Black Relationships : Born this way?

On to something? Or "on one"?


  • Total voters
    11

Clyde C Coger Jr

going above and beyond
PREMIUM MEMBER
Nov 17, 2006
52,513
11,280
Occupation
Speaker/Teacher/Author
...


Yes, it is exactly what I mean ... Until they are able to say conclusively, the jury is still out and the debate continues.

From the research I did, its extremely complex and all exploration.



No, there is no exact information if that's what you mean. But like in this study here, there is a pattern. The closer the subjects were genetically, the higher the likelihood of similar sexual preference was, right?

Ok, so actually they thought they had found a genetic basis in their first study. But, their later studies disproved their initial findings.

Biology and sexual orientation[edit]
Bailey is well known for research involving biology and sexual orientation. In the early 1990s Bailey and Richard Pillard coauthored a series of twin studies which examined the rate of concordance of sexual identity among monozygotic twins (52% concordance), dizygotic twins of the same sex (22%), non-twin siblings of the same sex, and adoptive siblings of the same sex (11%).[9][10] More recent research by Bailey et al. on twins however found much lower concordance rates for monozygotic twins regarding homosexual orientation of only 20% for men and 24% for women pointing to a significant contribution of environmental factors in sexual orientation; Bailey suggests an explanation for the much lower concordance rate among monozygotic twins in this study as opposed to previous studies: In those previous studies, twins deciding whether to participate in a study clearly related to homosexuality probably considered the sexual orientation of their co-twins before agreeing to participate.[11

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Michael_Bailey
 

Liberty

Banned
MEMBER
Aug 28, 2015
6,914
1,212
...


Yes, it is exactly what I mean ... Until they are able to say conclusively, the jury is still out and the debate continues.

From the research I did, its extremely complex and all exploration.
It may be a very long time before science can nail all the details. But, they have found that male homosexuality is more common in certain families that are linked by maternal bloodlines. They have found patterns in the size of the brains. They are making just enough headway to convince me that one day they will be able to decipher these genetic codes precisely.
 

Clyde C Coger Jr

going above and beyond
PREMIUM MEMBER
Nov 17, 2006
52,513
11,280
Occupation
Speaker/Teacher/Author
It may be a very long time before science can nail all the details. But, they have found that male homosexuality is more common in certain families that are linked by maternal bloodlines. They have found patterns in the size of the brains. They are making just enough headway to convince me that one day they will be able to decipher these genetic codes precisely.

Yes, I'm keenly aware of all of that, and its complexity.


https://destee.com/threads/born-this-way.84005/page-25#post-930794


Nonetheless, until the body of science speaks explicitly to the question, it remains a mystery.

...
 

Orisons

Well-Known Member
MEMBER
Jan 14, 2005
2,809
468
London in the United Kingdom
Occupation
Mechanical Designer/Project Manager
[QUOTE="Clyde C Coger Jr, post: 930631, member: 12718" You ask, how exactly? In this way ...

Going back to the title: Born that way? ‘Scientific’ racism is creeping back into our thinking. Here’s what to watch out for, we see Born that Way and "Scientific" racism is creeping back into our thinking.

But first, the idea is that a reader/poster would click the link and read the full article, since we are only able to post an excerpt of it. Inside the article, there is this:


"... Here’s how the argument goes. Some people are born with outstanding talents, easily mastering basketball, mathematics, languages or piano, if given the right environment in which to grow. What biologist or social scientist could argue with that?

But alongside that genetic understanding, an old and pernicious assumption has crept back into the American conversation, in which aptitudes are supposedly inherited by race: certain peoples are thought to have rhythm, or intellect, or speed or charm. That’s a fast track toward the old 19th- and early 20th-century problem of “scientific” racism.

Consider a recent paper that argues that ethnic conflict throughout history is a result of genetic diversity among communities. The authors argue that genetic diversity is the dominant force behind conflict among groups.

