Genetic Freedom

And around we go…why do we need LAWS to TELL people who to cultivate those aggregate phenotypes with, when they can freely chose to do that already?

Let me paraphase your points…

In castawayland I can work, eat, play, pray, dance, write poetry, play video games, see a movie etc… with any “visitor” of any group as long I and as often as want I to…but I can’t live next to one, because doing so threatens my unique aggregate phenotypes?

This is because living next to a different group increases the chances that will I go against my “race’s” attraction and may find a person of a different group sexually attractive. However spending 12-15 hours a day, 5 days a week, 52 weeks a year with this same person in a work or school or other environment…won’t.

Is that what you’re saying?

Holmes, you’re ignoring the “Proximity Rule.” Which is in the essay - which you should read as castaway can’t be bothered to explain it to you here. Not enough time, you see. Not that it matters, since Genetic Freedom is inevitable and you’ll end up agreeing with him whether you want to or not. It’s all the fault of the Media Matrix, but GF will win out in the end anyway.

Sorry, I just couldn’t resist…
P.S. Oops, almost forgot - blah blah unique aggregate phenotypes, blah blah Jew, blah blah oppressor.

**

[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers]
:frowning:
Well, let’s explore this, shall we? When you say “phenotype”, I’ll assume you mean it in the dictionary sense of an organism’s visible physical traits (possibly a bad assumption, given your displayed flexibility with English). So in an attempt to get this from the vague to the specific, I’ll ask:**

I am using it precisely per dictionary definitions, there are genotypes and phenotypes etc…

Additionally, for everybodies edification - I have actually decided it’s best to simply discuss that we should freely discuss Genetic Freedom among the human race rather than discussing any specifics of “district based communities.” Obviously it’s way to soon to bring that up because it’s too sensitive. So, I’ve rewritten the main essay link and essentially I say that the main goal is to achieve a world that is tolerant of people who wish to openly discuss their aggregate genetic phenotypes and promote them in the next generation of kids accordingly. Today we are not tolerant of that.

Can you give examples of visible physical traits that a “Genetically Free” community might seek to perpetuate?

Sure, any visible physical trait… any coloring feature, any body type feature - I need not be specific because ANY is pretty all inclusive - you may fill in the blank.
[li]Can you explain why these visible physical traits aren’t simply a matter of personal aesthetics and preferences? I’ll assume such advantages as better disease immunity or a stronger cardiovascular system don’t count as “visible”, useful though they may be.[/li]
Pigmentation / coloring is genetic. The invisible phenotypic differences are obviously important and some of those kinds can be determined - I believe “brainpower” can be well perceived in another person that you know very well. Once you get past all the “emotional problems” you begin to get a good feel of how “deep” a persons potential creativity and intellect can go (no need to use this as an open door to poke fun at me…).
[li]If you were a member of such a “Genetically Free” community, and a newcomer wanted to buy land and settle in, how different could their visible physical traits be before you personally voted against them, and can you offer examples of traits that would a “deal-breaker” for you, requiring to cast a no vote?[/li][li]If the majority of voters in your Genetically Free community allowed enough of the “wrong” (in your opinion) visible physical traits in, what steps would you take? Would you consider leaving, with a sense of betrayal?[/li]
Well, I’m going to consistantly backtrack upon conversations of this kind… it’s too soon to discuss these. My new course is simply promoting tolerance of openly discussing Genetic Freedom without any notion of changing any existing laws - My new essay explains it.

In addition to these relatively simple mechanical questions, I have to ask if it’s really that important that your grandchildren look like you.

It’s just about the pursuit of happiness… You do the best you can to raise your family and teach them about genetics and their unique aggregate phenotypes and they choose what they want to do with regards to mating. I want to help make society tolerant of such discussions.
Further, don’t people already have “genetic freedom” (note the lower-case latters) in the sense that they can mate as they choose?

Of course they do. That is one very important aspect of Genetic Freedom which is as true and free as the other type of Genetic Freedom.

The “essay” is the link at the very front of this thread.

[QUOTE=tomndebb]
And as I said: you are lying.
I asked for a citation to the lie that “On the other hand, the one-human-genetic-mass religion is based on, well, it’s based on a book that a Jewish Male wrote that says "the differences between the races are greater than the differences within.

Somebody quoted an article:

The Genetic Structure of Human Populations by Noah A. Rosenberg, et alii, reported in the 20 DECEMBER 2002 issue of Science, studied 1056 individuals.

Which by the way is a great genetic study given the rudimentary genetic analysis technology we have available to ourselves today, and the details can be found here:

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/data/298/5602/2381/DC1/1

I read through it and enjoyed the read.

