# Genetic Freedom **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 29, 2004, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192 "2004-03-29T23:45:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Black\_Train\_Song](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4da419/32.png) [@Black\_Train\_Song](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Black_Train_Song)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192/121 "2004-04-01T00:51:34Z")
How come you didn’t address my post **castaway**? > [@](#): > > In Richard Dawkins book, “The Devils Chaplain”, he touches on this topic. > > In short he says that the great majority of genetic variation is to be found within races, not between them. (suggesting a “bottlenecking” in the past hundred thousand years or so). So isn’t your whole argument about genetics a moot point? ---
**Author:** ![castaway](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c0e974/32.png) [@castaway](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/castaway)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192/122 "2004-04-01T00:58:34Z")
[ > [@](#): > > QUOTE=Kimstu] **castaway:** _If me and a 10,000 others are living on some plot of land, and you come in and impose yourself upon us, you are the one who has taken OUR freedom away… You can do whatever you want, just not in our little community._ > > Nope. If your “little” community is participating in the publicly-accessible housing market, you do not have the “freedom” to discriminate against members of the public on racial grounds in your transactions. > > Here’s a solution for you: Keep your community creation out of the housing market. You can create as large and as exclusive a community as you wish, as long as it remains on the strictly personal and private level and involves no commercial transactions (I’m not any kind of expert on anti-discrimination law, but I think that’s right). No rent, no mortgage, no membership fees, no financial exchanges of any kind. If you just acquire your property and then let your 10,000 “personal friends” who just happen to be of your preferred racial type live on it for free, as far as I’m aware, you are completely within your legal rights. > > Once you want to make your “community” part of the same housing market that serves the general public, though, you no longer have the right to exclude any part of the public from participating in it on racial grounds. > > (Slightly off-topic musing: Probably the most widespread misconception about individual rights is “I Can Do Whatever I Damn Well Please With My Own Goddamn Property.” Very widely believed, but in fact, false. Commercial transactions generally do **not** fall within the category of protected individual rights where it’s unconstitutional for the government to make any rules about what you can and cannot do.) Interesting… but still doesn’t address the need for having laws which allow peaceful genetic freedom for the human race. > [@](#): > > \*But I just pulled the 90% figure from my head… I don’t have any exact number. > > We all know that Jews own most media outlets in the US and europe. That has been true for about 50 to 100 years. \* > > Oh, boy. **castaway** , if you’re going to hang around Great Debates for any length of time (which I somehow doubt), you’re going to have to learn that this kind of argument isn’t good enough. Just pulling figures from your, er, head does not constitute evidentiary support for your positions. Nor does prefacing your unsupported assertions with the words “We all know that”. > > When somebody asks you to back up an assertion, you must either back it up **credibly** , with data from a source generally regarded as reliable, or back down. If you don’t do either, everyone will simply assume that you don’t have adequate support for your argument and don’t have the honesty to admit it. Somewhat harsh and uncharitable, I admit, but those are the rules we play by here in Great Debates. Ok, I don’t know if its 60%, 80%, 95%, or 75%… I just picked a number that sounded reasonable… Jews themselves have thrown out the 60% number when referring the the number of their own tribe that have upper level leadership roles in media. However, the higher you go into the ownership arena, it becomes more Jewish. I do have an article, written by a popular entertainment Jew on the E-entertainment network if you wish to see it. ---
**Author:** ![castaway](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c0e974/32.png) [@castaway](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/castaway)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192/123 "2004-04-01T01:03:29Z")
[QUOTE] > [@Zagadka](#): > > Oh, so you ARE an anarchist. It’s not exactly anarchy… is it? Actualy I’ve never studied Anarchy so I suppose I shouldn’t suggest that I know. I “think” it’s not quite the same as Anarchy. It’s just a more free world. > [@](#): > > And your religion would break that cycle… how? By creating locally dependent micro-cities governed by tyrrany of the corruptable majority? No… that’s what we have today, in almost every government on the planet… I’m working to change that… Are you so confused that you think the democratic party is not run by corruptable elites? Just as the Republican party is? > [@](#): > > Says who? Me, obviously, I’m expressing my feelings at that proposed solution. ---
**Author:** ![castaway](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c0e974/32.png) [@castaway](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/castaway)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192/124 "2004-04-01T01:05:19Z")
> [@Zagadka](#): > > Nice refute. > > How about we discuss social economics or civics, then? You seem to be avoiding each of those questions. No problem… start the discussion. ---
**Author:** ![castaway](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c0e974/32.png) [@castaway](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/castaway)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192/125 "2004-04-01T01:12:55Z")
[QUOTE] > [@Zagadka](#): > > Why would I want you to explain it if I “get it?” You misunderstand much that I say. I was saying that I’d be happy to talk with you about it, when you understand it more. Not “explain” it to you. Although you may have some questions that I could answer. > [@](#): > > What is so wrong with you describing what is different about your ideology from restricted town population and segregation? I’ve stated this many times. Segregation = governmentally mandated Genetic Freedom = not governmentally mandated > [@](#): > > What do you do when there is population growth? Excellent question! We all must control our populations, obviously. Out of control populations are quite unhealthy. If there is a group of people, on an area of land that control their numbers responsibly, then there is a group next door that does not control their numbers the overflowing group will likely want to enter into the less populated lands… this then overpopulates the lands of those who are reproducing responsibly - thusly, it must become a law that if a community over populates their own lands, they have no right at all to then overflow and overpopulate neighboring lands - something like that, details to be worked out in congress > [@](#): > > What happens when there is a schism in the town between southies and northies? Spawn off into two groups, if they really must - but don’t draw correlations between this and the civil war. > [@](#): > > What happens when the town votes to allow everyone it? Then everyone comes into it… done! Group freedom! > [@](#): > > What kind of government is this, anyway? And what does this have to do with genetics? How could you not understand the concept of Genetic Freedom by now? ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192/126 "2004-04-01T01:26:34Z")
This was just in the paper today…there’s a town in South Africa that’s doing just what you suggest, **Castaway** [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36597-2004Mar30.html](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A36597-2004Mar30.html) ---
**Author:** ![castaway](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c0e974/32.png) [@castaway](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/castaway)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192/127 "2004-04-01T01:29:27Z")
[QUOTE] > [@Kimstu](#): > > **castaway:** _It’s expected that you will make that association [between “Genetic Freedom” rhetoric and earlier segregationist “freedom of association” rhetoric]. Eventually your mind will grow beyond that and realize that Genetic Freedom is quite beyond any of the constrains and restrictions of the past._ > > 🙂 Look, if you want me to change my mind about something, you have to rationally **convince** me. Just issuing a prediction that my mind will somehow spontaneously change is not an adequate argument! I’m doing the best I can… [ > [@](#): > > i]The constitution will change. Then [racial discrimination in housing] won’t be unconstitutional.\* > > Fair enough, but that means that you’re going to have to make a truly convincing case for **why** we should change the Constitution. That case is, actually, the Genetic Freedom Essay. It’s pretty crystal clear - but also quite complex thus distorted to many. > [@](#): > > _(Proximity) “Expanding this argument out suggests that the current laws of non-discrimination in housing, which on the face of it, seem to be promoting diversity, actually encourage ethnic diversity to diminish over time.” […] > (Media) “It is reasonable to agree that each ethnic group has a right to fully guide their media and educational outlets.”_ > > Sorry, but this doesn’t add up to a convincing case for overturning anti-discrimination laws. All it indicates is that some people like ethnic separatism, which we already knew, and that some people think ethnic separatism will have a beneficial effect on human genetic diversity. The one logical point you are wrong on here is that it’s not that some people “think” it will have a beneficial effect on human population diversity… it will from a scientific perspective. > [@](#): > > But just pointing out that discrimination can have some beneficial effects doesn’t constitute a compelling case for making it legal. All life on planet Earth is Genetics… even you… sure we have the whole unknown soul thing going on, but in manifestation we are genetics… Thusly genetic freedom is a fundamental human right and the human race has a fundamental right to