Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The difference is some blacks would resist their kids marrying whites but still communicate with them afterward, while some whites would completely disown their kids for marrying a black person.
I grew up around kids whose parents would disown them if they dated a Black person. I remember one girl in my high school who primarily dated Black men. She was White. I later found out she got in alot of trouble by her parents.
This experience brings me to another experience. I remember talking to a girl about a book, To Kill A Mockingbird. I mentioned feeling bad for the judge because he was hated for having mixed children. She responded with "Interracial marriages are wrong. The races shouldn't mix". She even claimed it was in the Bible. I was rather shocked. I thought "this girl is suppose to be my friend and she does this". I went to look for it in the Bible. I asked other people. I asked a youth minister too. Guess what. They aren't wrong. Jesus never said it was wrong for a Black man to marry a White woman. It was just this person who said something like that.
I grew up around kids whose parents would disown them if they dated a Black person. I remember one girl in my high school who primarily dated Black men. She was White. I later found out she got in alot of trouble by her parents.
This experience brings me to another experience. I remember talking to a girl about a book, To Kill A Mockingbird. I mentioned feeling bad for the judge because he was hated for having mixed children. She responded with "Interracial marriages are wrong. The races shouldn't mix". She even claimed it was in the Bible. I was rather shocked. I thought "this girl is suppose to be my friend and she does this". I went to look for it in the Bible. I asked other people. I asked a youth minister too. Guess what. They aren't wrong. Jesus never said it was wrong for a Black man to marry a White woman. It was just this person who said something like that.
Good morning,
Where is this in the bible? I looked this up and I only saw prohibition of marriages between the Israelites and different faiths/religions and between the Israelites and other nations. Nothing seems to speak of color. I'm curious to see if you find something I didn't.
Where is this in the bible? I looked this up and I only saw prohibition of marriages between the Israelites and different faiths/religions and between the Israelites and other nations. Nothing seems to speak of color. I'm curious to see if you find something I didn't.
When I said, "They aren't wrong", I was referring to interracial marriages not being wrong. I was saying that interracial marriages are not wrong. The Bible mentioned nothing about color. Moses was married to an Ethiopian woman. I went to the Bible myself and found nothing against interracial marriage. I went to people who knew the Bible better than me and they said the same thing "Interracial marriages are NOT wrong".
Yes, you do. And it has nothing to do with the color of their skin.
Many Whites have problems with Black people because many are loud, aggressive and violent.
How often do you turn on the news and see an Asian-American shooting up a liquor store? Beating a woman for 'disrespect'? Randomly committing some act of senseless violence?
It varies from region to region. In Germany for instance some Asian ethnicities have a bad reputation. The Vietnamese mafia is infamous for its violence (decapitating their victims), while African immigrants don't cause such problems.
In the US it may be blacks who on average are more violent.
In each country or region there is a specific history that has lead to the situation. I do not believe that there are innate differences between races or ethnic groups when the starting point for the individuals' lives is the same.
Racism will only go away when there are no more races on earth. It is a natural condition of humanity to identify with what he sees around him. Xenophobia is another human condition, where you want to protect your "way of life" from encroachment and corruption by others. As a parent, you are constantly trying to limit the exposure of your children to contradictory ideas. To sort of shelter them from what you see as the "bad of the world".
There will always be disagreements and division, the only thing that makes us peaceful is the apparent need for each other, and that can only exist because of economics, through trade. Anything else is basically artificial compulsion of people together, which is BAD.
Because society is so mobile, and because trade for resources so important. Eventually this economic need will chisel away at the divisions we have with each other. But this has to be done naturally, otherwise you just cause problems.
My basis for this argument is actually from "Thomas Sowell", he argued that before you had government intervention, the blacks of high social status were perceived to have "earned it". That they were far more likely to be seen with respect because of this. The people around them knew they must be intelligent and hard working to have gained such a high position. But with affirmative-action and other government interventions, its difficult to tell the deserving blacks from the undeserving blacks, people tend to equate all blacks of high position as attaining such a position only by way of an unfair system, and so they don't believe they actually deserve it. And this helps fuel the hatred of successful blacks.
I don't think such a system would completely eliminate racism, but I do believe it would help to break down the justification for racism, especially in regards to successful blacks. And I know it would because I have seen this attitude first-hand.
Legal immigration is completely controlled by the federal government. If you want to come to America you have to apply for a VISA with the US consulate, and you need federal government approval to come here. When you get the approval then you can go anywhere in the United States you want to go. But what I am saying is, in the old days you did not need the federal governments approval to move to Georgia, you only needed Georgia's approval to move to Georgia, but once you got to Georgia you could not go to other states, because you were not a citizen of Georgia(and thus not a citizen of the several states), and could not become a citizen of Georgia without approval by Congress(the federal government). This would allow a state like Florida to let as many Cuban refugees into it as they want. They could bring over the entire country of Haiti if they want. They just can't make them citizens, so they can't go anywhere other than Florida. And without the illegal 14th amendments birthright citizenship, we wouldn't have to worry about future generations becoming citizens either, unless the Congress(the entire country) authorized it.
The refugee problem is a serious problem. The refugees are not educated, they speak another language, they have no money, no prospects. If they came to Italy they would basically become wards of the state(which is what is happening with muslim refugees all over Europe). On top of that, they tend to have huge quantities of children, and have no desire to assimilate. If you don't understand the problems with that, maybe you should go read about France's no-go zones.
Secondly, if you start letting in Refugees, it starts a process where it expands and expands where everyone wants to come to Europe "as a refugee". But you cannot have socialism and free immigration. If those immigrants came to Italy and got absolutely nothing from the state, then they could only stay if they were productive. Prior to the 1900's in this country, about 1/3rd of all immigrants to this country went back to Europe because they couldn't make it here.
The EU is breaking down the national borders, but it is far from uniting under one government, and will not be in any of our lifetimes. There is a certain amount of sovereignty being forteited by the states to help with economic development of "the zone". But the EU is not even close to the 1789 United States constitution in regards to a united structure. The only things that are on par with the original US Constitution is that being a citizen of any EU country allows you to travel to other EU countries(which is article IV of our constitution), and they share the same currency(which is in article 1 section 8 of our constitution). They understand the importance of those clauses, and I agree. But they want to maintain as much sovereignty as possible.
Americans at one time did not care much for East Asians, for many years in the late 1800's, Asians were not allowed to own land(blacks owned tons of land at that point). On top of that, you had the Chinese exclusion act. And then you had the Japanese being locked away in internment camps in WWII. To pretend that there were never any issues with Asians, you are mistaken.
The reason whites don't have problems with Asians is a perception. Whites don't perceive Asians to be getting special treatment. They see them as hard working, and deserving of their social status. And thus, white people have no problems with Asians. On the other hand, they see blacks and American-Indians as being basically lazy, unintelligent, and leechers. Who only received their economic positions by means of reparations or government intervention through things like affirmative-action.
If whites perceived blacks as being hard working and intelligent, and not drains on society that expects the government to hand them everything at the behest of whites. Then white/black racism would be effectively like white/asian racism, which is almost non-existent.
The United States is not one people, I don't know what you are smoking. Think of it this way, the people in Seattle, Washington are more culturally and ethnically similar to the people living in Vancouver, BC, Canada, than the people of Seattle are with the people living in Atlanta. They are also more politically aligned with the people of Vancouver than the people of Atlanta. To believe that we are some one united people just by way of living in the same territory is nonsense.
That same rational basis can be applied to many different regions of this country, which tend to be more politically and culturally aligned with foreign countries than to the other states. The problem is, no one wants to give anything up, they don't want to lose the "freedom" to travel from one part of the country to another. But the original United States provided that possibility of freedom to travel, but also the freedom for parts of the country to be free of control by other states who know nothing about them. Our system was sort of based off the Swiss alliance. Which separates the country into practically autonomous "Cantons", with a very weak central government. In Switzerland there are four different languages spoken in the different regions of the country(German, French, Italian, and Romanian). That was sort of the basis of this country, but it has been hijacked by big-government and special interests who want to mold the entire country through their own ideology. They want to enforce conformity, and destroy freedom and diversity.
Yes, my plan would create a large amount of seggregation at first. But I think in the long run it would be a happier, more free, and more prosperous.
You pronounce "mentally stuck in the middle-ages" in such a way that it seems to be a negative. The truth is, the people in those countries want to protect their culture and values. They do not want outsiders trying to tell them what to do. They don't want to be ruled by a majority who doesn't have the same beliefs, and is not looking out for their interests. There is no reason to believe that that is a bad thing. That is exactly what Americans do when they complain about muslims coming to this country, about cultural assimilation, and about forcing people to speak English. The only difference is, the minority are generally not a large enough and condensed enough group to combat the government in any real way. Nor do they have the regional political will to attempt to secede. I could guarantee you that if there were a bunch of muslims in Oklahoma when they passed that law making Sharia Law illegal, that they would probably be threatening to secede.
Is Brazil happy? I have never seen anything saying that it is. It has some of the highest crime rates in the world(other than South Africa). The only one I have found with Brazil on it is this one, and it must have pretty flawed methodology.