This is obviously not a book, Ok fine. Jews have the most control over what gets promoted in the mass media, and I would be willing to bet you that a Jew or Jews promoted the phrase “more variation within the races than between the races.” If I’m wrong I’d actually be surprised. If a non-jewish scientist said it, that’s fine, I’m talking about who promoted that scientists opinion as fact - because lies like that are what cause communication problems.
(You are, by the way, continuing to demonstrate your ignorance of science when you continue to harp on the notion that “What you call a fact is not based on 30,000 genes so it is not yet fact.” but you have demonstrated an impervious shield to scientific evidence and methodology, so I won’t waste our time explaining your error.)

You have “faith” that the rudimentary science available to us today is absolute with regards to conclusions comparing different human populations - I don’t have that faith. I’m waiting till we have all 3 billion base pairs of several thousand people logged into a computer - then the computer can tell us what is what. This is a reasonable position I have taken and I can guarantee you that ALL SCIENTISTS, can’t wait to get their hands on the data I just mentioned so they can see of “what they think is true today” is actually proved true with the full dataset. Scientists, we can predict things, absolutely. Sometimes we are right and sometimes we are wrong - that’s it.

Why not eliminate the ethnic requirements altogether and just focus on IQ or weight or something? That way you’ll get the best genes from all ethnicities. Obviously not everyone in one ethnicity is going to have the genetic makeup that makes the ethnicity desireable. You want some dumb fat ugly stinky bum mixing in your purity pool just because he’s white?

**

[QUOTE=Stonebow]
Thank you! You’v put my objections to this whole thing very eloquently. It just seems as though the ‘freedom’ being put forward by the OP is just the opposite of this. - clip - **

I’ll paste my new and improved, and shorter, essay here for your edification. I am comletely backing away from “district based communities” because people are not yet ready to have that discussion. Instead I’m simply going to promote that we have tolerance for people who wish to openly discuss cultivating their unique aggregate phenotypes as part of their lives and pursuit of enjoyment and happiness.

We have discovered that there is order to what gives us life - genetic life. All genetic life upon the planet has both similarities and differences. With each new birth of a plant, animal or human, genetic life changes one more time. These changes are the recombination of genetics from the male and female coupled with random mutations that occur. Humans are intelligent genetic life. By that I mean that, compared to the animal world, humans have written language, technology and things which define us as intelligent - we created the word “intelligent.” Given that we are intelligent, we can write about what freedoms we should all have, and much has been written already about our freedoms.

Since we are genetic life, and genetic life changes from generation to generation, naturally the concept of "the branching human race" will be continuously discussed.  What kind of branching?  Well, we are genetic life so genetic branching of course - although cultural branching is certainly not excluded from this discussion.  Over the past many ages of mankind, the human species has branched off into a variety of different genetic morphologies and cultures.  During the recent media and information age of mankind, the concept of "One Human Race Only" has been promoted and thusly become popular.  This concept holds that all humans should perceive themselves as part of a one-human-genetic-mass and mate with anybody accordingly without any concept of human genetic branching.  This Global view of human genetics as "one" is promoted in the media and educational system, while the "branching human race" is not promoted.  That's why I'm here!  There was a void of intellect and I'm filling it; feel free to join me.  This essay will discuss the branching human race, and I like to call it Genetic Freedom.

In the natural world, genetic life changes slowly by competing violently for survival.  Humans have competed violently throughout their history.  Violent genetic branching is obviously undesirable, so I will discuss how peaceful branching can be achieved.  Creating a civilization that respects the notion of the branching human race, would involve some changes.  The single most important change would be how we view the human race and how we teach our kids about it.  Limiting education to the concepts of the one-human-genetic-mass, will lead kids to disrespect anybody who wants to talk about and pursue unique aggregate phenotypes and mutations.  Let's discuss what is meant by "unique aggregate phenotypes and mutations," because that is the foundation and purpose of Genetic Freedom.

