Should interracial marriages be allowed?

[A18]

Men commit more violent crimes than women.

[AuH2O]

Well, while being attacked by a multitude of posters all at once, it's somewhat difficult to actually put together the links I'm talking about.

So maybe hold your attacks for just a few minutes? Maybe?

[Ebowed]

Fine, you want evidence, I'll give you some evidence. With some explanation of course.

But no one will actually take a rational look at the data. That is a 100% certainty.

In other words, you're afraid to post your evidence.

[Alcon]

Men commit more violent crimes than women.

Well, yes, but there is a clear biological explanation behind that (the presence of more testosterone).

This is an area I know little about, but even I know that.

[AuH2O]

It will be a few minutes. I changed my mind-- please continue to attack me rather than at least wait to see what I most post.

Your maturity is impressive.

[Alcon]

It will be a few minutes. I changed my mind-- please continue to attack me rather than at least wait to see what I most post.

Your maturity is impressive.

Feel free to not reply until you have found this information instead of saying that we'll never believe it.

[A18]

Men commit more violent crimes than women.

Well, yes, but there is a clear biological explanation behind that (the presence of more testosterone).

And AuH2O is saying there's a biological reason blacks commit more violent crimes than whites. Even if it's true, so what?

[Ebowed]

It will be a few minutes. I changed my mind-- please continue to attack me rather than at least wait to see what I most post.

Your maturity is impressive.

"I wish they'd shut up so I can find some website that says 50% of crimes were commited by blacks!" is what you are probably thinking.

Just post these links and then people may stop attacking you.  Maybe.  Otherwise you'll appear like you're still searching for the links.

[Alcon]

Men commit more violent crimes than women.

Well, yes, but there is a clear biological explanation behind that (the presence of more testosterone).

And AuH2O is saying there's a biological reason blacks commit more violent crimes than whites. Even if it's true, so what?

That is a point, but I would like him to prove that there is a biological reason first before we burn that bridge.

[A18]

It will be a few minutes. I changed my mind-- please continue to attack me rather than at least wait to see what I most post.

Your maturity is impressive.

"I wish they'd shut up so I can find some website that says 50% of crimes were commited by blacks!" is what you are probably thinking.

Just post these links and then people may stop attacking you.  Maybe.  Otherwise you'll appear like you're still searching for the links.

Um, no. It takes a while to dig stuff up you haven't looked at recently.

[A18]

Men commit more violent crimes than women.

Well, yes, but there is a clear biological explanation behind that (the presence of more testosterone).

And AuH2O is saying there's a biological reason blacks commit more violent crimes than whites. Even if it's true, so what?

That is a point, but I would like him to prove that there is a biological reason first before we burn that bridge.

Why? It's entirely irrelevant. You don't shun people because some group they happen to by birth belong to commits more crimes than another group.

[Ebowed]

It will be a few minutes. I changed my mind-- please continue to attack me rather than at least wait to see what I most post.

Your maturity is impressive.

"I wish they'd shut up so I can find some website that says 50% of crimes were commited by blacks!" is what you are probably thinking.

Just post these links and then people may stop attacking you.  Maybe.  Otherwise you'll appear like you're still searching for the links.

Um, no. It takes a while to dig stuff up you haven't looked at recently.

Considering that he's been talking about this evidence for quite a while now, I have to wonder what's taking so long.  When he replies "I have the evidence but none of you are rational enough to analyze it," suspicions will arise.

[dazzleman]

AuH2O, I admire you for standing up for your opinions.

I am a conservative, not a politically correct liberal.  So please keep that in mind.

There are obvious physical differences between the races, and even ethnic groups within races.  Did you ever wonder why so many tailors are Jewish?  Even if you look at occupations within the different subgroups of the white race, you will not find an even distribution in each field, nor will you find an even distribution in terms of wealth, crime rates, etc.

