|
Post by MaccusGermanis on Feb 6, 2007 17:17:09 GMT -5
Interesting, Do you think all Europeans are from such lineage or do you have a more specific group in mind? Probably not ALL, since there were people in Europe before hand. The majority are and any that were not have been mixed in. That being said, the people that were there in Europe before were the same people, just that they were not from the branch of people, ie. the Israelites that the blessings, promises and covenant were made. All that live within the walls of these people are indirectly blessed. More blessed than Christians of other nationalities? What good is such old covenant lineage if the persons of that lineage are not observant of the covenant? How can such people expect greater blessings than a Christian that chooses to adhere to the covenant?
|
|
|
Post by blondie on Feb 6, 2007 17:17:57 GMT -5
I think all races have genetic differences that exhibit advantages but I don't subscribe to the thought one race is superior. Phinehas, looks like you're getting it from all sides. The whole concept of "race" is a racist construct. Race only exists in peoples' minds. You can divide humans up any way you want to, but why? To make value judgments between them. One obvious rebuttal to the old Bell Curve idea is that the caste system in India produced all the distinctions of "race" within a "race." Also the Irish used to be thought of as stupid and committed a lot of crime compared to the English. Are they different races? Personally I believe I have more in common with somebody I grew up with here in Alabama than some European.
|
|
|
Post by MaccusGermanis on Feb 6, 2007 17:25:09 GMT -5
The whole concept of "race" is a racist construct. Race only exists in peoples' minds. You can divide humans up any way you want to, but why? To make value judgments between them. No, in fact races like the scientific classification of birds is a matter of observation. An Oriole does not look like Robin. What racists may forget is that both fly in a similar manner. Also the Irish used to be thought of as stupid and committed a lot of crime compared to the English. Are they different races? I see no reason to perpetuate such stereotypes of Irish, but yes the Irish are distinct from the English. Personally I believe I have more in common with somebody I grew up with here in Alabama than some European. One would think, but then it isn't really that hard to imagine having something in common with an European or for that matter a Persian.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Feb 6, 2007 17:36:35 GMT -5
ok, I'll try this one more time. My premise was this:
"The problem kind of parallels the gay issue in a way. There is a group that would like the acceptance of homosexuality to be the norm but doing so would open up the door for other sexual deviations to be forced into acceptance by the populace. Homosexuality being, like marijuana, the most "reasonable" compared to the other sexual deviations restrained and unaccepted by society in general."
Which means.... Consensual sex with a minor is illegal but because there are people that say they are "born this way", they will use the same exact tactics that the more "reasonable", in a social context, group used, which were represented by the homosexual community. They will say that they are "born" this way, that it is discrimination, that it is nobody's buisness what two consensual people do in the privacy of their own homes. That is what they have been using to push their agenda. I gave you a link that showed exactly that. I didn't say it had to work, just that they think it will work. Based on what society allows, it would not surprise me.
You then stated: "I can think of no other sexual deviation in which the volition of both parties can be assured. Law and morality is not contingent on any eww factor but rather the balance of personal liberties."
The two factors you gave that would prevent this were volition and the fact that the "eww factor" was not sufficient cause for laws.
I then said that NAMBLA was that "other" group on the horizon that would be pushing for tolerance and eventually acceptance, forced or otherwise, via laws.
My point was never that they could prove violition, which I stated many times, my point was that they will try to prove it and based on our P.C. society, they had a shot...a good shot. The other point was that the homosexuals had to get around the "eww" factor AND THEY DID.
What I mean by you be an unwilling shill is that the two REASONS you gave are the two exact things they have concentrated on in pushing their agenda. They can't do it based on a moral argument BUT they can do it based on convincing they are descriminated against and that it is consenual.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Feb 6, 2007 17:45:36 GMT -5
Probably not ALL, since there were people in Europe before hand. The majority are and any that were not have been mixed in. That being said, the people that were there in Europe before were the same people, just that they were not from the branch of people, ie. the Israelites that the blessings, promises and covenant were made. All that live within the walls of these people are indirectly blessed. More blessed than Christians of other nationalities? What good is such old covenant lineage if the persons of that lineage are not observant of the covenant? How can such people expect greater blessings than a Christian that chooses to adhere to the covenant? I didn't make the covenant up...God did. According to the Bible, he choose the Hebrews for a reason. I am in no position to question that. They lost the blessings and were sent into captivity...but it says they became his people again and the blessing returned. The Europeans came out of nowhere and became a great people...up to this day. Deut 7:6-8 6 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth. 7 The LORD did not set his love upon you, nor choose you , because ye were more in number than any people; for ye were the fewest of all people: 8 But because the LORD loved you, and because he would keep the oath which he had sworn unto your fathers, hath the LORD brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you out of the house of bondmen, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt. KJV
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Feb 6, 2007 17:55:26 GMT -5
Written at the end of the first century AD, prior to Nazis, KKK or other groups of this nature or agenda.