It pushes religious communities into battle, causes distrust among neighbors and dictates support for problematic social policies. Such an argument places the history and future of human conflict in genes, as if human interaction and environmental influences cannot match their power
..."

Hopefully, after reading the above, you may come to understood why I posted the article in this Thread, rightly or wrongly.
...

/QUOTE]
NO, I’m still struggling Clyde, because isn’t it a fact that homosexuality transcends Race, Creed, Colour in that aren’t there Gays in virtually every nation on the planet, amongst ALL of humanity’s so diverse ethnic groupings, but isn’t its connection to Eugenics/Sceintific Racism tenuous at best?

Though I’ve known personally individuals who genuinely didn’t want to be Gay, just happened to be Born that Way, however with regard to Eugenics making a comeback, being taken even a little bit seriously by scientists, are you genuinely unaware of the manner in which the Eugenics posse/White Supremacist Racist NUTCASES have been CRUSHED [Adolf Hitler must have been traumatized/totally gutted] by both the Palaentologists and the Geneticists agreeing that the ORIGINAL man definitely wasn’t Caucasion/White; he was an ancestor of either today’s African Pygmies or Khosa Bushmen [as verified by the large number of mutations on their Mitochondrial DNA profile]?

[QUOTE="Clyde C Coger Jr, post: 930699, member: 12718" Try not to struggle with this Orisons, but first, let's determine which camp we are in, respectively. This may help you better understand my perspective.


Obviously, I'm in the camp which views homosexuality as learned behavior. While you appear to be in the camp of "born this way." Please correct me in your next post, if necessary.

With this understanding, I reject that homosexuality transcends, race, color and creed; as well as, gays just happened to be born that way. On what evidence Clyde, did the male of Irish ethnicity that I grew up with CHOOSE to not play soccer, ride bicycles all over town, follow the usual macho pursuits of childhood/youth that his elder and younger siblings did with all of the rest of US?

Why would he or anyone choose a path that would cause them so much turmoil in their life, totally alienate them from most of their friends, family and social circle [which probably explains why despite being so very obviously effeminate all of his life he didn't actually COME OUT as Gay until he was 20 years old]?


Apart from not answering ANY questions at all in the direct manner possible Clyde, why would I dismiss my own personal experience of the so very torturous anguish that an Irish comtemporary of mine experienced as a youth trying to get through adolescence before coming out as Gay because various "Scientists" profess otherwise?

I didn't say that ALL Gays are Born that Way [who knows what percentage of people are malleable enough to follow social directives /cultural programming with regard to their sexuality] whereas isn't it a patently obvious fact that most people are not?

Scientific racism, creeps into our thinking speak for yourself, if we aren't careful to recognize the fact. To repeat, it does so in this manner:

It pushes religious communities into battle, causes distrust among neighbors and dictates support for problematic social policies. Such an argument places the history and future of human conflict in genes, as if human interaction and environmental influences cannot match their power..."

...

/QUOTE] Clyde, is there a specific reason why you continue to totally ignore my question underlined above with regard to the so very comprehensive manner in which Scientific Racism/Eugenics has been BURIED/totally debunked by scientists /SCIENCE, whereas what can anyone do about the somewhat RETARDED DIMWITS who continue to embrace it other than avoid them as much as possible? Well Clyde?

Are you saying or thinking that I embrace Eugenics? If so, you are dead wrong. The whole world knows the fallacy of Eugenics. Exactly what is the difference between Eugenics and the "Scientific Racism" that you assert [above] is the source of a lot of Humanity's GRIEF in the 21st century?

Isn’t ANYONE who genuinely believes they are not programmed
graphically illustrating that their programming is COMPLETE?
 

Clyde C Coger Jr

going above and beyond
PREMIUM MEMBER
Nov 17, 2006
52,513
11,280
Occupation
Speaker/Teacher/Author
Exactly what is the difference between Eugenics and the "Scientific Racism" that you assert [above] is the source of a lot of Humanity's GRIEF in the 21st century?

