falling in time somewhere between the panic over the perpetually imminent nuclear war of the 80s and the Y2K threat of the 90s that fizzled out in company with many of my brain cells on January 1, 2000. And I bet if you scrunch up the letters of your "motto" a bit, you'll be able to fit a cannabis leave on the bumper sticker beside them! On a serious note, I'm happy for you and I hope you enjoy your grandchildren. But why do you wear it as a badge of some kind of honour that they're not white? Why is it bad to maintain a caucasian lineage and a mark of honor to abort it?

Please put down the joint and concentrate if you can. I'm taking issue with your silly contention that religion is at the root of all violence. I am not claiming that religion never has anything to do with violence. And in case you haven't noticed, there is indeed no clash going on between Islam and Christianity. The clash is between secularism and Islam. Christianity is at best a shocked bystander, so don't try to drag it into the mix. It didn't do nuttin'.

My whiteness isn't going anywhere in the foreseeable future as far as I can tell, even though summer in the Okanagan turns me a bit Asiatic in appearance, so I'm not sure I need to take measures to preserve it beyond putting on sunscreen. But yes, preserving my caucasian genes with a caucasian mate is important to me, if not exactly "paramount." And what, pray tell, do you find offensive about that? Is it ok if I do the same thing but make up some other reason for it? Why do you think most people marry into their own race? Because of "culture?" On that note, I'd like to announce the engagement of Kimmy and I, who are planning to honeymoon in the ruins of the Berlin bunker so as to better learn the art of jackboot wearing, and vi vill zen produssse bucketloads of goose-stepping children of a shiny hue and a bit of kinky white hair, in a nod to the sheep in my family's woodpile. Let me break the thrilling news to her myself though...I want to make sure she's sitting down... BTW, WTF is this supposed to mean: So now that one of the families has lost their 'meaningless jewel', the other family will not join with them. That creates a negative meaning for the jewel.

Yes. Good point. However, I was not referring to his posts, but yours Scott. You want to "protect" them because you "prefer" them. And as with far too many of my posts, you just ignore them, or claim they are not worth addressing. And this all coming from the person who chides us on trying to ignore pertinent debate. And it hurts. Is it because I am an immigrant? Furthermore, we all ought to practice what we preach. Calling my post "broadly dishonest", than introducing the word "superior" in response to my request to find out the underlying reason for your "preference", and even more so, attributing it to me. A Freudian slip? A genuine mix up? Who knows. I shall not impute. But you seem to be presenting a lot of non sequiturs, and I would presume for the sake of political correctness. Ex. Than how about a simpler term to borrow from econ, "crowding out'. Or Birthrates. Or is that still beyond you. Or are you implying that only Caucasians can subscribe to the Caucasian culture, and that getting other "non Caucasians" to adopt Caucasian culture is an impossible feat. If that is the case, than why? Regardless, I do not care to go down to some childish level of argumentation, I would just like an answer. I agree with your wanting to preserve our common culture. I just do not know how skin colour got tangled up in it. Please, oh please, tell us why this race, or any race is worth preserving*. I'm sorry, but you're just making no sense whatsoever. You don't seem to know who said what, and either you're attributing motives, words, and the killing of kittens to me with not even a pretence of honesty, or your ESL absolutely sucks. Maybe try again, slowly.

What a maroon you're turning out to be. WW I and II were not religious wars, just to start. No, the crusades are not going on today. That's just silly. You're stacking a few crossburnings in the 50s against the Rwandan genocide and the Killing Fields? That's crazy. The holocaust was a function of racial "Aryanism" vs "Jewishness," not a battle between Christianity and Judaism. I might be "blind" to some point as yet unmade, but you're just being weird.