Printable View
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/w...acial_marriage
I know the source is probably what you eggheads would call "biased" but it still warms the cocklles of my heart to know Mississippi is still Mississippi
And for those of you who think Im just picking on whitey, this poll cut both ways, stupid knows no melanin content
I wouldn't be surprised if such a large percent of people didn't believe in interracial marriage. This country has a lot of stupid people in it. But to want to make it illegal?! That takes a special kind of bigotry. :shame:
I find comfort in knowing that this is the way the world will progress, and they can do nothing but watch and see "mixed race" children becoming the norm.
If that's not the ultimate punishment for racists, I don't know what is.
That would be that the children of racists marry out of their race.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
I am oppossed to mixed-race marriage!!
I mean, what will be next? Fathers marrying their daughters? People marrying their dogs? Marrying lampposts?
Mixed-race marriage will leave the Supreme Court no choice but to legalise polygamy.
:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::l augh::laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat
How can you even like rassenschande? Once races mix the quality of the offspring will decline. I don't think this ban is this stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Not sure if sarcasmQuote:
Originally Posted by Skullheadhq
Huh, the big tea party candidate (Bachmann) also has the most 'tolerant' supporters.
Also, this poll is why government power should be extremely restricted - there are shovel-loads (a technical term) of idiots out there, and giving the government power over your life means you give those voting idiots power over your life.
CR
Not sure if that is a serious comment. But hybridization is normally a positive thing. For instance most pure bred dogs are less healthy over their shorter lifespan then mongrels despite the former normally having access to more resources.
A lot of super models are mixed... so are a lot of babes in the babe thread.
End of the day the purest pure breeding in animals is done by cloning or inbreeding... I don't think either of those would be much fun do you?
I am sure hybridization reduces the genepool in the long run. Some genes will become dominated, no? It should increase the dangers of pandemics in a globalised world, if everyone end up with the same set of active genes (even if we do not, some DNA still faces the threat of becoming inactive, surely). I confident that having different ethnicities is a good thing.
Well, reccessive genes will probably survive on and manifest, but now more as a spread out and more rare cases. So in the case of the global pandemic, that means that the average resistance goes up, while it goes down in some regions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Viking
It slows down the development of subspecies, while having a significant base to have a resilent spicie, since we got some many who get children, with their own variation.
Compare with what we do with breeding, when only a selected few can breed, that would be to have chosen fathers that breeds millions of children. That's good for selective traits, but not for resilence. Ethnicities ends up in between.
That should mean that humanity as a whole benefits from hybridization, unless we're intending to specialize humanity and also your children, as commented above (the mixing reduces the number of poor genes on average).
Irrelevant due to mutation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Viking
You're either a brilliant, brilliant troll, or I'll be able to tell all of my friends at university that I know a Dutch Fascist.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skullheadhq
I fully agree with these people, banning interracial marriage is the only way to preserve a vibrant, tolerant, multilcultural society.
Encouraging interracial marriage is a fascist measure to forcibly incorporate black Africans into the dominant WASP culture. Personally, I find it disgusting.
This is more a factor of poor breed planning than the limited gene pool. If looks are favored over structure and health, you get the abominations some breeds have become.Quote:
Originally Posted by Papewaio
Individual ethnicities tend to have a rather large variation as well. It would be favourable to have parts of societies survive rather than a few individuals here and there. Though, a question is how effective pandemics may become.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ironside
Muations are individual. Ethnical traits belong to...ethnicities. If the relevant recessive gene becomes largely inactive, a few scattered mutations are not going to make a big difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Isn't brilliant a little bit too flattering? Just spicing this thread up. I don't even care about what happens to me tomorrow, how would I care about how the world is 100 years from now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Subotan
....and how, precisely, do you think the various ethnicities came into being?Quote:
Originally Posted by Viking
And please note that the answer "because god created them so" is not an option.
Why not?Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
incorrectQuote:
Originally Posted by Viking
Would you like to spin the wheel again?
Because creationism is the peak of ignorance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skullheadhq
If you have ever eaten some lamb at Easter then you can be sure it was from a hybridQuote:
Originally Posted by Viking
Hybrid Vigor Sheep
Outbreeding and Hybird Vigour
BREEDING PROGRAMS FOR
SHEEP PRODUCTION
Man is an animal too so hybrids must be fine, and it would be practically if not actually impossible to end up with one set of global genes due to hybridization.
