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.
3. Race is biological. This doesn't mean different groups are inferior or superior than others. Geographical populations can be defined genetically.
Genetic variances between human populations are small, while genetic variances within human populations are significantly greater. Differences in geography account for a relatively small amount of any genetic variance and is thus dwarfed by the amount of genetic similarities of any human population. In other words, there is greater genetic variation within "races" than between them.
i.e. through random selection, there is less genetic variation between an African American and European American, and more genetic variation between that of two African Americans or two European Americans.
Quote:
The proportion of human genetic variation due to differences between populations is modest, and individuals from different populations can be genetically more similar than individuals from the same population.
Of the 0.1% of DNA that varies among individuals, what proportion varies among main populations? Consider an apportionment of Old World populations into three continents (Africa, Asia and Europe), a grouping that corresponds to a common view of three of the 'major races.' Approximately 85−90% of genetic variation is found within these continental groups, and only an additional 10−15% of variation is found between them
Both sides are either mislead or in denial. I just want to raise these points.
Clarifications for the right:
1. Islamic extremism mostly impacts Muslims. The vast majority of Muslims oppose ISIS. Most of the victims of Islamic terrorism are Muslims.
2. Immigration is good. It brings creativity and creates demand in the economy.
3. Market capitalism can't work without government institutions and regulations. Markets require levers like any other universal system.
4. The gun show loophole does exist. Private sellers aren't required to run background checks for transactions in most states. Yes, Chicago and other liberal cities have strict gun laws, but the guns that are recovered derive from jurisdictions with lax gun laws.
5. People don't choose to be poor. Luck and circumstances can take you a long way. Nothing is determined solely on merit.
6. Inequality does exist and should be addressed.
7. Climate change is partly human induced.
# 1. I am a conservative and agree with your first clarification.
# 2. I agree that LEGAL immigration is very good for a nation.
#3. Market capitalism is not a word I understand. The free mark
et operates by voluntary exchange not planned or controlled by a central authority. The US does not operate a free market economy and has not since the federal government instituted the first legislation that regulated commerce.
#4. Private sellers include a brother selling a gun to his brother, etc., and should not require a background check, in my opinion. If a person has a conceal carry license, a background check has already been performed. The fact that guns that were legally purchased are recovered in other states does not mean that law abiding citizens should be denied their 2nd Amendment rights as a result of criminal actions by others.
# 5. Not ALL people choose to be poor. Some people make choices which result in poverty and some people, through circumstances, not of their making, are born into or become trapped by or slide into poverty. The purpose of a safety net is to assist those in the latter category the support they need to move out of poverty by empowering them to use their full potential to become self reliant and end the cycle of poverty for themselves and hopefully their family. To make someone comfortable in their poverty, is to waste their potential and deny them the opportunity to achieve financial freedom for themselves and their family.
#6. Inequality does exist and has existed since the beginning of time and will continue to exist until the end of time. The role of society is not to make everyone "equal" but to give everyone the same opportunity to achieve their highest goals. People are born with different talents, different physical attributes, different physical abilities, different levels of intelligent, etc., thus making "equality" an unattainable goal. The goal of providing the same opportunity to everyone regardless of their abundance or lack of individual gifts is all a society can truly offer to its citizens. I suggest you read "Harrison Bergeron" by Kurt Vonnegut Jr. to understand what it means to achieve "equality."
#7. Climate change is happening. There is no definitive evidence that humankind attributes in any significant way to climate change that would prove that humankind can in any way legislate even a miniscule resolution to this phenomenon. I suggest you watch "Cool It, " a documentary that explores Climate Change and man's role, to learn what REAL actions can be taken with regard to the environment.
I appreciate your post and stating what you feel is beneficial to each party to know. It provides an opportunity to agree or clarify positions on your clarifications from either a left or right viewpoint.
#7. Climate change is happening. There is no definitive evidence that humankind attributes in any significant way to climate change that would prove that humankind can in any way legislate even a miniscule resolution to this phenomenon. I suggest you watch "Cool It, " a documentary that explores Climate Change and man's role, to learn what REAL actions can be taken with regard to the environment.
If we could just get agreement that climate change is happening--regardless of cause--that would be a great step forward.
More and more scientists are also of the belief that regardless of the cause, it's too late to reverse it now, unless all nations make it the foremost priority of all worldwide human endeavor over the next hundred years...and that's not gonna happen.
Both points lead to a more important economic and political point: Where is it going and how do we all need to response to best survive it?
For instance, are agricultural companies developing grains that will survive the change, or are they expecting the government to give them direction or a later bail-out?
If we could just get agreement that climate change is happening--regardless of cause--that would be a great step forward.
More and more scientists are also of the belief that regardless of the cause, it's too late to reverse it now, unless all nations make it the foremost priority of all worldwide human endeavor over the next hundred years...and that's not gonna happen.
Both points lead to a more important economic and political point: Where is it going and how do we all need to response to best survive it?
For instance, are agricultural companies developing grains that will survive the change, or are they expecting the government to give them direction or a later bail-out?
