Org Mobile Site
Thread: Mississippi <3
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 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. 
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.
If that's not the ultimate punishment for racists, I don't know what is.
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
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.If that's not the ultimate punishment for racists, I don't know what is.
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.
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.
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat:
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.
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.
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
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.
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.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.
Originally Posted by Skullheadhq:
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.
Not sure if sarcasmHow can you even like rassenschande? Once races mix the quality of the offspring will decline. I don't think this ban is this stupid.
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
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?
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.
Originally Posted by Viking:
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. 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.
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).
Originally Posted by Viking:
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.
Irrelevant due to mutation.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.
Originally Posted by Skullheadhq:
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.
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.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.
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.
Encouraging interracial marriage is a fascist measure to forcibly incorporate black Africans into the dominant WASP culture. Personally, I find it disgusting.
Originally Posted by Papewaio:
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.
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.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.
Originally Posted by Ironside:
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.
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).
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.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.
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).
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
Irrelevant due to mutation.
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.Irrelevant due to mutation.
Originally Posted by Subotan:
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.
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.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.
Originally Posted by Viking:
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.
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.
....and how, precisely, do you think the various ethnicities came into being? 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.
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.
And please note that the answer "because god created them so" is not an option.
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
....and how, precisely, do you think the various ethnicities came into being?
And please note that the answer "because god created them so" is not an option.
Why not?....and how, precisely, do you think the various ethnicities came into being?
And please note that the answer "because god created them so" is not an option.
Originally Posted by Viking:
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.
incorrectI 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.
Would you like to spin the wheel again?
Originally Posted by Skullheadhq:
Why not?
Because creationism is the peak of ignorance.Why not?
Originally Posted by Viking:
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.
If you have ever eaten some lamb at Easter then you can be sure it was from a hybridI 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.
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".
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".
Originally Posted by Skullheadhq:
Isn't brilliant a little bit too flattering? Just spicing this thread up.
Precisely.Isn't brilliant a little bit too flattering? Just spicing this thread up.
Originally Posted by Skullheadhq:
I don't even care about what happens to me tomorrow, how would I care about how the world is 100 years from now.
And how would more mixed-race marriages affect that?I don't even care about what happens to me tomorrow, how would I care about how the world is 100 years from now.
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger:
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".
I don't want to be aligned with the socialists, I'll vote Republican. Works both ways buddy.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".
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.
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.
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
....and how, precisely, do you think the various ethnicities came into being?
That's where the globalisation enters the stage - it would prevent new ethnicities from springing into existence.....and how, precisely, do you think the various ethnicities came into being?
Originally Posted by gaelic cowboy:
If you have ever eaten some lamb at Easter then you can be sure it was from a hybrid
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.
If you have ever eaten some lamb at Easter then you can be sure it was from a hybrid
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.
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.
Originally Posted by Papewaio:
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.
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.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.
Originally Posted by Strike For The South:
incorrect
Would you like to spin the wheel again?
NO U.incorrect
Would you like to spin the wheel again?
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
Because creationism is the peak of ignorance.
I would say the same about evolution, but this is not what this thread is about.Because creationism is the peak of ignorance.
Originally Posted by Viking:
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.
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.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.
Trust me I know what I'm talking about when it comes to cattle.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO