Re: Race, Intelligence, and Behavior are Genetic...

Re: Race, Intelligence, and Behavior are Genetic...

theresearcher

From: theresearcher Subject: Re: Race, Intelligence, and Behavior are Genetic... Date: 20 Jan 2005 14:12:24 -0800 "Uh huh. You are, of course, aware that over 10,000 NEGROES are murdered by NEGROES every year in America, right?" "Police have only a vague description of the gunmen. They are described as three black men." ******************************************************************************************** You could look at these facts from the perspective that African Americans are inherently violent and inferior, but you would have to have concrete evidence to prove that the are more violent. Historically, other "races" have been capable of horrible atrocities as well. The case for the biological inferiority of African Americans would be a complex one and cannot be proven with the intermittent accounts and statistics that you are providing. Your argument would have to be much stronger to prove connections in the complexities of human society. >From another perspective, you could see that African Americans have been crippled economically, geographically, physically, and psychologically through systematic racism and oppression. Thus blaming the violence and "inferiority" on them would be like the domestic abuser who blames his/her victim for being inferior after a lifetime of abusing them. You break their knees and them blame them for not being able to walk. In order for you to prove that this latter perspective is untrue, you would have to prove that African Americans have been given equal treatment and opportunities. You would have to prove that racism does not exist. ******************************************************************************************* I'm sure that not many people were aware that the out-of-wedlock birthrate for blacks hovers around 70% ******************************************************************************************* This is under the assumption that having children out of wedlock is a bad thing. If we changed our underlying conception of what a "family" is, then it wedlock and out-of-wedlock wouldn't matter. Consider, for example, the Native American culture who have a different societal structure than our own: "Without property inheritance and without firm notions about the father's qualities being carried through ual intercourse or the blood, ual relations between men and women were conducted without concern about 'illegitimate' offspring. There could be several trial encounters without concern about 'illegitimate' offspring. There could be several trial encounters and temporary unions before a marriage was decided on, and openly acknowledged intercourse withother partners was possible for both husband and wife. When a Huron father was questioned one day by a Jesuit about how, with such practices, a man could know who his son was, the man answered, 'You French love only your own children; we love all the children of our people." - Natalie Zemon Davis 'Iroquois Women, European Women' I'm not suggesting that marriage within wedlock is bad so much as pointing out that your belief that wedlock births are superior to out-of-wedlock births is based upon social agreement that this is so. Thus, other cultures with different social agreements as to what is acceptable may find your need to distinguish wedlock births from out-of-wedlock births rather superfluous.