I would not deny that blacks have a much higher rate of social dysfunction than whites.  This means broken families, crime, etc.  I simply don't believe it's biological, but cultural.  I don't excuse it, and I think it's largely up to blacks to correct the problems.  But I don't think they're biological.

Men are more physically violent than women, and that is biological.  But the gap is not as great as perceived.  It is simply that men are more SUCCESSFUL than women at physical violence because we are stronger.  On the other hand, women are more emotionally violent than men.  Both sexes are equally good and evil, in my opinion, but the manifestations of good and evil come out differently due to biological differences.

I find biological differences far more convincing than physical differences due to race, which is one reason why I reject the linkage gay rights groups between racial intermarriage and gay marriage.  The two are not the same in my opinion.

I would suggest to you, in a friendly way, that you rethink your opinions a little bit, because I really do believe that you are off base.

[dazzleman]

Why? It's entirely irrelevant. You don't shun people because some group they happen to by birth belong to commits more crimes than another group.

Sure you do.  Why do you think most whites choose to live in neighborhoods that exclude blacks?  It's for reasons of practical self-interest.  Decent people would never shun an individual person for the reasons you suggested, but at the group level, you better believe it happens.  Our whole society is structured around it.

[A18]

What does not wanting to live in poor, urban hellholes have to do with being upset because your sister dates some black guy?

[J. J.]

After reading this thread, and excluding most of Goldie's claptrap, there is one point that I disagree with.  I have heard too many Black people referring to bi-racial people as "swirlies" in Phila to say that Black people are more willing to tolerate interracial relationships than White people.

Two points I will give to Goldie, however.  Yes, there are genetic differences between Black and White Americans.  This, however, generally has to do with long term environmental effects and not a difference in species.  It's the same reason that Eskimos tend to have body types that retain heat and people from Sweden tend to be blond.  It's the same reason that Jews have certain genetic diseases at vastly higher rates than non-Jews.  It's neither good or bad.

Second, much like any region of the country, there are differences between White and Black culture, within urban areas.  It has largely to do with the origin of the population, not a racial factor.   It rapidly disappears in the suburbs.  (One factor is Church attendence; it tends to be greater in the urban Black centers.)  It is not tied to race.

I personally have no problem with someone else dating outside of their race; for the record, I do, though that is far from the sole factor.  Flyers just happens to have a purely personal preference; he doesn't find women with darker skin attractive.  I know more than a few Black people with a personal preference against dating White people.  

[Ebowed]

I am a conservative, not a politically correct liberal.  So please keep that in mind.

I liked all of your post, dazzleman, except this part.  Certainly not all Democrats, or liberals, are "politically correct."  I haven't mentioned this in any threads on this board, but I happen to be a huge opponent of Internet filtering in schools and libraries, and censorship on television, which as far as I know isn't politically correct.  Throwing around terms like "politically correct," when not applicable, is dangerous in these sorts of debates.

[dazzleman]

What does not wanting to live in poor, urban hellholes have to do with being upset because your sister dates some black guy?

Because you don't want your sister to end up living in one, which you fear she might if she marries a black guy.

Look, I'm not defending this type of thing, just trying to explain it.  I approve of interracial marriage and dating, as long as the individuals are suitable to each other.  Race should not be an issue per se, but couples do have to deal with cultural differences that could affect their relationship.

[Gabu]

Why? It's entirely irrelevant. You don't shun people because some group they happen to by birth belong to commits more crimes than another group.

Sure you do.  Why do you think most whites choose to live in neighborhoods that exclude blacks?  It's for reasons of practical self-interest.  Decent people would never shun an individual person for the reasons you suggested, but at the group level, you better believe it happens.  Our whole society is structured around it.

