Race only skin deep - S.J. STUDENTS DISCOVER GENETIC LINK

Mercury News ^ | Mon, Feb. 09, 2004 | Katherine Corcoran

[CobaltBlue]

More than half of the class at San Jose's Piedmont Hills High School, students from numerous racial and ethnic backgrounds, are linked in their DNA to the same ancestor, born more than 100,000 years ago in central China or Taiwan.

[VOA]

Christians, and particularly creationists, have been saying this for centuries.
(Genesis 11) It is not a startling discovery.

Paul tried to explain this concept to the brainiacs of Athens, but like today's molecular
biologists (with exceptions like Collins of the Human Genome Project), they just don't
have low tolerance for even letting others hold ideas about unseen things.
This reminds me of a famed astronomer/space scientist (Janklow?) who said (something like)
that the longer he studied the cosmos, he was beginning to believe that as
he cleared the last crest of the last hill in his career...he'd meet some philosophers
priests and monks who already had all the answers.
(and I guess the good graces to ask him "What took you so long?")

ACTS 17
22 Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens,
I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious.
23 For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription,
TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.
24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven
and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;
25 Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he
giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;
26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the
face of the earth,
and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him,
and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:
28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own
poets have said, For we are also his offspring.

[Cronos]

Quite right. Science is proving whatChristians have known for a very very long time -- we're all the same, God's people.

[Dan Evans]

Does being a minority make it OK? Nope, it doesn't. You can't compare that to Nazis who were majority groups discriminating against a minority.

I don't think it makes any difference. Racial terrorism is the same whether done by a majority or a minority because it leads to the same thing -- racial groups at each other's throat. When Al Sharpton incites arson that is no different than a bunch of Nazi brown-shirts doing the same thing.

[Dan Evans]

Yeah, but the millions who come here are, generally, planning to assimilate not to conquer and throw out the original inhabitants (i.e. us).

What's that Hispanic group in California that wants to do exactly that? There was a poll taken in Mexico and it turns out most Mexicans think the half the US rightfully belongs to Mexico.

I think Western Civilization has backed out of Africa because we realized their is no way we could coexist with the indigenous population and maintain civilized Western ideals. We simply don't have the stomach to do what we would need to do.

[Dan Evans]

Mating trends? Huh?

Yes, whites tend to mate with whites in the South even though their schools are racially integrated. Jews try to marry into intelligence and money. It's a form of self-breeding whether they know it or not.

Not all groups value the same traits. You might think that people, when given a chance, would rationally accept opportunities for education and advancement but there are people who disdain intelligence and education. In England most young people in the lower classes will not accept a chance for higher education. They would consider that to be a traitorous to their class. I've been told that kids in Eskimo tribes in Alaska rarely accept scholarships. Also the hip-hop culture in our inner cities discourage scholarship -- and "acting white" is not the way to get a girl.

It isn't axiomatic that people will always mate within their own group. If enough of them don't, they merge and create a new group. What we call the Hispanics in Mexico are the result of breeding with the native Indians, the black slaves and the Spanish. But the whites who didn't rule the country.

Since the personality traits tend to be inherited, the tendency to stay in one's own tribe will be reinforced. Especially if the person's group is in a lower socioeconomic status -- people who leave the group will not be inclined to live in the old neighborhood.

[Dan Evans]

So, you want to stop hiring a person just because he's black and you want blacks to stop hire whites?

No, but I don't want to take away that right by allowing laws that ban it. We don't need laws that ban racial discrimination. And we don't need laws that allow the state to discriminate or force people to discriminate. (As Ann Coulter has pointed out, the Democrats have always been the party of racial discrimination. Before they joined the civil rights movement, it was not uncommon for Democrats to be KKK members. But now they support discrimination against whites and Asians).

We don't need to ban discrimination because businesses have to do what is in their best economic interest. Under Apartheid in South Africa there were laws against hiring blacks, but since there were as many intelligent blacks as there were whites, economic pressure forced companies to find ways around the laws.