Isn’t ANYONE who genuinely believes they are not programmed
graphically illustrating that their programming is COMPLETE?


Help me to understand what you are saying exactly, is it a question or a statement?

But are you denying my statement that Eugenics is a fallacy?

Did I not ask you a question Orisons, where's the answer?


...



 

Orisons

Well-Known Member
MEMBER
Jan 14, 2005
2,809
468
London in the United Kingdom
Occupation
Mechanical Designer/Project Manager
[QUOTE="Clyde C Coger Jr, post: 930631, member: 12718" You ask, how exactly? In this way ...

Going back to the title: Born that way? ‘Scientific’ racism is creeping back into our thinking. Here’s what to watch out for, we see Born that Way and "Scientific" racism is creeping back into our thinking.

But first, the idea is that a reader/poster would click the link and read the full article, since we are only able to post an excerpt of it. Inside the article, there is this:


"... Here’s how the argument goes. Some people are born with outstanding talents, easily mastering basketball, mathematics, languages or piano, if given the right environment in which to grow. What biologist or social scientist could argue with that?

But alongside that genetic understanding, an old and pernicious assumption has crept back into the American conversation, in which aptitudes are supposedly inherited by race: certain peoples are thought to have rhythm, or intellect, or speed or charm. That’s a fast track toward the old 19th- and early 20th-century problem of “scientific” racism.

Consider a recent paper that argues that ethnic conflict throughout history is a result of genetic diversity among communities. The authors argue that genetic diversity is the dominant force behind conflict among groups.

It pushes religious communities into battle, causes distrust among neighbors and dictates support for problematic social policies. Such an argument places the history and future of human conflict in genes, as if human interaction and environmental influences cannot match their power
..."

Hopefully, after reading the above, you may come to understood why I posted the article in this Thread, rightly or wrongly.
...

/QUOTE]
NO, I’m still struggling Clyde, because isn’t it a fact that homosexuality transcends Race, Creed, Colour in that aren’t there Gays in virtually every nation on the planet, amongst ALL of humanity’s so diverse ethnic groupings, but isn’t its connection to Eugenics/Sceintific Racism tenuous at best?

Though I’ve known personally individuals who genuinely didn’t want to be Gay, just happened to be Born that Way, however with regard to Eugenics making a comeback, being taken even a little bit seriously by scientists, are you genuinely unaware of the manner in which the Eugenics posse/White Supremacist Racist NUTCASES have been CRUSHED [Adolf Hitler must have been traumatized/totally gutted] by both the Palaentologists and the Geneticists agreeing that the ORIGINAL man definitely wasn’t Caucasion/White; he was an ancestor of either today’s African Pygmies or Khosa Bushmen [as verified by the large number of mutations on their Mitochondrial DNA profile]?

[QUOTE="Clyde C Coger Jr, post: 930699, member: 12718" Try not to struggle with this Orisons, but first, let's determine which camp we are in, respectively. This may help you better understand my perspective.


Obviously, I'm in the camp which views homosexuality as learned behavior. While you appear to be in the camp of "born this way." Please correct me in your next post, if necessary.

With this understanding, I reject that homosexuality transcends, race, color and creed; as well as, gays just happened to be born that way. On what evidence Clyde, did the male of Irish ethnicity that I grew up with CHOOSE to not play soccer, ride bicycles all over town, follow the usual macho pursuits of childhood/youth that his elder and younger siblings did with all of the rest of US?

Why would he or anyone choose a path that would cause them so much turmoil in their life, totally alienate them from most of their friends, family and social circle [which probably explains why despite being so very obviously effeminate all of his life he didn't actually COME OUT as Gay until he was 20 years old]?


Apart from not answering ANY questions at all in the direct manner possible Clyde, why would I dismiss my own personal experience of the so very torturous anguish that an Irish comtemporary of mine experienced as a youth trying to get through adolescence before coming out as Gay because various "Scientists" profess otherwise?

