When we find something "negative" out about ethnic minorities, why..

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Caligastia
Dog breeds vary tremendously but genetically are almost indistinguishable. Do you consider a Bulldog to be the same as a Greyhound in all non-superficial aspects? There goes your genetic theory. NEXT!

MORON!!!!!

We're talking about HUMANS, you idiot.

[Solly]

If we're talking about humans, let's talk about human differences then and not genetic differences.

Genetics have no part in this discussion.

[Whaleboy]

Genetics have no part in this discussion

If we talk about "race" then they do. Theres no other way. Ethnicity on the other hand is cultural, so we can use that instead.

Needless to say, such definitions are highly whimsical and useless imo, its just that bigots on their own small-minded agenda blow it out of proportion and make it a political issue. We don't see people divided on the basis of eye-colour these days do we? *Insert standard Goering warning from history statement here*.

[Solly]

Race isn't exactly a genetic issue.

[Inverse Icarus]

Originally posted by Space05us
Race should be ignored altogether.

said a fellow eskimo hater.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
Ah, yes. Because, like pedigree dog breeds, humans have been subjected to hundreds of generations of highly selective inbreeding designed to deliberately magnify specifically selected recessive traits, haven't they?

You're missing the point. Whether dogs have been selectively inbred or not makes no difference. The point I am making is that genetic similarity does not necesarily translate into actual similarity. Dogs illustrate this perfectly.

[Kuciwalker]

We're talking about people.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Park Avenue
If we're talking about humans, let's talk about human differences then and not genetic differences.

Genetics have no part in this discussion.

The differences between people are based on upbringing and genes.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
Needless to say, such definitions are highly whimsical and useless imo, its just that bigots on their own small-minded agenda blow it out of proportion and make it a political issue. We don't see people divided on the basis of eye-colour these days do we? *Insert standard Goering warning from history statement here*.

Again, skin color is a generally valid category because it corresponds directly to ethnicity, which is cultural and is DEFINATELY a valid category. Eye color is not.

[Whaleboy]

Race isn't exactly a genetic issue.

By definition, it is. Ethnicity on the other hand is cultural, correlated somewhat with certain racial characteristics.

[Whaleboy]

gain, skin color is a generally valid category because it corresponds directly to ethnicity, which is cultural and is DEFINATELY a valid category. Eye color is not.

What I am trying to say is that the link between skin colour and ethnicity is whimsical. It is conceivable of a time where those definitiosn become as arbitrary as hair or eye colour. You'll note that the nazis considered eye colour a defining characteristic of the aryan race.

What I am trying to say is that if you are of African origin, then "racially" you are negroid, whereas ethnically you could be as British as rugby-related sodomy. The connection between ethnicity and genetic characteristics is wholly capricious.

EDIT: The link between nationality and ethnicity is still more tenuous, I just use that as an example. Perhaps "Western" is more accurate, though all of these classifications are inherently flawed due to their arbitrary nature, as they are best defined on an individual and not a functional/phenomenal basis.

[Kuciwalker]

The statistics say differently.

[Whaleboy]

Lies, damn lies...

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp


Really?

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/mole00/mole00404.htm

........appears to suggest otherwise.

This guy makes the valid point that looking solely at an individual's skin tone is unlikely to yield an accurate picture of their racial background.

The UK's own Forensic Science Service is able to identify race fairly accurately through a process it calls "photofitting", that is to say, to come up with the best estimate of the appearance of a criminal who has left behind a drop of blood or a piece of skin.

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by Kucinich
We're talking about people.

The same principle that applies to dogs also applies to people.