We`ll Soon Get Past The Trayvon Martin Case [Pic]

Submitted by: eugenius 4 years ago Funny

Until that day, there"s going to be a lot of interracial hostility.
There are 30 comments:
Female 399
Bahahahaha, hilarious.
0
Reply
Male 182
"And the distinctions between individuals within "races" are greater than those between "races". So why do you consider the latter cause for classification and not the former? Because you`ve been taught to. It`s normal."

Look up Lewontin`s fallacy and Edwards` critique of it. General homogeneity does not preclude the existence of group-specific gene combinations.

Regarding CCR5- No one group has interbred enough to make this mutation significant enough that you can identify somebody`s heritage with it, unlike Ashkenazi Jews and their susceptibility to Tay-Sachs. If you took a couple hundred people with a high prevalence of CCR5 mutation and put them on an island for 2000 years, it would be a different story.

Also, your suntan line is flawed, as skin tone is determined genetically and research has been done to discover the prevalence of certain alleles in certain populations.

http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Human_skin_color
0
Reply
Male 1,364
stop being such a cultural marxist angilion. the muslims will come and get you.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
On top of that, in practice "race" is defined by wildly inaccurate descriptions of how much suntan people have or by whatever criteria any given speaker wants to use (e.g. nationality). It`s not defined by the relative prevalence of a few diseases or a small variation in a few genes.

Here`s an example and a question:

The delta 32 mutation of the CCR5 gene has a significant effect on susceptibility to some diseases, as I`m sure you know.

So, if you`re telling the truth about how you define race (at least partly) in terms of susceptibility to disease, you should classify people with the CCR5 delta 32 variant as being a seperate race to people without it. Do you? Does anyone?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Just because a distinction can be made doesn`t mean it`s a reason to pass judgement.[/quote]

And the distinctions between individuals within "races" are greater than those between "races". So why do you consider the latter cause for classification and not the former? Because you`ve been taught to. It`s normal.

You`ve argued that the existence of breeds of dogs proves the validity of classifying humans by "race" and your initial argument was merely silly name-calling. You`re in no position to be claiming the intellectual high ground here.
0
Reply
Female 812
He`s just asking if he wants a cracker!
0
Reply
Male 2,737
@Revolutioniz--all whiteys should walk around with whips.It suits them.
0
Reply
Male 2,737
Coloreds will be coloreds.
0
Reply
Male 182
Don`t try to school me on genetics. Unless you have more education on the subject than a biology degree from a private college ranking in the top 8% of all accredited American schools, don`t think you know something I don`t.

The qualifier "however superficial they are" negates your entire argument. A relative lack of variation doesn`t mean there isn`t any variation at all. I`d appreciate it if you didn`t overlook my arguments, like the ethnic group-specific diseases.

I don`t know what your agenda is, but if you`re going to lie and say that particular allele frequencies aren`t clustered, I don`t really know what to say. Like I said before, don`t misconstrue this. Just because a distinction can be made doesn`t mean it`s a reason to pass judgement. It`s just anthropology, plain and simple. There`s nothing inherently wrong with it.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
aroc91, such a shame you so clearly revealed your utter lack of reasonable argument by pulling out the PC card.

Read up on genetics. One of the more noticeable things about the human gene pool is how small it is in comparison with most species. That`s why it`s generally thought that all humans alive today descend from a relatively small number of humans a relatively short time ago - that explanation fits the quite remarkable lack of variation in humans.

The trivial differences that you consider important enough to categorise humans by simply aren`t.

A comparison with dog breeds just makes you look silly. There are very large variations between dog breeds, in part because humans have made them.

If you find one "race" of people who average 80 times the mass of another "race" of people, well, I`ll be surprised.

You can shut some people up with your weak hand of bullpoo cards, but not me.
0
Reply
Male 182
Angilion, stop being politically correct for the sake of being politically correct, even when it`s not necessary.

If you recognize that different dog breeds exist, you should recognize that different races of humans exist, however superficial they are.

Distinct phenotypic differences between people from different regions aren`t just coincidental. Even if we haven`t identified the genes yet, everything can be explained genetically and epiginetically. The presence of ethnic group-specific diseases trumps your attempt at PCness.

Note: That doesn`t mean one race is superior to another. Don`t misconstrue this.
0
Reply
Male 934
Oh snap.
0
Reply
Male 694
"race doesnt exist"
biggest load of crap ive heard in a LONG time. Also, words are only derogatory if you take them that way. so stop being little bitches about words and cracker and the n-word will die off. Make a big deal about them and the people who want to be mean will use them more because they know it bothers you.
0
Reply
Male 5,874
Me English! No understand!
0
Reply
Male 1,558
I like "haystack" better
0
Reply
Male 911
The root meaning of cracker refers to slave owners, whom used the cracking of a whip to intimidate, and or punish.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]A cracker is a derogatory (maybe?) term for a white person.[/quote]

No "maybe" about it. The whole purpose of the word is to be a racist insult. Of course, that doesn`t necessarily mean it`s always used as an insult. Insulting words can be used in a friendly, even loving context. But probably not between strangers in a chatroom.

The whole issue is insane, and I really do mean "insane". Race doesn`t really exist anyway, at least not in humans. Hatred, or even just dislike and distrust, based solely on arbritrary and obviously inaccurate descriptions of how much suntan people have. Bona fide insanity.
0
Reply
Male 119
A cracker is a derogatory (maybe?) term for a white person.
0
Reply
Male 25,416
this is stupid....
0
Reply
Female 839
what`s a cracker?
0
Reply
Female 839
Somebody please explain wtf this is
0
Reply
Male 1,586
@5cats well he is wearing a hoodie so obviously he`s showing his support, right?
0
Reply
Male 36,556
Every few months the MSM, at the direction of the Democrats, whip up racial haterd with one FAKE story or another, so yeah! Interracial hostility is going to be part of everyday life in the USA for quite some time to come.

AND wtf does this post have to do with Martin?
0
Reply
Male 6,737
I don`t understand...
0
Reply
Male 2,422
That`s our word yo.
0
Reply
Male 3,474
They wanted to see each others peckers. A rooster has two peckers.
0
Reply
Male 599
How is this related?
0
Reply
Male 1,204
Whoa, you`re not supposed to show blacks being racist. That`s not PC.
0
Reply
Male 3,745
There always has been, is, and will be a lot of "interracial hostility"...

On a related note. Lol.
0
Reply
Male 1,620
Link: We`ll Soon Get Past The Trayvon Martin Case [Pic] [Rate Link] - Until that day, there`s going to be a lot of interracial hostility.
0
Reply