I didn't say that ALL Gays are Born that Way [who knows what percentage of people are malleable enough to follow social directives /cultural programming with regard to their sexuality] whereas isn't it a patently obvious fact that most people are not?

Scientific racism, creeps into our thinking speak for yourself, if we aren't careful to recognize the fact. To repeat, it does so in this manner:

It pushes religious communities into battle, causes distrust among neighbors and dictates support for problematic social policies. Such an argument places the history and future of human conflict in genes, as if human interaction and environmental influences cannot match their power..."

...

/QUOTE] Clyde, is there a specific reason why you continue to totally ignore my question underlined above with regard to the so very comprehensive manner in which Scientific Racism/Eugenics has been BURIED/totally debunked by scientists /SCIENCE, whereas what can anyone do about the somewhat RETARDED DIMWITS who continue to embrace it other than avoid them as much as possible? Well Clyde?

Are you saying or thinking that I embrace Eugenics? If so, you are dead wrong. The whole world knows the fallacy of Eugenics. Exactly what is the difference between Eugenics and the "Scientific Racism" that you assert [above] is the source of a lot of Humanity's GRIEF in the 21st century?

[QUOTE="Clyde C Coger Jr, post: 930853, member: 12718" Help me to understand what you are saying exactly, is it a question or a statement?

But are you denying my statement that Eugenics is a fallacy?

Did I not ask you a question Orisons, where's the answer?

...

/QUOTE]
As the person who has stated [above] that Eugenics isn't so much a fallacy as opposed to very dated White Supremacist Racist GARBAGE, I am asking YOU yet again precisely what is the difference between Eugenics and the "scientific racism" you allege is clouding humanity's [YOUR] thinking [what is all this RUNNING/HIDING about]?


Isn’t ANYONE who genuinely believes they are not programmed
graphically illustrating that their programming is COMPLETE?
 

Clyde C Coger Jr

going above and beyond
PREMIUM MEMBER
Nov 17, 2006
52,513
11,280
Occupation
Speaker/Teacher/Author
... As the person who has stated [above] that Eugenics isn't so much a fallacy as opposed to very dated White Supremacist Racist GARBAGE, I am asking YOU yet again precisely what is the difference between Eugenics and the "scientific racism" you allege is clouding humanity's [YOUR] thinking [what is all this RUNNING/HIDING about]?

It appears to me the shoe is now on the other foot, so to speak
Orisons, why are you running and hiding from my question:


Are you saying or thinking that I embrace Eugenics?

(If so, you are dead wrong. The whole world knows the fallacy of Eugenics)

...
 

Orisons

Well-Known Member
MEMBER
Jan 14, 2005
2,809
468
London in the United Kingdom
Occupation
Mechanical Designer/Project Manager
[QUOTE="Clyde C Coger Jr, post: 930631, member: 12718" You ask, how exactly? In this way ...

Going back to the title: Born that way? ‘Scientific’ racism is creeping back into our thinking. Here’s what to watch out for, we see Born that Way and "Scientific" racism is creeping back into our thinking.

But first, the idea is that a reader/poster would click the link and read the full article, since we are only able to post an excerpt of it. Inside the article, there is this:


"... Here’s how the argument goes. Some people are born with outstanding talents, easily mastering basketball, mathematics, languages or piano, if given the right environment in which to grow. What biologist or social scientist could argue with that?

But alongside that genetic understanding, an old and pernicious assumption has crept back into the American conversation, in which aptitudes are supposedly inherited by race: certain peoples are thought to have rhythm, or intellect, or speed or charm. That’s a fast track toward the old 19th- and early 20th-century problem of “scientific” racism.

Consider a recent paper that argues that ethnic conflict throughout history is a result of genetic diversity among communities. The authors argue that genetic diversity is the dominant force behind conflict among groups.

It pushes religious communities into battle, causes distrust among neighbors and dictates support for problematic social policies. Such an argument places the history and future of human conflict in genes, as if human interaction and environmental influences cannot match their power
..."

