Michael Hardner Posted March 14, 2010 Report Share Posted March 14, 2010 any time a debate comes down to skin colour it's racist and any attempt to cloud/hide the issue with talk of economics or moral values doesn't change the fact that there's bigotry behind it... There was a poster named Lictor for awhile, whose arguments we would continually chase down. He'd make general comments about whites/blacks and the media, to which several skilled posters here would respond. It didn't matter how much we showed his arguments to be outright wrong, he would never learn from it, would never acknowledge a mistake, and would constantly come back with a new set of mistakes to prove his point. Sadly, the point was in his mind before any of the facts could get in there to dislodge it. This is what is called "ignorance", and why the root of the word is "ignore". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted March 14, 2010 Report Share Posted March 14, 2010 Seems that skin colour was indeed mentioned. it was but as counter to a point made that brown people are more intolerant than whites...and I dispute that, they're no different than conservative white canadians so colour is irrelevant...a bigot is a bigot regardless their skin tone, one is not worse than another because of color, it's a cultural bias...racial bigotry is alive and well in Canadian born, mostly among older undereducated rural white Canadians... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted March 14, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 14, 2010 You do a good job of defending your posts, so why jump in and try to assist another poster with their arguments ? Variety? What is a "black country" "white country" or whatever ? He talks about Japan - what is that ? It's all just prejudiced observations, to my mind. Perhaps so. But the actual statements are factually correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted March 14, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 14, 2010 racial classification itself is based on racist beliefs that we were different and not equal in some moral way so one group can claim a racial superiority and dominate over others... This is an absurd statement which basically indicts not all geneticists but many civil rights groups as racists. Is the NAACP a racist organization? Are doctors racist when they claim that certain races are more prone to certain diseases? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted March 14, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 14, 2010 it was but as counter to a point made that brown people are more intolerant than whites...and I dispute that, they're no different than conservative white canadians so colour is irrelevant...a bigot is a bigot regardless their skin tone, one is not worse than another because of color, it's a cultural bias...racial bigotry is alive and well in Canadian born, mostly among older undereducated rural white Canadians... What a bigoted statement. Based upon what evidence, study or citation? Your own "feelings"? The irony, that people who decry bigotry don't even know what it means - or that they're bigots by their own definition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted March 15, 2010 Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 This is an absurd statement which basically indicts not all geneticists but many civil rights groups as racists. Is the NAACP a racist organization? Are doctors racist when they claim that certain races are more prone to certain diseases? really, I suggest you go talk to a geneticist there are no races, we are one specie...that was your science lesson for the day you are now smarter than you were before... you're welcome... civil rights groups would not need to exist if it were not for people like you insisting there are separate races, which is the root of all bigotry...race is a social invention... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted March 15, 2010 Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 What a bigoted statement. Based upon what evidence, study or citation? Your own "feelings"? The irony, that people who decry bigotry don't even know what it means - or that they're bigots by their own definition. based on surveys... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted March 15, 2010 Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 really, I suggest you go talk to a geneticist there are no races, we are one specie...that was your science lesson for the day you are now smarter than you were before... you're welcome... civil rights groups would not need to exist if it were not for people like you insisting there are separate races, which is the root of all bigotry...race is a social invention... Here we go again, people denying what is right before their eyes. There are no colours! Two plus two does not equal four! You can't tell the difference between an African or a European or an Asian! Does anyone actually believe such nonsense? Stating the obvious fact that there are clear differences (primarily phenotypical) between races is not in any sense discrimination. Stating that something exists does not equate with stating that something is inferior. Learn to have a grown up debate rather than plugging your ears and shouting racist at the top of your lungs any time someone mentions a colour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted March 15, 2010 Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 (edited) Here we go again, people denying what is right before their eyes. There are no colours! Two plus two does not equal four! You can't tell the difference between an African or a European or an Asian! Does anyone actually believe such nonsense? Stating the obvious fact that there are clear differences (primarily phenotypical) between races is not in any sense discrimination. Stating that something exists does not equate with stating that something is inferior. Learn to have a grown up debate rather than plugging your ears and shouting racist at the top of your lungs any time someone mentions a colour. there is no such thing as race, Race is a social construct it has no basic biological reality...we are all africans...to say otherwise would be like claiming Labrador Retievers black, chocolate and golden are different races which is stupid they are all the same dog...you should have stayed awake in grade 12 bio you would've learned something... Edited March 15, 2010 by wyly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted March 15, 2010 Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 Race is not a biological concept, it is, like you say, a social one. In that context, it exists. Saying it does not exist is blatant denial of reality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted March 15, 2010 Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 Race is not a biological concept, it is, like you say, a social one. In that context, it exists. Saying it does not exist is blatant denial of reality. what race is Barack Obama? what race is Colin Powell, Scottish? Irish? African?...race does not exist, you're validating an erroneous social belief on nonexistent differences...are blue eyed and green eyed people different races? are blonds and red heads different races, why not?... the social concept that there are separate races is wrong and racist...claiming otherwise is a blatant denial of realityno matter how uncomfortable it makes the racial bigots of the world we are all one specie, we are all African, we are all related, we are all family... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted March 15, 2010 Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 what race is Barack Obama? Half black half white. Easy enough. are blue eyed and green eyed people different races? are blonds and red heads different races, why not?... the social concept that there are separate races is wrong and racist...claiming otherwise is a blatant denial of reality Many of these features originally belonged to distinct ethnic groups but they have since intermixed to such an extent that they are prevalent in many white ethnic groups. You can see these kinds of phenotypical differences between different groups clearly remarked upon in many historical sources. For example, red hair was common in Ireland, while eastern Slavic peoples were known to very frequently have blond hair. Different European ethnic groups certainly considered each other separate races, and some still do. no matter how uncomfortable it makes the racial bigots of the world we are all one specie, we are all African, we are all related, we are all family... Of course we are all one species. The term race as applied to humans does not mean species. Please feel free to look up the meaning of the term race as it relates to humans. Also, no, we are not all family. Feel free to look up the definition of the term family as well. You are clearly having trouble with definitions today. Families are groups of people related to each other through blood or marriage within several generations. For example, one's family would be one's parents, children, grandparents, grandchildren, spouse, cousins, aunts, uncles, brothers, sisters, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 15, 2010 Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 what race is Barack Obama? what race is Colin Powell, Scottish? Irish? African?...race does not exist, you're validating an erroneous social belief on nonexistent differences...are blue eyed and green eyed people different races? are blonds and red heads different races, why not?... the social concept that there are separate races is wrong and racist...claiming otherwise is a blatant denial of realityno matter how uncomfortable it makes the racial bigots of the world we are all one specie, we are all African, we are all related, we are all family... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregor_Mendel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 15, 2010 Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 Of course we are all one species. The term race as applied to humans does not mean species. All terminology re: existence as we know it is a human construct. It's yea ol' tree falling in a forest fallacy. Doesn't anyone wonder why folks near the Equator were dark skinned while those in the North tended to be fair skinned? Anymore? No? Are we allowed to think such thoughts? (pops a vitamin 'D' pill...puts on SPF 50) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted March 15, 2010 Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 All terminology re: existence as we know it is a human construct. It's yea ol' tree falling in a forest fallacy. Doesn't anyone wonder why folks near the Equator were dark skinned while those in the North tended to be fair skinned? Anymore? No? Are we allowed to think such thoughts? (pops a vitamin 'D' pill...puts on SPF 50) Race is not relevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 15, 2010 Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 Race is not relevant. But Gregor Mendel is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted March 15, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 based on surveys... What surveys? You asked your mom? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted March 15, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 (edited) there is no such thing as race, Race is a social construct it has no basic biological reality...we are all africans...to say otherwise would be like claiming Labrador Retievers black, chocolate and golden are different races which is stupid they are all the same dog... you should have stayed awake in grade 12 bio you would've learned something... You should have gotten a visit to the farm so you'd know that if you breed black labs with black labs you get - black labs, while if you breed chocolate labs with chocolate labs you get ... a chocolate lab. Likewise if you breed an African with an African you will probably get a person with familiar and distinctive racial features which will not include fair skin, blonde or red hair, or blue eyes. Would it make you feel better if we called white people a golden breed, and blacks the chocolate breed? Edited March 15, 2010 by Argus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted March 15, 2010 Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 (edited) Half black half white. Easy enough. in other words you don't know...Many of these features originally belonged to distinct ethnic groups but they have since intermixed to such an extent that they are prevalent in many white ethnic groups. You can see these kinds of phenotypical differences between different groups clearly remarked upon in many historical sources. For example, red hair was common in Ireland, while eastern Slavic peoples were known to very frequently have blond hair. and you can find blonde and red hair in Australian Aboriginals, red hair in the middle east, India, Japan, Africa, and it's not from intermixing so much for that fallacy...Different European ethnic groups certainly considered each other separate races, and some still do.ya just like the "Master Race", it's social racism not biology...Of course we are all one species. The term race as applied to humans does not mean species. Please feel free to look up the meaning of the term race as it relates to humans. feel free to look up eugenics it's in the dictionary too, being in the dictionary does not make it a valid concept...Also, no, we are not all family. Feel free to look up the definition of the term family as well. You are clearly having trouble with definitions today. Families are groups of people related to each other through blood or marriage within several generations. For example, one's family would be one's parents, children, grandparents, grandchildren, spouse, cousins, aunts, uncles, brothers, sisters, etc.family is a social definition that varies by culture, tribe, clan, village cousin, I had a friend with nine mothers how does that fit in your definition...the determination of who is family and who is not is a cultural decision not biological...we are all genetically related/family.. Edited March 15, 2010 by wyly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 15, 2010 Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 (edited) You should have gotten a visit to the farm so you'd know that if you breed black labs with black labs you get - black labs, while if you breed chocolate labs with chocolate labs you get ... a chocolate lab. Or Biology 12... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genotype-phenotype_distinction Edited March 15, 2010 by DogOnPorch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 15, 2010 Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 I had a friend with nine mothers how does that fit in your definition... As impossible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted March 15, 2010 Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 Doesn't anyone wonder why folks near the Equator were dark skinned while those in the North tended to be fair skinned? Anymore? No? Are we allowed to think such thoughts? combination of sexual selection and environmental considerations...why does my wife whose family come from near the equator have lighter skin than northern euro I do?...there's another racist fallacy destroyed... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted March 15, 2010 Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 As impossible. no it's fits their cultures definition of family... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 15, 2010 Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 It's impossible for a human being to have nine mothers. That's not how sex works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted March 15, 2010 Report Share Posted March 15, 2010 combination of sexual selection and environmental considerations...why does my wife whose family come from near the equator have lighter skin than northern euro I do?...there's another racist fallacy destroyed... I see...so in your opinion, the Sun has had no effect on human evolution/development. Interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.