It is ranked so highly because of a factor called "percent thriving" vs the "percent struggling" or the percent "suffering". I don't know exactly how they came to these numbers, but it was most likely an economic basis. Such as low unemployment, and economic equality. Secondly, you have daily experience, which shows Israel at 6.4(from the terrorism there), the United States at 7.3, Belgium at 7.3, and Brazil at 7.5.
I can only conclude that the whole happiness scale is heavily flawed.
This is a study done on reported "subjective well-being". Which is basically asking people two questions, how happy are you? And how satisfied are you with your life? Which is probably a more accurate assessment, rather than basing it almost entirely on economics.
It ranks Brazil below Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, and Mexico.
Well, I also said that a country needed to be prosperous as well being small and homogeneous. There are plenty of countries in Africa that are small and homogeneous that are extremely unhappy. There is not a single low-population, homogeneous, at least of average wealth that doesn't rank right at the top in happiness.
Sorry, I am not willing to spend as much time on this as you obviously are. We will continue to hold opposite views. But I wonder why you invest so much time. Your ideas will never ever be more than just your dream, reality is going the opposite way and nothing will change that.
(And yes, pretty much all those sources for happiness rankings seem odd, one would really have to go there and ask people. And even then the results could not necessarily be compared. My mother for instance is very humble, she doesn't complain about anything. My brother on the other hand readily complains about most anything. But basically their lives are quite similar and they live just an hour from each other, so same culture etc.).
A room full of 3 and 4 year old children and there is no racism.
You are so incorrect it's not funny.
Even if you take children who all live around each other, and put them in a room, (at 3 and 4 years old), then will group together based on skin color.
I even remember asking a 4 year old why she didn't want to play with the "other children", when they came over to the sliding board, and I remember her telling me that they "Smelled different". I asked her if anyone else said that, she said, "no, I just smelled them and it was different".
That really bothered me for weeks on end, and I talked with several kindergarten and nursery school educators in my area, and one that was a psychologist said they said it was normal for the children to group together based on their skin color, they tended to more easily identify with others that looked more like themselves.
It has not a thing to do with racism, (which is the belief that 1 race is superior to another, and you are probably talking about BIAS).
That is exactly the point. It is a primitive instinct that has to be overcome as there is no place for it anymore in our modern world.
Regarding smell, I find that odd. I mean, children and adults alike love pets, some of which really don't smell nice at all. But they avoid other humans just because they smell 'different'?! Even if someone smells different, they might still be more compatible than someone else smelling less different. It's a matter of getting used to it. I wonder if someone who learns to like someone else online via messenger etc. decides to avoid that person in real life should they find out on their first real encounter that they smell different...
When I said, "They aren't wrong", I was referring to interracial marriages not being wrong. I was saying that interracial marriages are not wrong. The Bible mentioned nothing about color. Moses was married to an Ethiopian woman. I went to the Bible myself and found nothing against interracial marriage. I went to people who knew the Bible better than me and they said the same thing "Interracial marriages are NOT wrong".
Thanks for the clarification, I appreciate it.
In these situations, I typically Moses as an example was well. I was hoping you hadn't found a contradiction to this elsewhere in the Bible.
I disagree. I think its entirely possible to be in an environment where there are enough negative experiences with people of a different color for an individual to create their own opinions. That's why traveling is more important than "diversity programs" in my opinion. I'm a firm believer that putting an impressionable child/teen on an airplane and showing them the nation and the world does far more for cultural understanding than being stuck in an office that is filled with race-based quotas. That goes for schools as well. And yet we're expected to "like" other races by merely being in their presence. It's non-sense, but it's the governments way.
Huh?
I like, and dislike, whomever I want to. Being polite/respectful is another matter.
The only time the government told me how to get along with others was during my time on active duty. We were to treat each other with respect because we were a team. What a concept!
What race-based quotas are you talking about? There are over 150 employees in my department: only one is black, there are 3 Asians, a few Hispanics, but the majority (including all of management) is white.
As far as Federal employment, the forms I have looked at, they give you preference based on your vet status: service connected disability with 30 percent rating, purple heart recipient, etc.
When was the last time you applied for a job? Nowadays, you have to submit application, resume/CV via internet. Some employers require you take a test(s), again, online. Then, the first interview is usually over the phone. If everything goes well, then you get a second interview in person.
You can be polite and extend respect to people you do not like. I do it at work all the time. It makes things easier. Besides, that's what the priest says from the pulpit when we go to church on Sundays.
In these situations, I typically Moses as an example was well. I was hoping you hadn't found a contradiction to this elsewhere in the Bible.
I never found anything in the Bible suggesting that interracial marriage was a sin. Whoever told me interracial marriages were a sin was a closet racist.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
laughable