2 Esdras 13
[39] And as for your seeing him gather to himself another multitude that was peaceable, [40] these are the ten tribes which were led away from their own land into captivity in the days of King Hoshea, whom Shalmaneser the king of the Assyrians led captive; he took them across the river, and they were taken into another land. [41] But they formed this plan for themselves, that they would leave the multitude of the nations and go to a more distant region, where mankind had never lived, [42] that there at least they might keep their statutes which they had not kept in their own land. [43] And they went in by the narrow passages of the Euphrates river. [44] For at that time the Most High performed signs for them, and stopped the channels of the river until they had passed over. [45] Through that region there was a long way to go, a journey of a year and a half; and that country is called Arzareth. [46] "Then they dwelt there until the last times; and now, when they are about to come again, [47] the Most High will stop the channels of the river again, so that they may be able to pass over. Therefore you saw the multitude gathered together in peace.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Feb 6, 2007 19:02:24 GMT -5
I would add before this specific conversation goes any further, that the beliefs I hold in regards to the more controversial issues I outlined, are a distant second place compared to what I think actually matters in the long run. These things I mentioned just make sense to me in what is written in the Bible in relation to the physical world and historic events but have no bearing in salvation. However, I have found that in no way do they contradict my understanding of the Bible or it's doctrine.
Just wanted to get that out of the way before somebody brings it up.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Feb 6, 2007 19:09:03 GMT -5
I think all races have genetic differences that exhibit advantages but I don't subscribe to the thought one race is superior. Phinehas, looks like you're getting it from all sides. The whole concept of "race" is a racist construct. Race only exists in peoples' minds. You can divide humans up any way you want to, but why? To make value judgments between them. One obvious rebuttal to the old Bell Curve idea is that the caste system in India produced all the distinctions of "race" within a "race." Also the Irish used to be thought of as stupid and committed a lot of crime compared to the English. Are they different races? Personally I believe I have more in common with somebody I grew up with here in Alabama than some European. One can not ignore the facts of history nor the physiological differences between the races. Bone density is different, with the order going from light to heavy...asian, caucasian, african. Hence there are not too many black navy seals and there are very few great white hopes in boxing. There is also the sprinting capabilities on a whole in regards to reflexes that one group dominates over others. These are some of the advantages that are demostrated via the genetic differences.
|
|
|
Post by billt on Feb 6, 2007 19:25:05 GMT -5
after years of hard work, exercise, practice, and weight lifting, this white guy had a 44 inch vertical jump.
it wasnt genetic it was work.....without the hard work the genetics are meaningless when it comes to athletics.
spud webb won the nba dunk title one year.
and larry bird was NOT a very athletic player, not real fast, quick, or jump high, but a brilliant mental game overcame that with anticipation and positioning.