    All genetic life branches with isolated reproduction.   Over the past many ages of mankind, the human species has branched off into a variety of different genetic morphologies and cultures which we can call ethnic groups or tribes.  This population diversity was created due to relatively isolated reproduction within the different land zones of the planet, coupled with cultural population influences and admixtures with adjacent populations and migratory peoples over the millennia.  Each of these ethnic groups or tribes will have unique aggregate phenotypic genetics and some mutational uniqueness.  The term "aggregate" obviously indicates that there are more than just one of these unique, population specific, phenotypes.  There may be only a few or perhaps as many as several hundred depending on which two populations are being compared.  A child that is born to two members of the same group, who both have the same unique aggregate phenotypes, will also have the phenotypes, and their genetic morphology will develop accordingly.  There is a lot of "gray" area here and how a baby turns out is not an absolute, but rather a probability trend as the genetics recombine from the mother and father.  No part of the human body is excluded from unique aggregate phenotypes, including the brain.  The term "unique aggregate phenotypes" deals with those specific collection of genetic phenotypes that ethnic group 'A' has, but ethnic group 'B' does not, and any two ethnic groups can be compared for how they are different.  Cosmetic differences are the ones we all can easily see, but many other "invisible" differences also exist.  A book was written suggesting that "genetic differences within the races are greater than genetic differences between them."  Don't let this statement confuse you.  "The races" are very, very broad human categorizations and a statement of this kind, if proven true some day, would not be a surprise.  Studies of this kind are still in their infancy, and the only way to be 100% certain of the genetic science is to sequence all 3 billion base pairs (30,000 genes) - and that takes lots of time.  Other methods of doing genetic testing and comparison are less foolproof than sequencing all 30,000 genes, and the above quote is based upon those other studies.  Genetic Freedom is at the level of ethnic group or tribe, rather than "race."  If the above statement is validated as true some day, it is actually good for Genetic Freedom because it means that there is already a lot of genetic diversity within people that are "of the same race" and possible "ethnic group." which is also no surprise when one understands genetics.  All humans are more alike than different, genetically, but each unique population has unique aggregate phenotypes and that is what we are talking about with Genetic Freedom.

How do people cultivate their unique aggregate phenotypes and mutations?  As we live our lives and pursue happiness, thinking about genetics positively and with a sense of fun is just part of enjoying life.  As mentioned already, the first most important thing is to teach people that "it's OK" to do this.  The current political, media, and educational environment frowns upon any notion of the human race branching and instead actively promotes that we are "all one" and should mate accordingly.  With that type of education, nobody can peacefully and happily pursue Genetic Freedom because they would become outcasts in an intolerant society.  This intolerance is a function of how we are educating the kids, so education is the first, most important step to implementing Genetic Freedom in a society.  We already teach tolerance to all the kids, now it's time to expand the definition of tolerance to be all inclusive.

Moving on, let's assume a society is educated to be tolerant of Genetic Freedom.  What is the next step of implementation?  Once we have a tolerant society, there are many ways we could allow people to express Genetic Freedom.  Do we let groups have local district based communities so they can fully express their cultures, properly raise their kids, and cultivate strong group cohesion and love?  It certainly seems like that would be a positive thing for society.  There is one little problem, however.  If only ethnic group "B" is allowed to move into this district, that means any other ethnicities that want to buy a house there, would be denied.  This is called discrimination in housing, and even though in a world tolerant of Genetic Freedom, there is no mal-intent behind this discrimination (which means simply distinguishing accurately), the problem arises with the history of the United States and of the world.  Lot's of pain and suffering from the past like slavery, suppression and oppression make us fear the notion of "free and happy" discrimination to promote free Genetic Freedom districts.  Sure, in a more enlightened time, this type of community may be possible, but for now let's assume that society isn't yet ready for this.  Is there some other way to implement Genetic Freedom?  Sure there is.  Once a population is educated to be tolerant of those who wish to openly discuss and promote their variety of Genetic Freedom, it will occur naturally.  Even today there are communities that are composed of largely the same ethnic group.  But, regardless of that, who people mate with in a society tolerant of Genetic Freedom will become a more specific choice and people will genuinely think about it.  Frankly, that is all that's required for Genetic Freedom to flourish - people to openly and happily think and talk about it.  That's not the world we live in today, so perhaps its time for tolerance to reach out to new frontiers.

**

[QUOTE=holmes]
And around we go…why do we need LAWS to TELL people who to cultivate those aggregate phenotypes with, when they can freely chose to do that already?**

I’ve never proposed laws to tell people who they should mate with… really I haven’t… feel free to quote me where I have.
Besides, I’ve altered my strategy a bit, See the new essay above…

I know groups of people who not only want to do that… but are doing it

Genetic Freedom! It’s all good.

**

[QUOTE=Zakalwe]
Holmes, you’re ignoring the “Proximity Rule.” Which is in the essay - which you should read as castaway can’t be bothered to explain it to you here. Not enough time, you see. Not that it matters, since Genetic Freedom is inevitable and you’ll end up agreeing with him whether you want to or not. It’s all the fault of the Media Matrix, but GF will win out in the end anyway.

