Re. brain sizes: Einstein's and women's

Cary Kittrell cary at afone.as.arizona.edu
Fri Oct 11 12:41:11 EST 2002


In article <s%Cp9.133386$S32.9649295 at news2.west.cox.net> "John Knight" <jwknight at polbox.com> writes:
<
<
<"Jd" <JDay123 at BellSouth.com> wrote in message
<news:3da5a8e1.9381193 at news1.lig.bellsouth.net...
<> Bob LeChevalier <lojbab at lojban.org> wrote:
<>
<> >>JDay123 at BellSouth.com (Jd) wrote:
<>
<> >>You guys are arguing that there is no scientific basis for defining
<> >>races and now here you are trying to deceptively sidestep the issue.
<> >
<> >Because in fact there is none.  The laws attempt to do so based on
<> >parentage, but parentage is often lied about, and science isn't
<> >generally used to check.  Furthermore, parentage presumes that one can
<> >determine the race of the parent, which is the same problem
<> >recursively.  There is no way to determine the race of someone even
<> >legally without assuming the race of someone else has already been
<> >determined.
<>
<> The fact that YOU say "that there is none" (scientific basis) means
<> that YOU can't argue race scientifically just as you can't argue
<> religion scientifically if you say "there is no proof" . Therefore
<> science is basically irrelevant to the point of being useless with
<> reguards to 2 of the most important issues of today if you hold to
<> your view. I challenge your view.
<>
<> With respect to laws being based on parentage, well, that's not
<> true. One of the first Laws (if not the very first) addressing the
<> race question was the 15th Amendment to the Constitution which uses
<> both terms "race" and "color" with respect to voting rights. It was
<> ratified Feb. 3, 1870.
<>
<> Here it is:
<>
<> Amendment 15, Section 1. "The right of citizens of the United States
<> to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by
<> any State on account of race, color or previous condition of
<> servitude."
<>
<> Section 2 shows that Congress is empowered to create laws with
<> respect to this Amendment.
<>
<> Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by
<> appropriate legislation.
<>
<> "Race" is associated with "color" in the U.S. Constitution, Bob.
<>
<> In fact, bills from the 107th Congress show that "race" is used in
<> conjuction with terms like "nationality" and "minorities" and they
<> show that lawmakers use findings of science in their efforts to pass
<> laws dealing with "race".
<>
<> Here are some examples....
<>
<> [H.RES.398.EH] Whereas fragile X is the most common inherited cause
<> of mental retardation, affecting people of every race, income level,
<> and nationality; </cgi-bin/query/D?c107:18:./temp/~c1075VbmUF::>
<>
<> [H.CON.RES.388.ENR] Whereas in 2000, the Surgeon General of the
<> Public Health Service announced as a goal the elimination by 2010 of
<> health disparities experienced by racial and ethnic minorities in
<> health... </cgi-bin/query/D?c107:27:./temp/~c1075VbmUF::>
<>
<> [S.RES.151.IS] Expressing the sense of the Senate that the World
<> Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia, and
<> Related Intolerance presents a unique opportunity to address
<> global... </cgi-bin/query/D?c107:37:./temp/~c1075VbmUF::>
<>
<> >>Do you not understand how the rule of law works in America? It has
<> >>to do with normal folks electing leaders, not clones bowing to the
<> >>whims of wizards.
<> >
<> >None of which has ANYTHING to do with science, which couldn't care
<> >less how the law works in America.  Science is not "politically
<> >correct", and it is international.
<>
<> My findings above prove you wrong Bob.  That is unless Scientists
<> are even more ignorant than I thought and have no clue whatsoever
<> than Law makers are looking over their shoulder and even funding
<> their research.  Not only that, but now you're telling me that this
<> ignorance has reached global proportions.
<>
<> Lets face it Bob, you're blowing smoke unless you truly can't
<> distinguish the difference between your a$$ and a hole in the
<> ground.
<>
<> There are good scientists, and there are wizards.  I think we need
<> Christians to vote for leaders which know the difference.
<>
<> Jd
<>
<
<Well said, Jd.
<
<We really must accept that when jews (and "liberals" and other muds [read:
<mongrels]) claim that women are more intelligent than men, that they
<actually believe it:  because in their communities, it seems to be the case.
<You have to REALLY be STUPID to believe that government and science are
<incapable of defining races which were EASILY defined, documented, and
<proven by Israelites thosands of years ago, 


Really?  What groups did these ancient Israelites assign the Japanese
to?  Inuit?  Terra del Fuegians?

<
<From the perspective of a mud or "liberal" or jew like lojbab, it probably
<is impossible to even comprehend the concept of race, but Thomas Jefferson
<had no trouble identifying who the Indians were and KILLING them before they
<killed any more Whites.
<


Well, when you're right, your right.  What WERE those Indians thinking,
invading our peaceful country like that and tossing us off of our
farms and forts and traplines?  Did I say our country?  Hell, they
invaded our entire rightful continent, didn't they?



-- cary



More information about the Neur-sci mailing list