Won’t be long until nearly everyone is brown… can’t wait!
A world of beautiful brown people, where diversity is our greatest strength.
Race is a social construct. Get it? Perhaps I should have gone with “sociable” instead.
“Diversity” is how you make the brown people. Brown people are the goal, not the diversity – diversity is just the means. 
Oh wait, that wasn’t snark. My bad.
Just FTR, Construct, I do find repugnant your views on everything else aside from Islam.
Yet it has significance in medicine, a seeming paradox.
Because people of certain ethnic populations tend to be lumped under the same races. If you actually remove the racial component and look at actual ancestry, you get a much better correlation.
Why do you hate White children?
SlackerInc, I totally understand.
There are no white children, there are only varying shades of beige. Usually whatever color dirt is where they live.
(PS: what moves you to capitalize the “w” in “white”? Is it because “white” is the absence of anything interesting?)
Well, except for the fact that96-97% of self-identified Whites have no non-White ancestry.
I capitalize White as a signal to other members of the alt-right, so they can recognize me, and because it subtly promotes the idea that Whites are a defined and meaningful group.
That actually should read “African-American” in place of “non-White”. Still, other evidence indicates that self-identified White Americans have a trivial amount of non-White ancestry: <.2% African American, <.2% Native American, ~1% unidentified, on average.
Caucasian, I beseech thee!
I’m not actually going to read the racial stupidity of random internet morons. Construct’s name amused me, that’s all.
Not really.
The big “Look! Race is important in medicine!” claim is usually Sickle Cell Anemia as it is found in the black community in the U.S. However, that is an accident of history. Sickle Cell is prevalent throughout those regions of Africa AND southern Europe AND western Asia where swamps provide good breeding grounds for the mosquitoes that spread it.
As it happens, the overwhelming majority of Africans brought to the U.S. as slaves happened to live in those regions, while the numbers of Africans living farther south where Sickle Cell is not prevalent were not often brought to the U.S. On the other hand, the numbers of immigrants from the regions of Sicily, Malta, Greece, and Syria where Sickle Cell is also prevalent, tended to be lower than the Italian, Greek, and Syrian immigrants from the regions less (or not) susceptible to Sickle Cell.
So, when studies are done in the U.S. on the prevalence of Sickle Cell, the population of African descendants shows a very high rate while the population of European descendants is much lower. However, had the U.S. imported more slaves from southern Africa while receiving far more immigrants from several swampy regions of Europe, there would have been no such association with perceived race.
Similarly, the drug BiDil has been approved for use among blacks because it showed much more effectiveness for that population than for whites. This came about when, in a study with a large number of white and black participants, the drug was seen to be more effective treating the black patients. However, when the original study was re-examined, it turned out that the white participants averaged younger age, better overall health, better diet, and less weight. In other words, while it is good that we are providing an effective medicine to black men, we are quite possibly shorting older, heavier, less healthy white men who would also benefit from the drug. Once the first test was announced, all the subsequent trials were geared toward making sure that it was effective and safe for black men when the trials should have probably been re-directed toward older, heavier, more sedentary men with additional health problems, regardless of perceived race.
Sickle Cell is not a “black” disease and BiDil is probably not more effective for blacks, (than for whites of equally bad physical conditions).
Well, I can say one thing for you, SlackerInc. You’re getting better. You’ve at least now restricted your comments to a particular branch of Islam, instead of Islam in general–you know, the religion of these people who wanted the U.S. to stay.
Eventually you’ll hopefully get to the point of realizing it isn’t religion at all. You whine about Aisha not wanting Western help. That’s not because of their religion. That’s because we tend to fuck things up worse. We aren’t ever going to stay. And, when we leave, the things get worse.
The issue is not Islamic culture–the culture all Muslims have in common. It is Saudi Arabian culture. And the problem is not Islam, it is bigotry–which we should work to eliminate. Islam is used by those in Saudi Arabia to further that bigotry–it is not the root cause. There is a feedback loop, sure, but the only way to short circuit it is to try to fix the culture, and the religion will follow.
You’re the one who decided to come in and shit all over Islam as a whole for what only a part does. That’s the bigotry. It doesn’t matter that you aren’t bigoted in other aspects of your life. You shat on the very people you are now saying are the oppressed people who wanted the U.S. to stick around.
And, finally, Islam is not the religion of a pedophile. They don’t believe he was a pedophile. Which means they agree pedophilia is wrong. You can’t be the religion of a pedophile if you think pedophilia is wrong.
You can have problems with progressives not speaking out against Saudi Arabia without being bigoted. I do, too. Unfortunately, your message is buried under your bigotry. You agree that bigoted views of Islam and the people Middle East are not repugnant.
They are, and, until you shed them, you’re not going to be able to join the rest of us who do in fact want the U.S. to stop cozying up with Saudi Arabia. Because you will just make the problem worse by making it easily dismissable as bigotry.
There’s a lot we clearly disagree about. I thought your paragraph about paedophilia in particular was positively Orwellian.
But I’m happy to make common cause with anyone who is on board with making Saudi Arabia the new apartheid South Africa (i.e., an international pariah).
Not an idea that inspires promotion, but mockery and derision. Contempt may not actually be required, but if the enthusiasm takes you there, go for it.
Yeah; BigT is wrapped up in fact. You’re not.
How is it Orwellian? She correctly described that the people practicing the religion you malign consider pedophilia to be a bad thing.
And you want to accomplish this because of the religion when, don’t you? You’re proud to announce that the people in that country should be held as pariahs because of their religion, aren’t you? It’s not the religion that’s causing a lot of problems for the people–it’s the culture.
As if religion and culture are separate things.
But what does the first sentence quoted above mean? That can’t possibly be the sentence you intended to put there, can it?
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!
There’s a stray when. Here’s the correct sentence:
So you really don’t think religion is a cultural practice? 
I suppose if you are a theist, that might make some sense, but still.