Hopefully, after reading the above, you may come to understood why I posted the article in this Thread, rightly or wrongly.
...

/QUOTE]
NO, I’m still struggling Clyde, because isn’t it a fact that homosexuality transcends Race, Creed, Colour in that aren’t there Gays in virtually every nation on the planet, amongst ALL of humanity’s so diverse ethnic groupings, but isn’t its connection to Eugenics/Sceintific Racism tenuous at best?

Though I’ve known personally individuals who genuinely didn’t want to be Gay, just happened to be Born that Way, however with regard to Eugenics making a comeback, being taken even a little bit seriously by scientists, are you genuinely unaware of the manner in which the Eugenics posse/White Supremacist Racist NUTCASES have been CRUSHED [Adolf Hitler must have been traumatized/totally gutted] by both the Palaentologists and the Geneticists agreeing that the ORIGINAL man definitely wasn’t Caucasion/White; he was an ancestor of either today’s African Pygmies or Khosa Bushmen [as verified by the large number of mutations on their Mitochondrial DNA profile]?

[QUOTE="Clyde C Coger Jr, post: 930699, member: 12718" Try not to struggle with this Orisons, but first, let's determine which camp we are in, respectively. This may help you better understand my perspective.


Obviously, I'm in the camp which views homosexuality as learned behavior. While you appear to be in the camp of "born this way." Please correct me in your next post, if necessary.

With this understanding, I reject that homosexuality transcends, race, color and creed; as well as, gays just happened to be born that way. On what evidence Clyde, did the male of Irish ethnicity that I grew up with CHOOSE to not play soccer, ride bicycles all over town, follow the usual macho pursuits of childhood/youth that his elder and younger siblings did with all of the rest of US?

Why would he or anyone choose a path that would cause them so much turmoil in their life, totally alienate them from most of their friends, family and social circle [which probably explains why despite being so very obviously effeminate all of his life he didn't actually COME OUT as Gay until he was 20 years old]?


Apart from not answering ANY questions at all in the direct manner possible Clyde, why would I dismiss my own personal experience of the so very torturous anguish that an Irish comtemporary of mine experienced as a youth trying to get through adolescence before coming out as Gay because various "Scientists" profess otherwise?

I didn't say that ALL Gays are Born that Way [who knows what percentage of people are malleable enough to follow social directives /cultural programming with regard to their sexuality] whereas isn't it a patently obvious fact that most people are not?

Scientific racism, creeps into our thinking speak for yourself, if we aren't careful to recognize the fact. To repeat, it does so in this manner:

It pushes religious communities into battle, causes distrust among neighbors and dictates support for problematic social policies. Such an argument places the history and future of human conflict in genes, as if human interaction and environmental influences cannot match their power..."

...

/QUOTE] Clyde, is there a specific reason why you continue to totally ignore my question underlined above with regard to the so very comprehensive manner in which Scientific Racism/Eugenics has been BURIED/totally debunked by scientists /SCIENCE, whereas what can anyone do about the somewhat RETARDED DIMWITS who continue to embrace it other than avoid them as much as possible? Well Clyde?

Are you saying or thinking that I embrace Eugenics? If so, you are dead wrong. The whole world knows the fallacy of Eugenics. Exactly what is the difference between Eugenics and the "Scientific Racism" that you assert [above] is the source of a lot of Humanity's GRIEF in the 21st century?
It appears to me the shoe is now on the other foot, so to speak Orisons, why are you running and hiding from my question: I hope you're joking, fear you're not or did you miss my response [underlined above] that YOU and I KNOW that you're NEVER going to address or answer are YOU Clyde?

[QUOTE="Clyde C Coger Jr, post: 930853, member: 12718" Help me to understand what you are saying exactly, is it a question or a statement?

But are you denying my statement that Eugenics is a fallacy?

Did I not ask you a question Orisons, where's the answer?

...

/QUOTE]
As the person who has stated [above] that Eugenics isn't so much a fallacy as opposed to very dated White Supremacist Racist GARBAGE, I am asking YOU yet again precisely what is the difference between Eugenics and the "scientific racism" you allege is clouding humanity's [YOUR] thinking [what is all this RUNNING/HIDING about]?


Isn’t ANYONE who genuinely believes they are not programmed
graphically illustrating that their programming is COMPLETE?
 

Clyde C Coger Jr

going above and beyond
PREMIUM MEMBER
Nov 17, 2006
52,513
11,280
Occupation
Speaker/Teacher/Author
... I hope you're joking, fear you're not or did you miss my response [underlined above] that YOU and I KNOW that you're NEVER going to address or answer are YOU Clyde?

No, I'm not joking Orisons, stop playing these silly games and answer the question(s). What's underlined doesn't answer the question(s), at all:


Help me to understand what you are saying exactly, is it a question or a statement?

But are you denying my statement that Eugenics is a fallacy?

Did I not ask you a question Orisons, where's the answer?



If you cannot provide simple answers to the above, don't expect me to continue in this exercise of folly.


...
 

Orisons

Well-Known Member
MEMBER
Jan 14, 2005
2,809
468
London in the United Kingdom
Occupation
Mechanical Designer/Project Manager
[QUOTE="Clyde C Coger Jr, post: 930631, member: 12718" You ask, how exactly? In this way ...

Going back to the title: Born that way? ‘Scientific’ racism is creeping back into our thinking. Here’s what to watch out for, we see Born that Way and "Scientific" racism is creeping back into our thinking.

But first, the idea is that a reader/poster would click the link and read the full article, since we are only able to post an excerpt of it. Inside the article, there is this:


"... Here’s how the argument goes. Some people are born with outstanding talents, easily mastering basketball, mathematics, languages or piano, if given the right environment in which to grow. What biologist or social scientist could argue with that?

But alongside that genetic understanding, an old and pernicious assumption has crept back into the American conversation, in which aptitudes are supposedly inherited by race: certain peoples are thought to have rhythm, or intellect, or speed or charm. That’s a fast track toward the old 19th- and early 20th-century problem of “scientific” racism.

Consider a recent paper that argues that ethnic conflict throughout history is a result of genetic diversity among communities. The authors argue that genetic diversity is the dominant force behind conflict among groups.

It pushes religious communities into battle, causes distrust among neighbors and dictates support for problematic social policies. Such an argument places the history and future of human conflict in genes, as if human interaction and environmental influences cannot match their power
..."

Hopefully, after reading the above, you may come to understood why I posted the article in this Thread, rightly or wrongly.
...

/QUOTE]
NO, I’m still struggling Clyde, because isn’t it a fact that homosexuality transcends Race, Creed, Colour in that aren’t there Gays in virtually every nation on the planet, amongst ALL of humanity’s so diverse ethnic groupings, but isn’t its connection to Eugenics/Sceintific Racism tenuous at best?

Though I’ve known personally individuals who genuinely didn’t want to be Gay, just happened to be Born that Way, however with regard to Eugenics making a comeback, being taken even a little bit seriously by scientists, are you genuinely unaware of the manner in which the Eugenics posse/White Supremacist Racist NUTCASES have been CRUSHED [Adolf Hitler must have been traumatized/totally gutted] by both the Palaentologists and the Geneticists agreeing that the ORIGINAL man definitely wasn’t Caucasion/White; he was an ancestor of either today’s African Pygmies or Khosa Bushmen [as verified by the large number of mutations on their Mitochondrial DNA profile]?

[QUOTE="Clyde C Coger Jr, post: 930699, member: 12718" Try not to struggle with this Orisons, but first, let's determine which camp we are in, respectively. This may help you better understand my perspective.


Obviously, I'm in the camp which views homosexuality as learned behavior. While you appear to be in the camp of "born this way." Please correct me in your next post, if necessary.