|
|
|
Post by MaccusGermanis on Feb 6, 2007 20:02:42 GMT -5
ok, I'll try this one more time. ...Which means.... Consensual sex with a minor is illegal but because there are people that say they are "born this way", they will use the same exact tactics that the more "reasonable", in a social context, group used, which were represented by the homosexual community. They will say that they are "born" this way, that it is discrimination, that it is nobody's buisness what two consensual people do in the privacy of their own homes. That is what they have been using to push their agenda. I gave you a link that showed exactly that. I didn't say it had to work, just that they think it will work. Based on what society allows, it would not surprise me. I did not need a translation....but it appears you might. Your original language was more clear. Consensual sex with a minor is not just illegal, it is impossible to prove. There is no such thing as consensual sex with a minor. The debate whether homsexuals are born that way has no bearing on their ability to demonstrate the volition of both parties. You then stated: "I can think of no other sexual deviation in which the volition of both parties can be assured. Law and morality is not contingent on any eww factor but rather the balance of personal liberties."The two factors you gave that would prevent this were volition and the fact that the "eww factor" was not sufficient cause for laws. The single distinction is volition. Your personal discomforts have no place in establishing law. I then said that NAMBLA was that "other" group on the horizon that would be pushing for tolerance and eventually acceptance, forced or otherwise, via laws. Actually, you said they would "celebrate" my comments. That is far different from having pointed out the obvious fact that NAMBLA would try to influence lawmaking. No shit. That does not prove why they should "celebrate" the clear distinction of volition among homosexuals that pedophiles can never attain. My point was never that they could prove volition, which I stated many times, my point was that they will try to prove it and based on our P.C. society, they had a shot...a good shot. The other point was that the homosexuals had to get around the "eww" factor AND THEY DID. What the hell? You contradict yourself without even completing a single sentence. "A good shot?" ....to do what?....prove volition?... I thought that was not your point?.....somewhere you've stated that "many times." In fact, you said that my comments gave NAMBLA reason to "celebrate." But they can not prove the volition of their victims. They have no reason to "celebrate" my clear distinction. The "eww factor" is no basis for lawmaking. What I mean by you be an unwilling shill is that the two REASONS you gave are the two exact things they have concentrated on in pushing their agenda. They can't do it based on a moral argument BUT they can do it based on convincing they are discriminated against and that it is consensual. Actually the language that you are not even competent enough to steal is "unwitting" shill, I coined it to surmise your attitude about my position. Of course they are discriminated against, based on the fact that they can never prove the volition of their victims. The only reason NAMBLA should have any cause to celebrate is that people like you seem ignorant of what volition does mean.
|
|
|
Post by MaccusGermanis on Feb 6, 2007 20:10:45 GMT -5
... there are not too many black navy seals Of course there are not "too many" black Navy Seals, we could always use more soldiers trained to that degree.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Feb 6, 2007 20:17:19 GMT -5
after years of hard work, exercise, practice, and weight lifting, this white guy had a 44 inch vertical jump. it wasnt genetic it was work.....without the hard work the genetics are meaningless when it comes to athletics. spud webb won the nba dunk title one year. and larry bird was NOT a very athletic player, not real fast, quick, or jump high, but a brilliant mental game overcame that with anticipation and positioning. There are exceptions but I wasn't speaking about exceptions only the averages.
|
|
|
Post by billt on Feb 6, 2007 20:21:57 GMT -5
ty corny, that is part of MY point...YOU are applying the traits of a given group to ALL individuals within the group and that is FAULTY reasoning.
YOU corny judge people by the often misguided preconceived notion YOU have of their particular grouping in YO(UR mind.
I choose to look at each person as an individual and make no prior assumptions based on the shade of the skin.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Feb 6, 2007 20:27:01 GMT -5
MaccusGermanis,
I think I have proven my premise to be accurate and shown how your statements are related to the NAMBLA agenda in scope. You disagree, which is fine.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Feb 6, 2007 20:29:08 GMT -5
billt - Ignore the fact, that on average, black people have better sprinting and jumping abilities than other races if you want to. I will allow professional sports including the summer olympics to be my proof.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Feb 6, 2007 20:30:23 GMT -5
... there are not too many black navy seals Of course there are not "too many" black Navy Seals, we could always use more soldiers trained to that degree. Oh, sorry, I will re-word it so that my point is made clear to you. There are not many blacks in the Navy Seals.
|
|
|
Post by billt on Feb 6, 2007 20:47:25 GMT -5
not ignoring anything corny, just NOT letting it color my opinions about the individuals i encounter along life's highway.
|
|
|
Post by MaccusGermanis on Feb 6, 2007 21:14:50 GMT -5
MaccusGermanis, I think I have proven my premise to be accurate and shown how your statements are related to the NAMBLA agenda in scope. You disagree, which is fine. More than fine. I am correct. You delude yourself.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Feb 6, 2007 21:18:31 GMT -5
MaccusGermanis, I think I have proven my premise to be accurate and shown how your statements are related to the NAMBLA agenda in scope. You disagree, which is fine. More than fine. I am correct. You delude yourself. Whatever dude.