peacefully branch, genetically. This is deep philosophy here. > [@](#): > > The old pro-segregation “freedom of association” arguments also identified some potential benefits of discrimination. Such as? I’ve not studied that. > [@](#): > > The legislatures and courts still ended up deciding that those potential benefits didn’t **outweigh** the disadvantages of legal discrimination, specifically its damaging infringement of the individual right to equal protection of the laws. That’s interesting… Genetic Freedom as I’ve described it, would not infringe upon anybodies equal protection under governmental laws, but if a jury were all white and the criminal black (perhaps that’s what they are talking about, I don’t know). If democracies were ethnicity based - which as I wrote in another post, might be a good idea. Imagine a hundred communities, of the same or similar ethnicity, living all across the world in different places, but they are just one government! People need not live on adjacent land to have a governmental system in place. > [@](#): > > Similarly, there’s no reason to think that courts or legislatures will conclude that your “Genetic Freedom” argument trumps the individual right to be free from discrimination in the public sphere. Let the education continue, I don’t expect this to occur quickly. Nothing trumps the fundamental right of the human race to freely and peacefully branch, genetically. As people are educated and become less ignorant, judges, legislators and all the rest will think and make laws accordingly. ---
**Author:** ![Black\_Train\_Song](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4da419/32.png) [@Black\_Train\_Song](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Black_Train_Song)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192/128 "2004-04-01T02:27:26Z")
**Castaway** How extensive is your genetic knowledge? How long would it take for a particular “race” to branch before it was markedly different genetically speaking? What are the differences now, genetically speaking? I think you’re a racist who’s trying to bend science around to fit your needs. good luck with that. ---
**Author:** ![flight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bbce88/32.png) [@flight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flight)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192/129 "2004-04-01T02:40:35Z")
You still didn’t answer my question about travel. By your proximity rule (which can simply be stated that people will find a mate from the people in their environment, something very obvious with the exception of internet dating an mail order brides) people mate with those around them. It is an observable fact that often people will find love when travelling or on vacation (I know I have a couple times :-)). Thus, in order to provide for the integrity of your communities it would seem that you need not only prevent others from living there, but from even visiting or travelling through. Is there some other way of handling it? Secondly when you talk about a group of people’s freedom to continue their line, however they happen to define it, you are really talking about controlling who their children mate with. The individuals who would choose to be a member of one of your communities aren’t going to interbreed, so what they are trying to do is create a situation where their children will not have the option of breeding with other groups as they will not have contact with those groups. It seems that what you are suggesting is just reducing the available choices, or freedom if you will, of the next generation. Thirdly, you have stated in reply to my last post that the media problem is so big and so complex that it would take a team of experts at least a year to compile any evidence of it. If this is so, how do you know about it? Are you just going on gut instinct? You have said you can’t give us proof, so what convinced you? I agree with you that media has a huge ability to form and change perceptions in people, where we disagree is if there is any directed effort towards a particular end. If you are right and they are using very subtle methods to do this then it should not be apparent to you or anybody else. This part more than any other seems like paranoia. Lastly, you state that one of the major goals of genetic freedom is for people to be able to talk about it openly. You already have this freedom. You are exercising it here. The reason you do not see it on nightly talk shows is not that it is being suppressed, but that nobody cares about it or thinks it is important. I think that eating an orange by each little cell one at a time is calming and meditative and teaches people patience. I think that if more people would do this it would teach them to approach problems calmly and methodically rather than with blind emotion and may even make the world a more peaceful place. I have never seen anyone ever menton this in any form of media. Is there a great conspiracy to keep this down because the media elite want us at each other’s throats so that we are easier to control? No, there is no mention of it becuase it is silly and no one cares about it. The same holds for your theory. ---