With this understanding, I reject that homosexuality transcends, race, color and creed; as well as, gays just happened to be born that way. On what evidence Clyde, did the male of Irish ethnicity that I grew up with CHOOSE to not play soccer, ride bicycles all over town, follow the usual macho pursuits of childhood/youth that his elder and younger siblings did with all of the rest of US?

Why would he or anyone choose a path that would cause them so much turmoil in their life, totally alienate them from most of their friends, family and social circle [which probably explains why despite being so very obviously effeminate all of his life he didn't actually COME OUT as Gay until he was 20 years old]?


Apart from not answering ANY questions at all in the direct manner possible Clyde, why would I dismiss my own personal experience of the so very torturous anguish that an Irish comtemporary of mine experienced as a youth trying to get through adolescence before coming out as Gay because various "Scientists" profess otherwise?

I didn't say that ALL Gays are Born that Way [who knows what percentage of people are malleable enough to follow social directives /cultural programming with regard to their sexuality] whereas isn't it a patently obvious fact that most people are not?

Scientific racism, creeps into our thinking speak for yourself, if we aren't careful to recognize the fact. To repeat, it does so in this manner:

It pushes religious communities into battle, causes distrust among neighbors and dictates support for problematic social policies. Such an argument places the history and future of human conflict in genes, as if human interaction and environmental influences cannot match their power..."

...

/QUOTE] Clyde, is there a specific reason why you continue to totally ignore my question underlined above with regard to the so very comprehensive manner in which Scientific Racism/Eugenics has been BURIED/totally debunked by scientists /SCIENCE, whereas what can anyone do about the somewhat RETARDED DIMWITS who continue to embrace it other than avoid them as much as possible? Well Clyde?

Are you saying or thinking that I embrace Eugenics? If so, you are dead wrong. The whole world knows the fallacy of Eugenics. Exactly what is the difference between Eugenics and the "Scientific Racism" that you assert [above] is the source of a lot of Humanity's GRIEF in the 21st century?
It appears to me the shoe is now on the other foot, so to speak Orisons, why are you running and hiding from my question: I hope you're joking, fear you're not or did you miss my response [underlined above enquiring as to what is the difference in your mind/as opposed to REALITY between what you mean by Eugenics and Scientific Racism] that YOU and I KNOW that you're NEVER going to address or answer are YOU Clyde?

What is so Arch [aren't you just hiding AGAIN/all the time] bout your constant editing/attempts to place my so direct answers to your questions out of context?

[QUOTE="Clyde C Coger Jr, post: 930853, member: 12718" Help me to understand what you are saying exactly, is it a question or a statement?

But are you denying my statement that Eugenics is a fallacy?

Did I not ask you a question Orisons, where's the answer?

...

/QUOTE]
As the person who has stated [above] that Eugenics isn't so much a fallacy as opposed to very dated White Supremacist Racist GARBAGE, I am asking YOU yet again precisely what is the difference between Eugenics and the "scientific racism" you allege is clouding humanity's [YOUR] thinking [what is all this RUNNING/ HIDING about or is your functional literacy being so very very easily challenged]?


Isn’t ANYONE who genuinely believes they are not programmed
graphically illustrating that their programming is COMPLETE?
 
Last edited:

Consciousness Raising Online!

Latest profile posts

Feeling good today fam...just been reading a couple of books. I think Dennis Kimbro's "Daily Motivations for African American Success" is one of the best motivational books on the market. This book has motivation for each day of the year on each page and all of these relate to your own Blackness. No matter what you're experiencing there's something in that book you could draw from. ✊
Life is a poem, love is the pen.
Charles Thompson wrote on Enki's profile.
Good evening
Destee wrote on Angela22's profile.
Hi Sweetie Pie Honey Bunch!!!! ... :dance4: ... Welcome Home! So good to have your sweet Spirit in the house! ... YAAAAAAY USSSSS! ... :yaay: :yaay: :swings: ... :heart:
Angela22 wrote on Enki's profile.
I hope all is well with you. Much love.:love:
Top