Rockin' in the free world since 2005.

[Total: 25    Average: 2.4/5]
30 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 14770
Rating: 2.4
Category: Funny
Date: 04/06/12 12:02 PM

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

  1. Profile photo of eugenius
    eugenius Male 30-39
    1620 posts
    April 6, 2012 at 10:01 am
    Link: We`ll Soon Get Past The Trayvon Martin Case - Until that day, there`s going to be a lot of interracial hostility.
  2. Profile photo of collegebound
    collegebound Male 18-29
    3745 posts
    April 6, 2012 at 12:08 pm
    There always has been, is, and will be a lot of "interracial hostility"...

    On a related note. Lol.
  3. Profile photo of BostonKaiser
    BostonKaiser Male 40-49
    1177 posts
    April 6, 2012 at 12:11 pm
    Whoa, you`re not supposed to show blacks being racist. That`s not PC.
  4. Profile photo of ivran
    ivran Male 18-29
    599 posts
    April 6, 2012 at 12:14 pm
    How is this related?
  5. Profile photo of tommy2X4
    tommy2X4 Male 50-59
    3441 posts
    April 6, 2012 at 12:27 pm
    They wanted to see each others peckers. A rooster has two peckers.
  6. Profile photo of xiquiripat
    xiquiripat Male 18-29
    2423 posts
    April 6, 2012 at 12:29 pm
    That`s our word yo.
  7. Profile photo of Buiadh
    Buiadh Male 30-39
    6739 posts
    April 6, 2012 at 12:30 pm
    I don`t understand...
  8. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    31762 posts
    April 6, 2012 at 12:31 pm
    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?
  9. Profile photo of honkeylips
    honkeylips Male 30-39
    1586 posts
    April 6, 2012 at 12:50 pm
    @5cats well he is wearing a hoodie so obviously he`s showing his support, right?
  10. Profile photo of kerryfairy82
    kerryfairy82 Female 18-29
    839 posts
    April 6, 2012 at 1:46 pm
    Somebody please explain wtf this is
  11. Profile photo of kerryfairy82
    kerryfairy82 Female 18-29
    839 posts
    April 6, 2012 at 1:47 pm
    what`s a cracker?
  12. Profile photo of Fatninja01
    Fatninja01 Male 30-39
    25406 posts
    April 6, 2012 at 2:09 pm
    this is stupid....
  13. Profile photo of crash665
    crash665 Male 30-39
    119 posts
    April 6, 2012 at 2:10 pm
    A cracker is a derogatory (maybe?) term for a white person.
  14. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    April 6, 2012 at 2:56 pm
    A cracker is a derogatory (maybe?) term for a white person.

    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.
  15. Profile photo of Revolutioniz
    Revolutioniz Male 18-29
    911 posts
    April 6, 2012 at 3:07 pm
    The root meaning of cracker refers to slave owners, whom used the cracking of a whip to intimidate, and or punish.
  16. Profile photo of soundman655
    soundman655 Male 50-59
    1558 posts
    April 6, 2012 at 3:28 pm
    I like "haystack" better
  17. Profile photo of Nickel2
    Nickel2 Male 50-59
    5879 posts
    April 6, 2012 at 4:06 pm
    Me English! No understand!
  18. Profile photo of faaaaq
    faaaaq Male 18-29
    687 posts
    April 6, 2012 at 6:26 pm
    "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.
  19. Profile photo of Rawrg
    Rawrg Male 18-29
    934 posts
    April 6, 2012 at 6:32 pm
    Oh snap.
  20. Profile photo of aroc91
    aroc91 Male 18-29
    182 posts
    April 6, 2012 at 7:14 pm
    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.
  21. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    April 6, 2012 at 11:59 pm
    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.
  22. Profile photo of aroc91
    aroc91 Male 18-29
    182 posts
    April 7, 2012 at 1:00 am
    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.
  23. Profile photo of robosnitz
    robosnitz Male 40-49
    2737 posts
    April 7, 2012 at 1:35 am
    Coloreds will be coloreds.
  24. Profile photo of robosnitz
    robosnitz Male 40-49
    2737 posts
    April 7, 2012 at 1:36 am
    @Revolutioniz--all whiteys should walk around with whips.It suits them.
  25. Profile photo of Oblivia
    Oblivia Female 18-29
    812 posts
    April 7, 2012 at 2:11 am
    He`s just asking if he wants a cracker!
  26. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    April 7, 2012 at 6:22 am
    Just because a distinction can be made doesn`t mean it`s a reason to pass judgement.

    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.
  27. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    April 7, 2012 at 6:44 am
    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?
  28. Profile photo of alpensepp
    alpensepp Male 70 & Over
    1364 posts
    April 7, 2012 at 7:26 am
    stop being such a cultural marxist angilion. the muslims will come and get you.
  29. Profile photo of aroc91
    aroc91 Male 18-29
    182 posts
    April 7, 2012 at 9:57 am
    "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
  30. Profile photo of Bountykat
    Bountykat Female 18-29
    399 posts
    April 10, 2012 at 7:41 pm
    Bahahahaha, hilarious.

Leave a Reply