Sexism and racism are not supported by science. Racial purity, espoused by racists of all stripes whether it be the Klu Klux Klan, The American Indian movement or any other racist hate group is not advantageous For example,. The more unlike you are to your mate the less likely your offspring are going to be to get a genetic disease. The less like you are to your mate the less likely your offspring are to get a disease caused by homozygous recessive genes, like, say, cystic fibrosis, because your mate is more likely to have a dominant allele at that locus that will be expressed rather than another recessive allele for the disease, which will result in the disease being expressed. So, “race mixing,” is what is actually advantageous, not racial purity. Sexism is not supported by science either. Feminists claim we all start out as female, therefore males are mutants of females and therefore, they are inferior. However, pick up any grade 10 biology book and you’ll learn what makes someone male or female is the sex chromosome they inherit from their father. If you inherit an X chromosome from your father, you will be female, and if you inherit a Y chromosome from your father, you will be male and there is nothing, and I mean nothing, that changes an X chromosome into a Y-chromosome. Therefore, racism and sexism are not supported by science.
Which begs the question .... why are Progressives currently the most racist and sexist people in the western world? They claim to be all 'science and fact'.
Progressives. for the most part, are scientifically illiterate. Progressives believe completely in things in the complete absence( or almost the complete absence of evidence) in the presence of overwhelming contradictory evidence, even For example, things like: Sugar is better for you than artificial sweeteners, Smoking marijuana is healthy, Almost every aspect of alternative medicine, and the really disturbing one, GMO's are harmful to people and the environment. The last one is pretty disturbing because a GMO exists right now that could prevent deaths of 700,000 children under the age of 5 each year. However progressive groups like Greenpeace appose it so it's not being grown. and GMO's are better, not worse, for the environment. GMO's require less fertilizer and no tillage. The combination of fertilizer and tillage used in conventional crops results in eutrophication of waterways. Eutrophication results in oxygen depletion and kills marine life.
Um, no. One of the reasons why science says races aren't a real thing is that there is more genetic diversity within a "racial group" than there are between "racial groups". You're actually buying into a misconception about racial differences to reach your conclusion. http://www.nytimes.com/2000/08/22/science/do-races-differ-not-really-genes-show.html Hence "race mixing" is not going to help you avoid genetic disease.