Sorry, I just couldn’t resist…
P.S. Oops, almost forgot - blah blah unique aggregate phenotypes, blah blah Jew, blah blah oppressor.**

Wow!

See, it’s already taking hold in your mind! Today’s sarcasm and humor is tomorrow’s reality!

That’s good! Because that’s what they mean when they say the differences within are greater than the differences between…if you want to make an improvement, you have to breed positive qualities independent of ethnicity, otherwise there is no guarantee that your community has the genetic pool you’re after. Understand?

It would be better to click this link to read the latest essay as I’ve already enhanced it a bit… It’s very short compared to the original one at the beginning of this thread.

http://www.geneticfreedom.com/geneticfreedom/latest-conversation-starter.htm

Sure… but this can be accomlished with people who are 100% “white” or 100% black, or 100% anything per todays categories…

Any groups can promote whatever genetics they wish, and the way that you just proposed doing it is called global eugenics - without any of the governmental control presumed with eugenics.

have at it, if you wish, but don’t hate others who pursue different kinds of reproductive trends.

Branching human race…

Various quotes by the OP:

This looks like your standard response to any request for specific examples of how “Genetic Freedom” would be implemented, or how people practicing “Genetic Freedom” would behave differently than they do now. Everything else you’ve posted is vague nonsense either seeking appeal to emotion or obscurity through jargon.

In any case, I am without reservation publicly declaring myself ready and able to discuss any and all practical aspects of “Genetic Freedom”, namely how it will be implemented, what new laws will have to be created, and what the possible consequences are for individuals in their daily lives. You’ve implied that I’m on the verge of violence, ready to sic mobs on you and such. I’m not. I’m simply curious if you’ve thought at all about how to implement any of what you’re suggesting.

Well, have you?

OK…just so long as you now understand how differences within ethnicities are greater than differences between. You seemed to be stumbling on that one earlier.

It’s not up to “us” to let a group have a district. It’s up to anyone outside of the group who is wealthy enough to move in anyway. So if it’s in a real crappy location then sure, groups will probably be left alone. Beachfront property? Not bloody likely!

Well, like I said… district based community discussions are for the future. First step is open, amiable discussion of unique aggregate phenotypes - discussing that type of Genetic Freedom.

I’ve not stumbled on that one for even a moment… I’ve explained that the current rudimentary genetic science may indicate this trend, but whether this is validated with the complete dataset (all 3 billion base pairs of several thousand people from around the world), remains to be seen.

I’ve also pointed out that if the genetic variation within races, or ethnicities is greater - then that is actually good for existing ethnic groups that wish to continue breeding in their group - because there is LOTS of diversity simply within their local group and they need not go to the “world gene pool” to find lots of genetic diversity.

**

[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers]
Various quotes by the OP:
In any case, I am without reservation publicly declaring myself ready and able to discuss any and all practical aspects of “Genetic Freedom”, namely how it will be implemented, what new laws will have to be created, and what the possible consequences are for individuals in their daily lives. You’ve implied that I’m on the verge of violence, ready to sic mobs on you and such. I’m not. I’m simply curious if you’ve thought at all about how to implement any of what you’re suggesting.

Well, have you?**

I’m no longer discussing “district based communities.” That discussion is for the future. I wish only to promote now the free discussion of all the different ethnic groups of the world who wish to intentionally continue their unique aggregate phenotypes. We can discuss any details of that.

This is just fantasy that you are speaking here… people can pursue whatever type of unique aggregate phenotypes that they wish, they need not access the entire world gene pool to branch the human race… branching the human race, by definition, means they have branched and do not continuously access the world gene pool.

So, it’s you who does not yet understand.

As far as I know, wherever free speech exists, people are already free to discuss “unique aggregate phenotypes”. What you may be overlooking, though, is that historically, marriage was never about having children that looked like the parents. Rather, two approaches have predominated:
[ul][li]Individuals sought out mates that appealed to them personally, because of the attributes of the mate, and not necessarily because the mate resembled the seeker in some superficial way, and[/li][li]Marriages were arranged by families, primarily to ensure the preservation of wealth, or at least financial security, with little regard for what the resulatnt children would look like (though it was important, naturally, that children be healthy)[/ul][/li]
To simplify the discussion you seem to want to have; there’s nothing currently stopping or hindering white people from marrying white people, black people from marrying black people, etc. There is also nothing (aside from some lingering social stigma in some areas) preventing white people from marrying black people, though your “Genetic Freedom” seems geared to discourage such parings, for reasons that remain unclear to me, using methods that you refuse to discuss.

You offer nothing of value that I can see, since going out of your way to preserve superficial physical traits strikes me as a waste of effort.