Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
You tell me. You're the racist.
I'm saying there ain't any and my evidence is the geneticists.
If race doesn't exist.
- Thread starter BattleofHodow
- Start date
You tell me. You're the racist.
I'm saying there ain't any and my evidence is the geneticists.
You tell me. You're the racist.
I'm saying there ain't any and my evidence is the geneticists.
Confusing. You say there is no such thing as race but you don't know what race is? How do you know it doesn't exist if you don't know what it is?
If you are just citing geneticists, what do they mean by race if it doesn't exist? If it doesn't exist, how am I a racist (or is that just something used to degrade people)? It would seem you have to know what something is if you are going to determine whether it exists or not.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Post your phone number and I'll be happy to read both links to you.
None of the posts define what race is. They only say it doesn't exist but we don't know what it is that doesn't exist.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
We? Who is "we"? I know you have a definition since you are a racist but since I accept there are no "races" as shown by geneticists, I don't have one.
From what I can tell, you loosely define races as different groups of people differentiated by the paper bag test and nose shape. How many different races do you believe exist? Are some better than others?
What is a racist? You must know the answer to this since you think they exist.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
A person like you who believes human beings are divided into races...whatever that may be.
If there are different races, are some superior to others? What race is Barack Obama? Colin Kaepernick? Do you believe one drop of one race makes a person of that race?
Please define how you break down human beings into racial groups.
IBDaMann
Well-known member
Leftists are the ones who HATE basically everyone, but most of all, they loathe themselves. Remember the leftist motto: "We're not happy until you're not happy." They spend their day thinking of new and better ways, in their own minds at least, to justify killing living humans who have not committed any crime for no other reason than for someone else's convenience. If HBO ever wants material for a comedy special, they should just talk to Frank Apisa and Phantasmal about whether it is OK to just kill living humans. They are, of course, self-loathing leftists.
Leftists want all law-abiding citizens to just be lined up and shot like NAZI prisoners, after having been forcibly rendered defenseless. Great spokespeople for leftists on this issue are guno and ThatOwlCoward. All they want is for your children and mine to be mowed down by whatever crazies happen to be wandering by, because leftists have classified defending children, and protecting them, as practically a capital offense. I bet they cackle whenever there's a mass shooting in a defenselessness zone (I know, that's redundant ... all mass shootings occur in leftist-created defenselessness zones) and then they roll on the floor laughing at conservatives for having failed to thwart leftists and to prevent the mass shooting from having happened in the first place. Then leftists go out and blame the conservatives for the shooting that leftists ensured was completely optimized for the shooter's convenience and effectiveness. Finally, leftists use the deaths to build on this success of theirs to create more defenselessness zones. Leftists are shitty that way. Hey, HATERS are gonna HATE.
Nope. It's the stupid leftists, such as yourself, who HATE and then project their HATE onto those who don't hate. Leftists are forever assigning bogus positions onto people who do not hold those positions because it's all leftists can do to have something to attack. Leftists have virtue-signaling revivals in which they shout "RACIST!, RACIST! RACIST!, RACIST! RACIST!, RACIST! RACIST!, RACIST! RACIST!, RACIST! RACIST!, RACIST! RACIST!, RACIST!" repeatedly for hours on end ... then they go out into the real world and put their training to the test.
Why isn't AProudLefty jumping in here to remind you that "saying so doesn't make it so"? Is that because AProudLefty is also a leftist, which makes him a hypocrite? Answer: Yes it does.
Nordberg, thanks for chiming in. Could you throw me a bag of peanuts while you're there? It's always a pleasure deciphering your ... well, we'll call them "regurgitations." They're always fun.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
You should consider treatment, Sybil. You could be at peace...and the voices would stop.I AM PSYCHOTIC
LIVING IN A PSYCHO WORLD
SYBIL THE SYCHO
It would also help you to stop hating millions of innocent American men, women and children.
IBDaMann
Well-known member
Apparently you don't understand. Your point was falsified. "Race" is only a notional political pigeonhole used to control people. For any two supposedly different "races" there are two people who are much closer genetically than between two "typical" people of the same "race."
You can't identify similarities amongst biological "races" because there aren't any biological "races." Prove me wrong. How can my children identify their individual "races"? If my children arrive at a speculation of whatever race they suspect they are, how can they verify said speculation? How can my children verify that they are all of the same race, or all of different races, or whatever?