This is certainly true.  Statistically, blacks are more likely to commit violent crimes; the issue is whether or not this is because they're black.  I'll freely admit that when I see a black person, my immediate reaction is one of suspicion.  I'm not proud of it, but it's just a fact, and it's one that I might as well admit, given that there's exactly zero I can do about it.  It doesn't last long, and I can easily get over it, but no matter what I do, it's always there.  It's a natural human reaction that comes with the interest of self-preservation that makes humans wary of those who they subconsciously perceive as being more dangerous than others.  It's only when you do this after it becomes apparent that the person is not dangerous that it turns into destructive racism.

That said, however, we're not talking about statistics; we're talking about what's inherent in having a certain skin color.

[A18]

If you're not defending it, what are you defending?

[dazzleman]

I am a conservative, not a politically correct liberal.  So please keep that in mind.

I liked all of your post, dazzleman, except this part.  Certainly not all Democrats, or liberals, are "politically correct."  I haven't mentioned this in any threads on this board, but I happen to be a huge opponent of Internet filtering in schools and libraries, and censorship on television, which as far as I know isn't politically correct.  Throwing around terms like "politically correct," when not applicable, is dangerous in these sorts of debates.

By politically correct, I meant a mindless denial of certain well-known facts.  Example:  You have just as much of a chance of being mugged by a group of white kids as you do by a group of black kids.  Or:  There's violence in all schools; the busing of large numbers of blacks from ghetto neighborhoods will not necessarily lead to increased violence.  WRONG!  This is the type of politically correct garbage I see being thrown around out in the world.

There are many facets to political correctness.  I think we're better just facing certain facts, distasteful though they may be, and working with them, rather than denying them.

[J. J.]

Why? It's entirely irrelevant. You don't shun people because some group they happen to by birth belong to commits more crimes than another group.

Sure you do.  Why do you think most whites choose to live in neighborhoods that exclude blacks?  It's for reasons of practical self-interest.  Decent people would never shun an individual person for the reasons you suggested, but at the group level, you better believe it happens.  Our whole society is structured around it.

This is certainly true.  Statistically, blacks are more likely to commit violent crimes; the issue is whether or not this is because they're black.  I'll freely admit that when I see a black person, my immediate reaction is one of suspicion.  I'm not proud of it, but it's just a fact, and it's one that I might as well admit, given that there's exactly zero I can do about it.  It doesn't last long, and I can easily get over it, but no matter what I do, it's always there.  It's a natural human reaction that comes with the interest of self-preservation that makes humans wary of those who they subconsciously perceive as being more dangerous than others.  It's only when you do this after it becomes apparent that the person is not dangerous that it turns into destructive racism.

That said, however, we're not talking about statistics; we're talking about what's inherent in having a certain skin color.

I'm trying the the 70ish widows that are about 5 feet tall (at most) that live accross the street trying to mug me.  :-)

It's age with me; if see someone under 30, I view them with suspicion goes up.  Race isn't a factor.

[danwxman]

I am a conservative, not a politically correct liberal.  So please keep that in mind.

I liked all of your post, dazzleman, except this part.  Certainly not all Democrats, or liberals, are "politically correct."  I haven't mentioned this in any threads on this board, but I happen to be a huge opponent of Internet filtering in schools and libraries, and censorship on television, which as far as I know isn't politically correct.  Throwing around terms like "politically correct," when not applicable, is dangerous in these sorts of debates.

By politically correct, I meant a mindless denial of certain well-known facts.  Example:  You have just as much of a chance of being mugged by a group of white kids as you do by a group of black kids.  Or:  There's violence in all schools; the busing of large numbers of blacks from ghetto neighborhoods will not necessarily lead to increased violence.  WRONG!  This is the type of politically correct garbage I see being thrown around out in the world.

There are many facets to political correctness.  I think we're better just facing certain facts, distasteful though they may be, and working with them, rather than denying them.

A lot of liberals are going to call you out because you go too far dude. All you do is bash liberals for being politically correct...you're just a huge hypocrite. Most liberals aren't politically correct at all...as a matter of fact I'd go so far as to say the average conservative is much more politically correct then the average liberal.