**Author:** ![castaway](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c0e974/32.png) [@castaway](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/castaway)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192/130 "2004-04-01T03:05:37Z")
[QUOTE] > [@Rooves](#): > > **Castaway** How extensive is your genetic knowledge? Quite a bit more than average, certainly, but I’m not a genetic scientist in a biological sense. I am a Doctor of materials science and I do study materials made from nucleotides - DNA. > [@](#): > > How long would it take for a particular “race” to branch before it was markedly different genetically speaking? Well, looking at the dog kingdom, it hasn’t taken too long… humans are also quite genetically different. There are, of course, scientists who like to tilt current science towards the “we’re all the same” mindset. You obviously are caught up in all that and if you want to understand that better, I wrote about it briefly here: [http://www.geneticsreligion.com/geneticfreedom/race.htm](http://www.geneticsreligion.com/geneticfreedom/race.htm) > [@](#): > > What are the differences now, genetically speaking? Differences between races is a bit too broad. Among the main categorization of races, white, semitic, Oriental, Indian, Black, Native Americans you will always find similarities and differences. On the level of ethnic group or tribe you will find the more significant differences. Now, that having been said, certainly the races have trends which can be observed such as pigmentation. Additionally, regardless of pigmentation, you could color everybody the exact same color, let’s say light green, and if given a picture of 100 different people, we would be able to guess which racial group a person belonged to based on the shape of their face and bodies - most of the time. We would also be wrong some of the time. It really depends on how much a person has studied the various looks of the various races. Beyond that, Doctors are becoming rather frustrated at those who attempt to portray humans as “genetically equal” as they have found significant chemical differences among different races or ethnic groups - this means they must know those differences else they may perscribe a drug to someone that will have little effect or an adverse effect. Dr. Dina Dell has some info on this on his website. > [@](#): > > I think you’re a racist who’s trying to bend science around to fit your needs. good luck with that. You’ve been conditioned by the media to think that. You’re quite simple minded and jump to simple, easy out conclusions too quickly. ---
**Author:** ![castaway](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c0e974/32.png) [@castaway](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/castaway)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192/131 "2004-04-01T04:22:20Z")
[QUOTE] > [@flight](#): > > You still didn’t answer my question about travel. By your proximity rule (which can simply be stated that people will find a mate from the people in their environment, something very obvious with the exception of internet dating an mail order brides) people mate with those around them. It is an observable fact that often people will find love when travelling or on vacation (I know I have a couple times :-)). Thus, in order to provide for the integrity of your communities it would seem that you need not only prevent others from living there, but from even visiting or travelling through. Is there some other way of handling it? I try to address all points but remember, I’m trying to talk with about five or six people it seems and they all want to have in depth detailed conversations. You’re missing the spirit of Genetic Freedom… it isn’t about enforcing the genetic integrity of your group. There is no enforcement. Everybody is free. Everybody chooses to live there. If they go travel and find love with another ethnicity, enjoy! Perhaps they couldn’t find love in their local group - certainly happens. > [@](#): > > Secondly when you talk about a group of people’s freedom to continue their line, however they happen to define it, you are really talking about controlling who their children mate with. Sure, that’s a good point. I think you’re utilizing the word control a bit harshly here. I looked up the definition and it deals with limiting or restricting something. Let’s break it down: They start out in these ethnically homogenous communities and go to school. They watch programs which are created by their ethnic group etc. they learn about all the other ethnic groups. We could certainly have activities which bring the various ethnic groups together, perhaps to teach them the concept of Genetic Freedom among other things. They learn all this by the time they are about 11 or 12. They are entering into the age of being interested in partners. Mother and Father still mostly determine what they do and where they go etc… They still go to school and at the level of middle school and high school , it would still likely be ethnically homogenous so relationships would be “guided” in that way, correct. However, they are still too young to create kids. At the level of college, I really don’t think it would be practical to have ethnically homogenous schools (some may be, sure, but many would not). College is where many people meet husbands and wives… now these children know where they came from, they understand “their people” and at the level of college they interact with everybody as they learn about the “world economy” and they can either choose to stay with and enhance the genetics of their own ethnic group, or they can choose to combine in some other way. Hows that? > [@](#): > > The individuals who would choose to be a member of one of your communities aren’t going to interbreed, so what they are trying to do is create a situation where their children will not have the option of breeding with other groups as they will not have contact with those groups. It seems that what you are suggesting is just reducing the available choices, or freedom if you will, of the next generation. I answered that above. It’s about raising young children as well as possible. Enriching and catering to their minds as much as possible. Keeping the lines of communication between the old and the young wide open so intellegence can be passed down to the next generation… today their is a hatchet of non-communication between the old and the young - this is largely caused by the media and by today’s educational system. > [@](#): > > Thirdly, you have stated in reply to my last post that the media problem is so big and so complex that it would take a team of experts at least a year to compile any evidence of it. If this is so, how do you know about it? Are you just going on gut instinct? I’m going on empiracal observation. I can see the evidence, I cannot scientifically relate it to you until the studies are done - for one thing it’s not my field so I don’t know all the fancy language to use to communicate it properly. I have pointed out on this thread the current media conditioning regarding genetic studies and how we are “all the same” etc… Media is beginning to back down on that, sure. But many people are still confused about it and actually believe the spin that was put on it. Certainly some in the media aren’t backing down and continue to say that “we’re all the same” genetically. In a more subtle way, it’s how white males are portrayed, how black males are portrayed, how white females are portrayed etc… it all adds up. > [@](#): > > You have said you can’t give us proof, so what convinced you? First, let’s be clear. It doesn’t matter if media is or is not promoting homogenization for the concept of Genetic Freedom to be real and valid. However, we could analyse just one movie. That might be a way to show this trend. I could even let you pick the movie. Then I would rent it, take notes, and show you the notes. Essentially I would take notes according to the following links rules: [http://www.geneticsreligion.com/geneticfreedom/media-watchdogs.htm](http://www.geneticsreligion.com/geneticfreedom/media-watchdogs.htm) Note that there are some movies that do not show this trend, at all. I’ve certainly seen movies that are positive to Genetic Freedom. But the majority of movies, are not. > [@](#): > > I agree with you that media has a huge ability to form and change perceptions in people, where we disagree is if there is any directed effort towards a particular end. Fair enough. But profit is a particular end… marketing products to people is a particular end… Basically, if I may, you don’t believe they are trying to homogenize human genetics - that is the “particular end” you are referring to. > [@](#): > > If you are right and they are using very subtle methods to do this then it should not be apparent to you or anybody else. It would only be apparent to those who pay attention, who are very bright, open minded etc… Sure, we can find “conspiracy” in anything if we try, granted. Any facts can be twisted or spun to serve any particular agenda, especially in politics. Did some in the U.S. military think that Japan was about to attack us? Were they “paranoid” prior to the attack? > [@](#): > > This part more than any other seems like paranoia. I don’t simply discard what you say… I pay attention. I genuinely believe the media, given that there is little diversity in it’s ownership, promotes an agenda amenable to the owners. There is a guy named Israel Shamir that wrote about this. I don’t know what you think about him, but I’d be curious to know. He lives in Israel and here’s is his site: [http://www.israelshamir.net/](http://www.israelshamir.net/) I could not find the exact article as he has written many, but he came right out and said that Jews that run the media naturally want to “blend in better” in the societies they have great wealth in, and one way to do that is to promote immigration and even interracial marriages etc… > [@](#): > > Lastly, you state that one of the major goals of genetic freedom is for people to be able to talk about it openly. You already have this freedom. You are exercising it here. How long do you think I’d last in the city coucil? or how about a School board meeting? Come on, you know better than that. We live in a hyper sensitive time where any speak on genetics IS RACISM… then it’s “inciting racial hatred” and then it’s a “hate crime” and you could, in fact, go to jail. Here on the internet, sure, we can talk about it all day long. > [@](#): > > The reason you do not see it on nightly talk shows is not that it is being suppressed, but that nobody cares about it or thinks it is important. I think that eating an orange by each little cell one at a time is calming and meditative and teaches people patience. I just planted fruit trees in my yard: Carambola, Navel Orange, Strawberry Guava, Avocado, Blueberry, Jaboticaba, Ruby Red Grapefruit, Mango, and Lychee. > [@](#): > > I think that if more people would do this it would teach them to approach problems calmly and methodically rather than with blind emotion and may even make the world a more peaceful place. Sure, that among other things could be good. Kind of like Samarai. > [@](#): > > I have never seen anyone ever menton this in any form of media. Is there a great conspiracy to keep this down because the media elite want us at each other’s throats so that we are easier to control? You and I differ here… I say the answer is YES. Fundamentally, the more divided the “little people” are, the easier it is to profit from them because they are too busy arguing with one another to gather together into groups and point their fingers at the excessive profiteers. > [@](#): > > No, there is no mention of it becuase it is silly and no one cares about it. The same holds for your theory. People dont’ care about it… but if the media began promoting it tomorrow for ten years, in ten years we would all embrace genetic freedom as reality. That is how powerful the media is. It creates what we care about, what we consider to be silly or cool. It’s really not a stretch. Take the example of Christians - just one little book has brainwashed them for 2000 years. One little piece of written media and the spell cannot be broken from generation to generation… that is a prime example of media brainwashing. ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 4:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192/132 "2004-04-01T04:36:13Z")
> [@castaway](#): > > However, we could analyse just one movie. That might be a way to show this trend. I could even let you pick the movie. Then I would rent it, take notes, and show you the notes. As a scientist, how can you evey say the words “pick just one, and this will show a trend.” I’m still awaiting your reply on social economics, civics, etc. You’d better have a damn well written out plan if you want to erect a world government. ---
**Author:** ![flight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bbce88/32.png) [@flight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flight)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 5:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192/133 "2004-04-01T05:06:20Z")
> [@](#): > > People dont’ care about it… but if the media began promoting it tomorrow for ten years, in ten years we would all embrace genetic freedom as reality. That is how powerful the media is. It creates what we care about, what we consider to be silly or cool. It’s really not a stretch. This is exactly the point I am trying to make about the media. They don’t have an agenda against genetic freedom and they do not have one for it, they are simply reflecting society. They aren’t going to start supporting it for ten years because it isn’t popular. When it becomes popular they will mention it. You yourself say that this is a new idea of yours. If I come up with a new idea today, I am not going to get pissed at the media tomorrow for not publicizing it. If you gain enough support from people who know what they are talking about then you will get the media attention you want. > [@](#): > > How long do you think I’d last in the city coucil? or how about a School board meeting? Not because they are repressing you, but because they do not agree with you. You have the right to espouse your views, but others have the right to dissent. The point is you cannot get elected or expect people to support you if your views are completely different from theirs. You seem to think this means they are trying to keep you down, in fact they just don’t like what you have to say, and that is their right. I happen not to believe in segregation (that is what it is, even if it isn’t a government policy) so I would never vote for or support you in public debate. If everybody feels my way and nobody feels your way, do not expect anyone to pay attention. > [@](#): > > I’m going on empiracal observation. I can see the evidence, I cannot scientifically relate it to you until the studies are done - for one thing it’s not my field so I don’t know all the fancy language to use to communicate it properly. This amounts to gut instinct. If, say, society was progressing towards a more open, accepting, integrated culture and you did not see things that way, then when the media changes along with the culture, simply reflecting what was happening, you would see it as pushing people away from your views. This is what I see happening. I see media following the wave of change in attitudes towards race and I see you being left behind. To you it does not look like you are being left behind, but rather that everyone else is being forced into unnatural beliefs. There are two premises here. One is that culture is changing as it always has and the media is following along. The other is that there is a great conspiracy to control humanity and media is simply a tool of that great conspiracy. Even you can see which of these is more probable to an outside observer. Thus, as you are bringing in what to most people is a nut job theory, the burden of proof is on you. You say you cannot show any proof, so I would lay of even mentioning this idea until you can as it just weakens any other arguments you may have. Also, you say we could discuss an individual movie. This cannot work as by your theory it is a gradual process that slowy changes attitudes. No single movie could possibly show any sort of trend. I can show you very conservative and very liberal movies and neither support the idea that the media in general is pushing us in that direction. Thankfully you say it does not matter for this whole genetic freedom thing so I wil llet you ignore it if you want rather than pushing you any more on something you have no support for. [QUOTE] If they go travel and find love with another ethnicity, enjoy! Perhaps they couldn’t find love in their local group - certainly happens. [QUOTE] That wasn’t my point. The point was that the reason for existence of these communities is to lessen intermingling of different races, or whatever you want to call them. So, if you let people _in to visit your community_ (not out to visit others) you are negating the reason for their existence. If your youth are exposed to people from other cultures in their late teens when they would probably be most susceptible (owing to youthful rebellion) many will probably fall for the exotic and interesting strangers. Again, in my travels I have seen this happen and am very grateful for it. Of course, if every community prevents any but their own from entering it would have the same result as letting no one leave. You would end up with the free mixing zones you describe being the only possible travel destinations. Do you see this as so? Also, what makes you think people would not mix just as much if they went away to college as if they weren’t segregated early on. As I have said before, you have given every other race the benefit of being exotic. Unfortunately I don’t know of any study done on southern whites who went to college in the north during the times of rampant segregation, so I cannot make any solid statements, but there is plenty of enecdotal evidence to support that your idea would not work. As it is, you have stated the the media rule and the entire genetic basis for your argument are unnecessary and irrelevant to the outcome of allowing communities to segregate themselves, so I suggest that we eliminate those lines of discussion so we can at the core issue. Is it right or even practical to have these segregated communities. ---
**Author:** ![Thaumaturge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/858c86/32.png) [@Thaumaturge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thaumaturge)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 6:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192/134 "2004-04-01T06:10:31Z")
Regardless of the veracity of claims that there are significant differences between the races at the current time, ultimately, it doesn’t matter. It won’t happen for a long time, but eventually, people will have **true** genetic freedom. If I want to have green skin that photosynthesizes, and eyes that see new colors with metallic irises, I or my decendants will be able to. When that happens, people will be divided along the lines of their ideology, not the accidental grouping of genes acquired at birth that define race. What will matter is your perception of yourself, not the gene lottery. The media has nothing to do with this, it is a reflection of us, not a controller of us. As the world gets smaller, and science learns more and more that filters into popular culture, people’s attitudes will naturally change. Media that caters to it’s audience gets watched and makes more money. Media that people don’t like and connect with bombs. The media doesn’t create crap that everyone hates and somehow trick us into liking it. I’m white, but I’d rather have darker skin that didn’t burn, and I’d change a host of other things about myself. Race is simply a non-issue for me. The lines of race will blur more and more over time. I’m one half polish, and part german dutch and english. My kids will be part polish, dutch, english, german, chinese, and possibly japanese ( gf’s mother was adopted, think she might be part japanese). What race will they be? Who cares, all that matters is what they make of themselves. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 11:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192/135 "2004-04-01T11:38:33Z")
> [@](#): > > Who says they can’t intermix? I never did. They would mix as much as naturally occurs heed both individual and group freedoms. Everyone is doing exactly that, now, without the extra expense of maintaining all your little vaguely defined privacy cells. Now you have made the claim that having people mix, socially, tends to result in more interbreeding. There is probably some truth to that, although I notice that even with rigid segregation, interbreeding took place quite a bit. However, it is clearly true that having groups isolated from each other causes them to engage in more xenophobia and antagonism. So, for the purpose of supporting some imagined “genetic freedom” (which we already possess), you are proposing extra levels of government and bureaucracy that will clearly encourage balkanization and “genetic” conflict. You have certainly persuaded me that you have a good idea. If you want this imagined “genetic freeedom,” simply imitate the Amish who have already achieved your goal without setting up any discriminatory or conflict-engendering ghettoes. ---