I don't know of anyone who has denied that climate change is occurring. The issue is around Anthropomorphic or "man made" climate change.
As I said, there is NO scientific consensus around AGW and there never will be, because any contribution by humans to climate change is so incredibly insignificant as to basically be non-existent. That does not mean that there are not technologies to explore or actions that can be taken by humans to benefit the environment, but the creation of carbon-tax schemes and the decimation of job producing industries for the purpose of mandating unreliable alternatives is not a realistic solution to me or to most people.
Unfortunately, those who have an agenda with regard to AGW are not willing to take a rational approach and instead engage in fear mongering and name calling and using "the debate is over" to end any rational discussion that could lead to valid solutions long term.
The laws regarding gun control, passed by various states and the federal government, require certain actions be taken when purchasing a firearm. Given that buying at gun shows creates a way around these laws, it is a loophole that absolutely exists, regardless of if you agree with the laws or not. It's fine to disagree with the, but laws should be applied evenly. Advocate for either the end of the loophole or the end of the law; to proclaim the current methods are sufficient is an unbalanced viewpoint.
Actually, that's not true at all. The laws work exactly the same at or away from a gun show-there is no "loophole". If you buy a gun from a gun dealer, that dealer has to have a federal firearms license. And you have to fill out a Form 4473 and have a federal background check done (some states forego the background check if you have a CCW permit.). And if you purchase from a private individual at a gun show, the rules are the same as purchasing a gun from any private individual away from a gun show. There is no federal requirement for a check from a private sale, but some states do require them anyway.
I don't know of anyone who has denied that climate change is occurring. The issue is around Anthropomorphic or "man made" climate change.
Your reading has been very narrow, then. For instance:
Quote:
Sen. Ted Cruz on Sunday said facts don’t support climate change, in a speech that described the notion as a front for power-hungry politicians who want to control Americans’ lives.
During an appearance before some of the most influential conservative donors in the country, the Texas Republican said there is no factual basis for scientists’ research that shows the planet is changing. The 2016 White House hopeful said none of the research is worth the paper it is printed on.
Both sides are either mislead or in denial. I just want to raise these points.
Clarifications for the left:
1. Western countries are much more tolerant than the developing world. Tribalism is a major problem in Africa. Colorism and tension between ethnic groups in India are currently upheld.
2. The US isn't the only country with immigration laws. In fact, US immigration is pretty much generous relative to other countries. In Mexico, Cubans get deported regularly. East Asia wishes to preserve their national and ethnic heritage. Japan shows no signs of encouraging immigration.
3. Race is biological. This doesn't mean different groups are inferior or superior than others. Geographical populations can be defined genetically.
4. Gender and sex do overlap. There are plenty of studies showing boy/girl differences in behavior before socialization kicks in.
5. When people criticize Islam, it doesn't mean they're bigots. There may be some who do it out of bigotry. But people like Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Bill Maher, and Hitchens(RIP) are vocal in their opposition to Islam due to aspects that go against Western conventions. Basically, they oppose Islam due to its intolerance of gays, feminism, education, and art. Things we take for granted in Western society are shunned in the Islamic world.
6. Market capitalism and free trade have lifted billions out of poverty and have improved the standard of living of billions of people.
Clarifications for the right:
1. Islamic extremism mostly impacts Muslims. The vast majority of Muslims oppose ISIS. Most of the victims of Islamic terrorism are Muslims.
2. Immigration is good. It brings creativity and creates demand in the economy.
3. Market capitalism can't work without government institutions and regulations. Markets require levers like any other universal system.
4. The gun show loophole does exist. Private sellers aren't required to run background checks for transactions in most states. Yes, Chicago and other liberal cities have strict gun laws, but the guns that are recovered derive from jurisdictions with lax gun laws.
5. People don't choose to be poor. Luck and circumstances can take you a long way. Nothing is determined solely on merit.
6. Inequality does exist and should be addressed.
7. Climate change is partly human induced.
You say, "clarifications" I say "opinions"
As they say, "opinions" are like as..oles, everybody has one!"
Well, in that context, I don't disagree with him. "Climate change" is no longer an issue of science. It has become a political issue and I agree with him that the "Climate data" that has been presented to the public is politically driven and does not reflect the hard science around climate change.
Do you deny that we are in a cooling phase currently?
No it's not. Society did not make up different skin colors.
But going on skin color alone often lumps unrelated groups into the same "race." An Australian Aborigine and a dark-skinned Nigerian are both classified by most people as "black," but genetically they are about as different as it's possible for two humans to be. And the greatest genetic diversity between ethnic groups is found in sub-Saharan Africa, but most people lump them all together as one black "race." If a dark-skinned person and a light skinned person in America are genetically more similar to each other than the light skinned person is to a European or the dark-skinned person is an African (which can sometimes be the case), does it make sense to classify the light skinned American and the European as both belonging to the "White race" and the dark-skinned American and the African as both belonging to the "Black race"?
"Race" as it is commonly used doesn't correspond to anything biologically meaningful. (Hardly surprising, since the idea was invented long, long before genetic analysis came along.)
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.