[AuH2O]

Crime Data
FBI Uniform Crime Report, 2003
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm

2003, Section IV

note on data: since hispanic is not a race, many are included in the "white" crime rates, thus skewing them to the left. The number of non-hispanic whites is roughly 5.4 times the population of blacks in the US. Using that number will actually underestimate black crime rates because of the aforementioned hispanic confusion of the data, but nevertheless the data is statistically significant.

Arrests by race

Murder
white: 49.1%
black: 48.5%

-- Blacks are slightly more than 5 times more likely than whites to commit murder.

Larceny (theft)
white: 68.5%
black: 28.8%

-- after a ratio adjustment, blacks are still more likely to commit larceny, but the rate is far lower. If economic factors drive crime, then in theory blacks should be even more likely to steal than they do.

Aggravated Assault
white: 64.7%
black: 33%

-- This contradicts the idea blacks are simply in a more violent environment as an explanation for their murder rate. They are more likely to commit assault, by roughly 2.7 times, but nowhere near their proclivity in terms of murder rates.

Drunk Driving
white: 88%
black: 9.6%

-- Used to demonstrate the data is not somehow biased against blacks; in fact, as we will see, quite the opposite-- it is probably biased in their favor overall.

Now, in terms of the idea blacks commit more crime because they are more often in poverty:

2004 US Census Press Release

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:e6p-Ou2fnowJ:www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/income_wealth/002484.html+income+data+by+race&hl=en

Whites account for 44% of Americans in "poverty." Taking into account black population size at the time of the census, roughly 8.6 million blacks were in poverty; slightly less than hispanics and only slightly more than half the number of whites in poverty.

Taking into account the Uniform Crime Report's inclusion of hispanics into their "white" dataset, the property crime rates seem to follow the above numbers.

In other words, it is not surprising that 28.9% of forgery arrests were made on black offenders; though they make up roughly ~25% of those in poverty, that is a fairly small difference.

The inconsistencies emerge with regard to violent crimes. Blacks, for instance, again commit ~29% of arsons designed to attack property-- but 37% committed for violent purposes.

Blacks commit 23.9% of non-rape sex offenses, which again is higher per capita than whites but not unreasonable given poverty rates. However, they commit 33.3% of forcible rapes, well above the expected number.






If anyone is interested in intelligent discussion, which I doubt, the topic is more than suitable.

[dazzleman]

Why? It's entirely irrelevant. You don't shun people because some group they happen to by birth belong to commits more crimes than another group.

Sure you do.  Why do you think most whites choose to live in neighborhoods that exclude blacks?  It's for reasons of practical self-interest.  Decent people would never shun an individual person for the reasons you suggested, but at the group level, you better believe it happens.  Our whole society is structured around it.

This is certainly true.  Statistically, blacks are more likely to commit violent crimes; the issue is whether or not this is because they're black.  I'll freely admit that when I see a black person, my immediate reaction is one of suspicion.  I'm not proud of it, but it's just a fact, and it's one that I might as well admit, given that there's exactly zero I can do about it.  It doesn't last long, and I can easily get over it, but no matter what I do, it's always there.  It's a natural human reaction that comes with the interest of self-preservation that makes humans wary of those who they subconsciously perceive as being more dangerous than others.  It's only when you do this after it becomes apparent that the person is not dangerous that it turns into destructive racism.

That said, however, we're not talking about statistics; we're talking about what's inherent in having a certain skin color.

Gabu, I was talking on a macro level, and pointing out that whites largely do shun blacks as a group because of the social problems that blacks have, and the negative effects of these problems.  It is largely a statistical thing, and it can filter down to the personal level, depending upon the type of person involved.

Look, I know plenty of black people that I like very much, and respect very much.  I consider them equal to me, in a non-condescending way.  I would date and marry a black woman.  But I would never live in a predominantly black neighborhood, or send my kids (if I had any) to a predominantly black school.  I was pointing out that people can operate on two different tracks when it comes to race.