|
|
|
Post by MaccusGermanis on Feb 6, 2007 21:18:53 GMT -5
Of course there are not "too many" black Navy Seals, we could always use more soldiers trained to that degree. Oh, sorry, I will re-word it so that my point is made clear to you. There are not many blacks in the Navy Seals. Thank you. And yet the claim is still not even anecdotal. How many Navy Seals do you know that are/are not black? I'll even help with your informal survey 0/2. So you may be right.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Feb 6, 2007 21:21:02 GMT -5
not ignoring anything corny, just NOT letting it color my opinions about the individuals i encounter along life's highway. billt, the fact that I think black people on average can run faster than other races doesn't amount to a bunch along life's highways other than I don't kid myself into thinking the odds are in my favor that I can out run any one of them. So, I don't see how you can make this into more than it is.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Feb 6, 2007 21:33:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by MaccusGermanis on Feb 6, 2007 21:44:41 GMT -5
From your first link. With empahsis added. www.cdnn.info/industry/i020819/i020819.html"Minority applicants have graduated from the punishing six-month screening process, which eliminates seven out of every 10 who attempt it, at the same rate as whites, he said." "The problem has been getting them to show up in numbers," said Olson. Many minorities either never considered the SEALs, he said, or believed they had no chance of making it. "The sense that we are an elite force prevented some who had the ability, the potential to serve as SEALs, from starting that journey."
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Feb 6, 2007 22:01:48 GMT -5
I don't care what their P.C. company line is now...the truth is blacks have a harder time in swimming and all things being equal, it's due to their higher bone density and lower body fat percentage. Are you just arguing with me to argue? Because for a smart guy, you sure have a hard time accepting facts. "As we show below, minorities are disproportionately affected by the ASVAB score requirement, the swim test (particularly blacks), and to a much smaller degree, the discipline record." "DEFINING ELIGIBLE POPULATIONS Swimming Requirement One further prerequisite measure needs to be applied before we can fully define the eligible source population. The swimming require- ment is a particularly difficult one for minorities to meet, especially blacks (Brooks and Zazanis, 1997). The Army has made its swimming test largely diagnostic in the sense that failure to pass it at this stage does not disqualify someone from attending the Army Special Forces Assessment and Selection (SFAS) course. However, the swimming requirement is still a hurdle. It is important to note that the Army swimming requirement is considerably less demanding than that of the other services. In addition, as we pointed out, the entry physical requirements for Navy SEALs and the Air Force CCT/PJs are renowned for their difficulty. To pass the swimming portion of the test for SEALs or CCT/PJs requires better-than-average swimming ability and comfort in the water. In the entrance tests for the Army SF, failure rates for blacks for the swim test were almost six times higher than those for whites, accord- ing to Army Research Institute reports (Brooks and Zazanis, 1997). The success rates in passing the BUDS/S selection test given at Great Lakes Training Center show clear differences in the pass rates for blacks and Hispanics (Figure 2.5) compared with that for whites, and again, the swim requirements appeared to be the major hurdle." www.msurotcalumni.org/files/MR1042.chap2_1_.pdf
|
|
|
Post by MaccusGermanis on Feb 7, 2007 17:21:08 GMT -5
I don't care what their P.C. company line is now...the truth is blacks have a harder time in swimming and all things being equal, it's due to their higher bone density and lower body fat percentage. Are you just arguing with me to argue? Because for a smart guy, you sure have a hard time accepting fact. You did provide that link that espoused the supposed "P.C. company line." It was a part of the. "....2 minute glance on the internet ..." which you'd suggested did prove your statements to be true. Did you read the text of the linked article during your 2 minute survey?
|
|
|
Post by blondie on Feb 7, 2007 17:47:48 GMT -5
Ithe truth is blacks have a harder time in swimming and all things being equal, it's due to their higher bone density and lower body fat percentage. Holy S***!
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Feb 7, 2007 17:50:37 GMT -5
MaccusGermanis,
That link I provided was to show the low percentage of blacks in the Seals, nothing more. My whole point was that the numbers are low due to the tough testing done in the water. That blacks have a harder time in the swimming tests is due in part to the genetic facts in regards to high bone density. That is what I stated and that is what I proved.
Since that first link, I gave another link that SHOWED, based on the military data, that blacks had a tougher time in the swimming portion. The overall drop out rate being besides the point and what I consider to be a company line statement.