In the US blacks did not gain entry into the music, sports and film industry because of civil rights laws or because of discrimination lawsuits. It was changing social attitudes that did it.

But if we have civil and criminal laws against discrimination we enter an Orwellian society that prosecutes people for "de-facto" segregation. We try to discern what is in a man's mind. The racial balance of the workplace becomes an issue. The way he phrased a comment about Kwanzi becomes an issue. The thought police become more powerful.

[Cronos]

What's that Hispanic group in California that wants to do exactly that?

I know that. That's why I said "generally". Again, the Mexicans CAN flourish in our climate. Pale skins have found it hard to live in sub-saharan Africa, unless they become brown (and over generations you CAN see that in some S Africans and Australians)

[Cronos]

No, but I don't want to take away that right by allowing laws that ban it

That does clarify your viewpoint. When you say We don't need laws that ban racial discrimination. you will agree that we NEEDED those laws in the 50s and 60s when there was very institutionalised discrimination. Now, well, maybe not in most places but there are still some places which discriminate. However, most new generations are meritocracy based and color blind, so maybe now is the time or maybe in the next few generations.

[Dan Evans]

we NEEDED those laws in the 50s and 60s when there was very institutionalised discrimination. Now, well, maybe not in most places but there are still some places which discriminate.

Blacks had opportunities to go to college long before the civil rights laws were passed. Yes, there are places that still discriminate. For example the University of Michigan, the Federal government and a zillion other places that give preference to women and minorities. The civil rights act of 1964 forbids maintaining records or inquiring of race. Too bad they don't enforce it.

No, it was sufficient to strike down laws that discriminate. But why replace laws that discriminate with more laws that discriminate? We don't need laws and court judgments that demand discrimination. Hopefully the tide is turning on affirmative action but that could change. Let Thomas Sowell explain how cruel affirmative action is.

We should be allowed to have Jewish schools or Christian schools or all-black schools or all-white schools if people want. And, no, the government shouldn't give them money (I don't think we need government support of schools at all).

If a little old lady in Chicago wants to advertise in the paper for a white, live-in, Christian handyman, she should be allowed to do that without getting clobbered by the city civil rights goons.

[Dan Evans]

Again, the Mexicans CAN flourish in our climate. Pale skins have found it hard to live in sub-saharan Africa

Pale skin people have been living in Colorado for over a hundred years and we get more sunlight than they do in South Africa where sunburn is the least of their problems. Things like baby rapists, murder and government confiscation of property are more of a concern.

[Cronos]

or all-black schools or all-white schools if people want.

So, you support segregation. So if tomorrow there's a school only for blacks, you're okay with it? SAy the army also has segregation and colleges and universities too and so we have 5 or 7 different streams -- for blacks, whites, white hispanics, black hispanics, East Asians, West Asians, Native Americans etc. etc.

[Cronos]

Blacks had opportunities to go to college long before the civil rights laws were passed.

So, you're saying a black man could get into say Harvard in the 1930s if he had good scores? And this is at the same time that he had to join separate black regiments in the army.

[Cronos]

No, it was sufficient to strike down laws that discriminate.

Ok, the laws that said you couldn't disbar a person because they were black were struck down. So, if you DO disbar a person because they're black, isn't that wrong?

[Cronos]

For example the University of Michigan, the Federal government and a zillion other places that give preference to women and minorities.

you're answering questions with questions. Blacks were discriminated against in the 50s and 60s and into the 70s. Do you agree with that or not?

[cyborg]

I laughed when I read that.

[Cronos]

You said :Caucasians at one time or another colonized most of Africa (by boat, not through the Sahara) yet they are 1% of the population there. America was also a colony yet Caucasians are 75% of the population here. What was the difference?
To which I replied < font color = blue> In Africa, the entire continent was colonized only in the 1800s. There was already a substantial population there. . Then you said :
There is already a substantial population here in America but that doesn't stop millions of people from coming here. I think people go to places because it is a better place to live than where they lived before. And one of the things that make a place is the kind of people who live there. You are usign wrong comparisons AGAIN.

