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.