**Author:** ![Karmagun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/4af34b/32.png) [@Karmagun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Karmagun)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 1:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192/136 "2004-04-01T13:24:30Z")
castaway, still waiting for your response to post #103 ---
**Author:** ![castaway](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c0e974/32.png) [@castaway](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/castaway)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192/137 "2004-04-01T22:30:19Z")
> [@Rooves](#): > > In Richard Dawkins book, “The Devils Chaplain”, he touches on this topic. > > In short he says that the great majority of genetic variation is to be found **within** races, not between them. (suggesting a “bottlenecking” in the past hundred thousand years or so). > > Sorry if this has already been addressed. I addressed this on this link: [http://www.geneticfreedom.com/geneticfreedom/race.htm](http://www.geneticfreedom.com/geneticfreedom/race.htm) For one, we’ve only sequence five humans… the guy that made that statement above does not have the scientific data to make the statement. Second, It doesn’t matter, whatsoever, if the above statement eventually turns out to be scientifically accurate for Genetic Freedom to be a fundamental right of intelligent genetic life. Finally, as I mentioned in the link above, by this guys statement, there is no need to import people into “white” communities of the world to increase diversity because, as he states, there is so much genetic diversity there already. ---
**Author:** ![castaway](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c0e974/32.png) [@castaway](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/castaway)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192/138 "2004-04-01T22:35:31Z")
Hello everybody I am very busy and will likely not be able to respond too much until April 19th. I will start at the top of page 3 and address every single point, in detail. I may peak my head in here a bit and answer a single post, but rest assured, I will address every single post above starting on April 19th. However, for the most part, the original essay I wrote answers just about every single question you guys keep asking - along with the additional links on the website. Also, most of the responses I’ve made thus far address most the the questions I keep seeing here. I will clarify further, as needed, on and after April 19th. Later ---
**Author:** ![Ca3799](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/9f8e36/32.png) [@Ca3799](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ca3799)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192/139 "2004-04-01T23:05:05Z")
I believe there is a medium sized manipulation happening here. At the JREF forum was a message (link here)[http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=38044e](http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=38044e)) that linked to this site in the internet ifidels board (link here) [http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=80942](http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=80942) which linked here, a site called “Original Dissent Traditional Conservatism for and from the Common Man” (link here) [http://forums.originaldissent.com/showthread.php?t=12487](http://forums.originaldissent.com/showthread.php?t=12487) It seems racisits are targeting ‘intelligent’ message boards in order to use ‘logic’ to sway more recruits to racism. Sorry for all the linkage. ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2004, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192/140 "2004-04-01T23:05:11Z")
[QUOTE=castaway] > [@](#): > > Spawn off into two groups, if they really must - but don’t draw correlations between this and the civil war. I never equated it with the American Civil War. You did. I merely pointed out that any closed environment will fracture. You think there is room for infinite fractures of groups? You said you’re willing to talk about social economics. How do you intend to run international economies between your little city-states? How will they deal with war? What will be done to prevent alliances? What makes you assume they won’t group up together and form a stronger group? Maybe instead of just basing all of your wild theories off of one college chemistry course, you should spend some time in social studies, economics, etc. > [@](#): > > Then everyone comes into it… done! Group freedom! So if a group votes not to follow your racial segregation plan, you’ll shut up and leave? > [@](#): > > How could you not understand the concept of Genetic Freedom by now? Because you keep changing it to fit your needs? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/genetic-freedom/237192.md?page=8)