We're talking about colonising in the 1800s in the time of Empires and national will behind colonising. When the Europeans came to the Americas they had the entire weight of their goverments behind them, actively looking for new land for their people not trade. Africa was KNOWN to European states right from the time of Carthage and the Phoenicians. Europeans went to Arfica with the express aim of TRADE, got that TRADE, makign money. They came to the Americas to create Empires to get imperial land, not just to strip the country of it's wealth and leave. The only exception to this was the Boers.

Furthermore, where do you get the statistics to say: Caucasians at one time or another colonized most of Africa (by boat, not through the Sahara) yet they are 1% of the population there. ? huh? Africa's population == 700 million. Population of South Africa = 42 million (ww.cia.gov) white 13.6 % = 5.712 million. Then, in the rest of SUB-SAHARAN africa, (Zimbabwe, Botswqana, Namibia etc.) probably another million. THen, NORTH AFRICA, ARABs, BErbers etc. All CAUCASIANS. Egypt itself has 74 million people. Plus you've got the numerous Indians all over Africa as that continents' merchant class. So we put the number of caucasians at a conservative 120 million -- that's nearly 20% of the population of Africa, so nearly 20% of Africa is CAUCASIAN in population and in the case of North Africa have been so for thousands of years

[Cronos]

Furthermore, your statement Caucasians at one time or another colonized most of Africa (by boat, not through the Sahara) yet they are 1% of the population there. America was also a colony yet Caucasians are 75% of the population here. What was the difference?

What's the difference? Let's see, Europeans set up colonies in America in the late 1490s early 1500s. European colonies in Africa only really open up in the 1800s.

Next, most of the native population in America die due to diseases brought over to which they are not immune. Ont he contrary, native Africans are immune to many diseases native to Africa that the Europeans were NOT immune to.

Next, North America was very very sparsely populated, so many tribes got wiped out completely by these new diseases like smallpox. Most Europeans could barely stay in the Tropics for a few years before dying.

Finally, where could the europeans have moved to? Climates suitable to them, with a small native population and In the 1800s. America? Already done. Australia? Criminal colony and it's too much of a desert. North Africa? Already got native kingdoms and Empires -- the French only captured Algeria in 1831. Saharan Africa? Why? It's just a desert. The Tropical belt of Africa? Too disease ridden. The only part where Europeans COULD settle was in South Africa -- South Africa, Zimbabwe. Namibia isn't much for farming but has good diamond mines. Does THAT answer your question why there are more Caucasians in America than in Africa?

[Cronos]

We should be allowed to have Jewish schools or Christian schools or all-black schools or all-white schools if people want. And, no, the government shouldn't give them money (I don't think we need government support of schools at all).

Again you're mixign up two things -- religion and the idea of race. Sure, have a Christian, Muslim, Budhhist, Jewish school to teach the faith if you're willing to pay for it. Someone want sot attend a Jewish school? Convert. Then you say all-black schools. suppose a White guy wants to join? Can he convert? Can he use boot polish? Hah!

That's cutting off people on thigns they can't change.
Let's have a school where only people 5'8" and above are allowed. Dwarves are not allowed -- they're only good for wrestling and for being mocked at in amusement fairs. Discriminatory? H*** yeah! How can you discriminate against a person based on somethign they cannot change? A person who short can't change that fact about themselves. A person who's white can't make himself black. THey can try to be the best in their field even if it is dominated by people of a different type -- Murphy whatever in basketball or even the few white players in the NBA.

[Cronos]

Pale skin people have been living in Colorado for over a hundred years and we get more sunlight than they do in South Africa where sunburn is the least of their problems.

yeah, the country of SOUTH Africa which is NOT part of the Tropics. What about Kenya or the Congo or Cameroon? CAn whites survive well there? Not really, not for the first 10 odd generations.

[montag813]

Why would it be a shock that students in this majority-Asian class have a common ancestor?