Hopefully this clears up why my statements were true and that your attempt to prove them wrong has failed.
|
|
|
Post by MaccusGermanis on Feb 7, 2007 18:02:34 GMT -5
Hopefully this clears up why my statements were true and that your attempt to prove them wrong has failed. Can you point to where I directly disputed your claim that black soldiers have difficulty in swimming? I even find it quite plauseable that "higher bone densities" and "lower body fat" are contributory to this difficulty. Not to be discounted is the cultural difference of the importance given to learning to swim. Nor should it be discounted that "higher bone densities" and "lower body fat" could be side effects of activity themselves. Osteologists are able to determine the relative activity of skeletons in life by such indicators. I don't find it offensive to believe that black people have a predisposition to sinking. I just wonder why it is so important to you that you would take such shortcuts in building your argument.
|
|
|
Post by blondie on Feb 7, 2007 18:02:52 GMT -5
Phinehas,
Can you point me toward any legitimate genetic scientists that still believe in the concept of race? I know people use racial terms as shorthand communication.
TEN THINGS EVERYONE SHOULD KNOW ABOUT RACE
Our eyes tell us that people look different. No one has trouble distinguishing a Czech from a Chinese. But what do those differences mean? Are they biological? Has race always been with us? How does race affect people today?
There's less - and more - to race than meets the eye:
1. Race is a modern idea. Ancient societies, like the Greeks, did not divide people according to physical distinctions, but according to religion, status, class, even language. The English language didn't even have the word 'race' until it turns up in 1508 in a poem by William Dunbar referring to a line of kings.
2. Race has no genetic basis. Not one characteristic, trait or even gene distinguishes all the members of one so-called race from all the members of another so-called race.
3. Human subspecies don't exist. Unlike many animals, modern humans simply haven't been around long enough or isolated enough to evolve into separate subspecies or races. Despite surface appearances, we are one of the most similar of all species.
4. Skin color really is only skin deep. Most traits are inherited independently from one another. The genes influencing skin color have nothing to do with the genes influencing hair form, eye shape, blood type, musical talent, athletic ability or forms of intelligence. Knowing someone's skin color doesn't necessarily tell you anything else about him or her.
5. Most variation is within, not between, "races." Of the small amount of total human variation, 85% exists within any local population, be they Italians, Kurds, Koreans or Cherokees. About 94% can be found within any continent. That means two random Koreans may be as genetically different as a Korean and an Italian.
6. Slavery predates race. Throughout much of human history, societies have enslaved others, often as a result of conquest or war, even debt, but not because of physical characteristics or a belief in natural inferiority. Due to a unique set of historical circumstances, ours was the first slave system where all the slaves shared similar physical characteristics.
7. Race and freedom evolved together. The U.S. was founded on the radical new principle that "All men are created equal." But our early economy was based largely on slavery. How could this anomaly be rationalized? The new idea of race helped explain why some people could be denied the rights and freedoms that others took for granted.
8. Race justified social inequalities as natural. As the race idea evolved, white superiority became "common sense" in America. It justified not only slavery but also the extermination of Indians, exclusion of Asian immigrants, and the taking of Mexican lands by a nation that professed a belief in democracy. Racial practices were institutionalized within American government, laws, and society.
9. Race isn't biological, but racism is still real. Race is a powerful social idea that gives people different access to opportunities and resources. Our government and social institutions have created advantages that disproportionately channel wealth, power, and resources to white people. This affects everyone, whether we are aware of it or not.
10. Colorblindness will not end racism. Pretending race doesn't exist is not the same as creating equality. Race is more than stereotypes and individual prejudice. To combat racism, we need to identify and remedy social policies and institutional practices that advantage some groups at the expense of others.
|
|
|
Post by phinehas on Feb 7, 2007 18:09:34 GMT -5
Hopefully this clears up why my statements were true and that your attempt to prove them wrong has failed. Can you point to where I directly disputed your claim that black soldiers have difficulty in swimming? I even find it quite plauseable that "higher bone densities" and "lower body fat" are contributory to this difficulty. Not to be discounted is the cultural difference of the importance given to learning to swim. Nor should it be discounted that "higher bone densities" and "lower body fat" could be side effects of activity themselves. Osteologists are able to determine the relative activity of skeletons in life by such indicators. I don't find it offensive to believe that black people have a predisposition to sinking. I just wonder why it is so important to you that you would take such shortcuts in building your argument. Actually, I really don't know what it is you keep arguing with me about on this, I think you're arguing to argue. as far as WHY I brought up bone density differences? Because it was an answer to billt's comments and that there are differences in people other than the color of their skin or the shape of their nose, etc.
|
|