Even though 'Race' is A Social Construct, Racism Persists

So, are you saying that we should just accept racist ideals? Surely I misunderstood you.

 

You definitely need to read what I posted again... try not to come to any conclusions without help clearly that's beyond you

 

ok, I did misread it, but you didn't have to be so rude about it. I asked to be clear, not to be rude.

 

I was rude because you pushed my buttons... there is NOTHING that annoys me more than posters twisting what you posted. Usually starts with.... "So you are saying" then proceed to completely twist what you posted. To me it appeared as if that was what you were doing.

 

We accept gravity even though people die from falling off ladders all the time.

 

I read 'quit' not 'keep' for some reason. It's probably because of the other people I have been arguing with. I tell you what. I am getting a head ache from it.

To your point, who is on a quest to prove we are all the same? What I am arguing is that genetically we are so close to each other that we should not try to create a false belief that any physical differences we may have translate into a hierarchical classification of biological races.

 

It's lots of fun to play word games with social constructs. The fact is evolution has produced races/subspecies/ethnicities/populations that can be determined genetically and which determine significant biological differences.

You wave your hands frantically trying to obscure this fact because you don't like racism, i.e. for political rather than scientific reasons. Prof. Reich in the article I linked above suggests this is a mistake because advancing scientific advances are going to bowl you over.
-----------------------

 

You would have to shut down genetic research to succeed in that!

"You will sometimes hear that any biological differences among populations are likely to be small, because humans have diverged too recently from common ancestors for substantial differences to have arisen under the pressure of natural selection. This is not true. The ancestors of East Asians, Europeans, West Africans and Australians were, until recently, almost completely isolated from one another for 40,000 years or longer, which is more than sufficient time for the forces of evolution to work."

ibid

 

But still what if you come across a centaur, half man half beast, does this now mean you can discriminate, even if we are vastly different from one another, it should never be grounds for discrimination..I think it's best we learn to embrace differences, not try and make up reasons why we are the same... of course humanity find all sort of reasons to discriminate including religion, not specifically related to our dna.

 

and if people actually took you seriously, they would play with wasp nests.

Hopefully people don't believe you because those buggers do sting, and it really hurts.

 

Your logic - fishes, snakes, monkeys, people have red blood, therefore they are no different.

 

Existence of races does not imply superiority. Which is the superior race of cats?

I'm pretty sure the only animals where races are proven to significantly differ in ability are dogs and horses, and that's only the case because humans bred them to be that way.

 

I usually bring up instances or specific situations. Then, I discuss related facts. You went to a window and screamed that racist should stop being racist. I think you did that because you think it has merit in the fight against racism, but it really is just an attempt to vaguely paint with too broad a brush to exaggerate a fake opponent.

 

Not true, dogs and wolves can interbreed, humans and chimpanzees cannot. And while there may not be any ONE gene that determines race, there are obviously a number of genes that control skin color, skull shape, brain size, relative IQ, susceptibility to disease (sickle-cell anemia, for instance), nose configuration, testosterone levels, hair texture, eye color, etc., which differ among different races. So which is more determinative that there are different races, one gene that controls race or multiple genes which control race?

 

I appreciate your honest debate.
I agree that cultural differences are great. The world would be boring if we were all the same.

My point is that genetically we are not different enough that we should have a system of races or subspecies, and science is where I get this from.

 

Really? Quote me.

If you want to talk inherent value of all species, start another thread. I did not say anything about that. This thread is about us.

 

So, there are different races - blacks, whites, yellows, reds... What's wrong with that? Why is it so hard for you to admit it?

 

The thread is not that long. Go back through it and read the multiple scientific articles I posted.

Race is not real. Why is it so hard to admit that?

 

Not unless the dogs and wolves are in captivity. In the wild wolves will have nothing to do with dogs . Wolves mate for life ,dogs will ' cheat ' on their wolf mates. So they will never live in peace together.
Horses and donkeys don't breed in the wild either, but man will make a mule from them. A mule who be forever sterile so the mixed gene doesn't escape.
Birds never interbred either. Nor do large cats.
When races mix one or the other will dominate and change the culture ,religion and laws of the other.
And that has been going on forever.

 

Because like so much stupidity from the left, it's patently absurd.

 

How does the term "nearly" fit with the concept of exact DNA?

 

So we cannot tell a black from a white by dna analysis? If we can, what is different about the dna? And if we can then there is a difference in dna between races, right? Not much, but still a difference. Enough to tell which group one is from.

 

You just proved my point by constructing your own matrix based on your opinions of these people.

 

I don't think you know how to prove a point, what "matrix" means, or who the people in the picture are. And I didn't construct it, it's a readily available meme on Google.