And Proposition 8 passed in liberal, Democratic California with 52% of the vote. This has less to do with Mississippi and more to do with the fact that a lot of people have a very specific opinion about what a marriage looks like.
Of course, anti-miscegenation laws are unconstitutional, so such polls from the democratic polling operation, PPP, are just meant to throw mud. Essentially, they want third parties to consciously or subconsciously think "Forget the issues, I don't want to be aligned with the racists, I'll vote Democrat".
Precisely.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skullheadhq
And how would more mixed-race marriages affect that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Skullheadhq
I don't want to be aligned with the socialists, I'll vote Republican. Works both ways buddy.Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger
Genes don't disappear by being dispersed. Genes disappear in populations which encourage some sort of long term inbreeding. If a person has a pair of matching genes, say from multi generation cousin marriages, then their is a gene that has gone missing.
6 billion people with 23 gene pairs... I think it would be very difficult to form one set of a limited gene pair from hybidisation. Essentially to have one set come out of that is like stirring a latte and have it separate into sugar, milk, and an espresso shot. Genes don't disappear when shared by mixing.
I'm Celtic-Scandinavian one brother is blue eyed blonde, the other has hazel eyes and metallic red hair until it went auburn then went. I'm more dark hazel eyed, brown haired and going going gone. The mix of genes has caused quite a variation not hybrid sameness.
That's where the globalisation enters the stage - it would prevent new ethnicities from springing into existence.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Quote:
Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy
I don't think that the word 'hybrid' is a too good word when it comes to describing 'mixing of ethnicities'. In nature, some hybrids are sterile (salmon + trout, for instance) - I have never heard of anything similar when it comes to humans.
What I am having in mind is recessive genes - that certain bits of DNA may largely become inactive because it becomes dominated; that it in once certain ethnicity typically was not dominated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Papewaio
NO U.Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
I would say the same about evolution, but this is not what this thread is about.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Salmon and trout are both fish but there not the same species, hence they are sterile, my use of the word hybrid merely reflected the tenor of the previous poster. Ethnic differences are more like the differ between Saler and Angus cattle, when they interbreed the offspring is not sterile.Quote:
Originally Posted by Viking
Trust me I know what I'm talking about when it comes to cattle.
IIRC you hugged me for something I posted about nationalism in Europe - I would like to return the favour.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
yes becuase that's what this forum is for the mastabatoury expression of the same opinoin where we all stroke eachother for how intellectual we are
got it
It took you since 2005 to find that out? What a slowpoke you are :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
Then you would be wrong. 'Nuff said.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skullheadhq
~:grouphug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Subotan
No, it's about inserting hidden penis jokes. Haven't you figured it out yet...? Man, some people are slooooooooow.... Right, now I'm off to watch Angelina bounce her big boobs around in tight clothes in Tomb Raider. Lateeeeeer....Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
Recessive genes doesn't really disappear. Take being blond for example. That will be reduced early on when mixing etnicies, since you'll get people with 1 blond, 1 brown genes (thus being brown haired). But they won't die out and getting 1/4 of their children as blondes. But since blondes are popular, they will have more children, thus slowly increasing with time anyway. The local recessive gene will thus increase in the total population if considered better, even if it will be expressed more rarely in the early and middle phase of the population mixing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Viking
Blondness is not going to fend off pandemics. The genes that will could actually be a disadvantage outside the its ethnicity of origin. I am not saying that the recessive genes will disappear, but if they are rare, then globalisatoin would mean that they would become scattered and it could become increasingly rare for them to become 'activated', or whatever is the appropriate term.
Dad used to use positive hybridization with Maine Anjou & Angus cattle to good effect.
I'm not so sure that outside of Europe brown hair genes are dominant. I've seen enough Eurasian (half Chinese and half Nordic) kids with light brown to blond hair to wonder about that. Part of it is more that a trait can be effected by a suite of genes not just a single pairing.
End of the day the differences between any one ethnic group is not as large a jump as between the sexes.
.....nor is the jump in difference between two members of different ethnic groups greater than the difference between two members of the same ethnic group.
The cause here is that blond hair is also (strongly) sexually selected for, so it overcomes its recessive status as allele. Tall, (fair) and blond, to be precise.Quote:
Originally Posted by Papewaio
Can't be as recessive as we think it is. First generation European/Asian kids can have anything from black to blonde hair. It might be that what we think of as blonde being recessive is only in comparison to European/Middle East black haired genes. It seems to me that the blond Euopean genes are expressed when mixed with Asian black hair... This indicates something different in the genes that make hair black between Europe and the far east.