How about this one: Which biological researcher established the biological taxonomy of human races, and where can I get this listing?
These questions need to be answered first. So no, at the moment there are no biological similarities between so-called "races." There are no "races."
If we take three groups:
1 One consists of Chinese, Japanese, Koreans
2. Another consists of people from Sub-Saharan Africa
3. The third consists of people from the U. S., Canada, Great Britain, and other European countries.
How would you describe each group if you were identifying them in the simplest terms possible.
What makes you think one of those groups is superior or inferior to another? Why would that even be an issue in identifying groups? Unless you are trying to politicize a simple biological classification.
Nobody can have "one drop" of blood from another. They can obviously be a mixture of different groups.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Their geographical origin as you just did. Why? How would you describe them? In "racial" terms? Paper bag test and a nose shape test?
I don't. You're the racist. I asked you and you dodged the question. Interesting.
No shit. So tell me the race of Barack Obama and why you believe he belongs to that "race". I already asked you once and you dodged the question. I'm curious to see you run from it again.
1. When you complete the census form, what "social construct" do you check for yourself?
What is this person's race? (you may report more than one race).
White
Black or African-American
Asian
American Indian or Alaska Native
Native American or other Pacific Islander
Some Other Race
Are you of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin?
2. On what basis do you choose that "social construct"?
3. Do you think your "social construct" is superior to the others you did not choose?
Obama would check both Black or African-American and White.
The Census Bureau, Center for Disease Control, Military, and other government agencies seem to think race exists. That must make them racist according to you.
Last edited:
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Other. Are you saying race isn't genetic, but only a social construct, Flash? So far you've been very evasive, so I doubt you'll answer this question.
2. Thank you for surrendering your genetic racism and embraced that "races" are culture. People can choose, but mainly I think they live in the one they are raised. Kapernick being an exception.
3. It depends upon the area of superiority. The West is more technologically superior compared to the Southern Hemisphere and Middle East. The West is also more human rights superior compared to less developed nations. Less developed nations tend to have more family-oriented and religious cultures. That said, take a 100 babies from the West and put them in the less developed nations and take a 100 babies from those nations and place them with families in the West. The results prove that the babies grow up to become part of the cultures in which they are raised.
I used "social construct" in quotation marks because somebody did not just make up the concept. There are physical and biological differences we can identify.
There is no question babies become part of the culture in which they are raised. However, that does not mean those babies do not have physical features that allow them to be identified and distinguished from other members of that culture who are native to that area.
Those physical features are not the same as culture. An African-American can be put in China, France, or Greenland. He will be living in a different culture but he will still be an African-American.
You failed to answer what you choose when completing such forms and why you choose it.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
You define race by superficial characteristics. To paraphrase Martin Luther King, you judge people by their superficial appearances and not their character.
You're proving yourself to be both evasive and either a liar or stupid. "Other" is an option. It varies on forms. Some have "choose not to answer", others have "mixed" or a blank line.
Tiger Woods is a Cablinasian yet the racistss like yourself want to label him "black" just like you want to label Obama as "black" despite the fact he's well over 50% "white". I'm an American Heinz 57...and not a hyphenated one either. LOL Unfortunately, like "Cablinasian", it's not among most choices so I usually mark "other".
IBDaMann
Well-known member
Stupid comment. Of course it was just made up. How do you think the term was first coined?
There are identifiable differences between any two people. Therefore there is a race for each human. There the term is meaningless.
Like I said, a different "race" for each person. Stupid.
There's no official listing of "races" I see.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Oooh! Another cute couple in the making.
I'll bow out while you two canoodle with each other. LOL
Guno צְבִי
We fight, We win, Am Yisrael Chai
Invention of the white race
Why would you label Tiger a Cablinasian? That is a mixture of different "races." I did not label Obama as black. I said he would check "black or African-American" and "white." What percent white he is does not change anything. You say race does not exist and then describe Tiger and Obama in terms of race.
Yes, race is largely superficial although identifiable by DNA and skeletal features. It is not culture.
You want to make race something that is more complex than it has to be. If a white Irish girl is brought up in China as an infant by a Chinese family, she will conform to Chinese culture; but, she is still a white girl and all Chinese can identify her as such. Her race is not the same as her culture.
You are also evasive by using "other" but not putting anything else.
Do you oppose the census, schools, employers, etc. from collecting racial data for using when determining diversity, affirmative action....?