[PinstripesAndPithHelmets]

Originally Posted by AshtrayKitten

I did nothing but point out that there is more to race than aesthetics. I corrected you when you hysterically denied this:

Physiological differences? Are you serious? Do black people have their organs in different places, or something? You fucking moron.

That's categorically false. You did quite a bit more than that, and we both know it. It's obvious where you're going with your line of reasoning. It's as old as any justification for expansionism or genocide. It's tired, trite, and it belongs at the Berlin Conference, not anywhere in the 21st century. It doesn't take a genius to read between the lines of what you said.

Originally Posted by AshtrayKitten

You claimed I was putting forth the notion that blacks are a different species than whites, and gave a lovely dissertation on how they are the same species and how Paris is the capital of France and water is made of H2O. That you deny you didn't make one is laughable, and we can quietly forget about it along with your outrage over the notion that medical science supports the division of humanity along racial lines if you so desire.

I stand by my assertion, and I don't see where I ever denied making it.

Originally Posted by AshtrayKitten

Negative. I have not presented supporting evidence for that claim yet, other than my anecdotal example of D.C. and WV. Again, I was stating the fact that there's more to race than skin color.

You haven't, and you won't be able to. Still, just because you didn't present any evidence - as if you even could - doesn't mean that you didn't make the implication.

Originally Posted by AshtrayKitten

A separate issue, grasshopper, is whether or not these deeper traits can influence certain races in the areas such as intelligence and propensity towards delinquency. I believe they do, and that for the sake of political correctness, such talk is marginalized and pushed away as far as possible.

It is not at all separate. Here we return to the crux of the issue. This is exactly why I said what I said. This is the same argument made by every 19th century politician campaigning for imperial expansion, every crackpot racist with a superiority complex, and every proponent of genocide throughout history. "They" are less intelligent, less articulate, less civilized than "We". It's a hop, skip and a jump from what you say, to declaiming other "races" as being subhuman. All you've done so far is respond with a petty smokescreen about definition. It's as clear as day where you're headed with this line of reasoning.

Honestly, I did make a mistake. I should've let you carry your ridiculous argument out to its fully racist length. You would've hanged yourself, and I wouldn't have had to say a word.

Originally Posted by AshtrayKitten

I'm not sure what you think my intent is, though.

I thought I made it quite obvious. Was my pedantic explanation of how "water is made of H2O" not clear enough?

Originally Posted by AshtrayKitten

Do you accept the possibility that genes can make a certain group of more aggressive? Yes/No? Is it absolutely, positively impossible?

Now you're appealing to my sense of scientific curiosity?

The overwhelming weight of modern research stands against you on this one, yet it seems like you're here insisting that just because it's possible automatically makes it true. Absolutely absurd.