I have read a lot of comments from people who are supposedly of the "master race" on this very forum who cannot even spell properly. If you are going to cast you and your kind as geniuses, please become literate first.
"Do you think some races or cultures are inherently superior or inferior to other[sic]?"
This "comment" is clearly directed at the diverse racial group visiting the "Is It Normal" forum. That is the point... The "Poll Creator" is seeking to stir up controversy by having diverse racial groups read this bologna and debate over who is the Alpha human being. The fact of the matter is that there is no such thing as a "Superior Race". Only Darwinists believe in such flawed categorizations of the human species.
Nazis prescribed and Neo-Nazis prescribe to the prejudicial notion that some human beings are better than others; much like Charles Darwin... Prejudice is never something a civilized forum wants to encourage. This is not a "leap" to understand, darren3. At least, not to those of us with open minds, human decency, and common sense.
You read way to much into things. This is a site where all opinions are welcome (or should be) to discuss any topic the author chooses to ask. There is nothing inherently evil about asking that question. You can twist it anyway you want, but if you really are open minded you'd see that its an interesting, thought provoking question. Nothing more, nothing less.
Oh I almost forgot. My opinion on the polls question. "No" to superior races. "Yes" to some races being physically adapted to perform better at certain things than others (examples: Eskimos adapted to cold, Kenyans run long distance better than virtually anyone).
And one last thought. Darwin has been scientifically proven correct. I know this doesn't sit well with most religions, but then again neither does the age of the earth. Of course if you believe the earth is 6000 years old, that a man walked on water, a woman got pregnant without having sex, the earth was created in 7 days, Noah had an ark with a pair of every single species on it, a man rose from the dead, turned water into wine, made women from the rib of man...then Darwin will probably seem too far fetched also.
This is NOT a site where people can post whatever offensive blather they like... Is that the word on the street, darren3? There is a line that all posts should not cross on IIN. Simply because this site caters to odd and unusual subject matter does not mean that posters have carte blanche to be down-right rude, insulting, and racially insensitive. There is nothing neither interesting nor "thought provoking" about this old bigotry parlor game. Nor is it cute or quaint to compare the "God" given attributes of one human being to those of another and to deem one of these individuals lacking. Whomever created this poll is of the "low brow" variety and should have posted a poll addressing his/her eugenics issues instead... Like their being an inbred, half-wit.
Furthermore, excuse me. I read precisely the "right amount" of meaning into the painfully obvious issues presented on this forum. I believe my "primary" complaint was that this poll reflected the baser elements of, "Neo-Nazism", not, "Social Darwinism". The act of creating a poll to determine which race is superior is offensive and purely racist in intent. If you disagree, I am not going to argue the obvious with you. If you find enjoyment in such abhorrent discourse, I am not going to bother to plumb your soul for any higher purpose or meaning. I have better uses for my time. End of story.
While I agree that this poll is unsound, dismissing it because you find it offensive is in poor judgment. There are sound arguments that intelligence is racially determined, whether you like it or not. Still, as much as I value intelligence, I would never call a race or culture superior or inferior because of it.
Well it was you who pulled Darwin into the Nazi conversation. From reading your posts I think you are quite neurotic. There are plenty of examples of how races are different. Why do you think we all look different? Aboriginals share 2% of their mitochondrial DNA with Indians. Every-one IS slightly different. That's a good thing for humanity to be able to continue. There are plenty of physiological differences between races - just do some research if you are interested. I have a Masters in Biology specialised in Evolution. People ARE different. Get over it. I don't think if you asked a tiger if it had different physiological traits to a lion it would call you a Nazi (if it could speak English of course).
Are there superior or inferior races or cultures?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
I have read a lot of comments from people who are supposedly of the "master race" on this very forum who cannot even spell properly. If you are going to cast you and your kind as geniuses, please become literate first.
--
darren3
12 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
2
2
-
dappled
12 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Who is this comment directed at? And what does the poll have to do with Neo Nazis? Kind of a leap there.
--
dappled
12 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
-
[Old Memory]
12 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
I'm not so sure it was much of a leap. I think Gems was talking about eugenics and the idea of a master race. I certainly see her point, anyway.
Dear darren3,
This poll is begging the question:
"Do you think some races or cultures are inherently superior or inferior to other[sic]?"
This "comment" is clearly directed at the diverse racial group visiting the "Is It Normal" forum. That is the point... The "Poll Creator" is seeking to stir up controversy by having diverse racial groups read this bologna and debate over who is the Alpha human being. The fact of the matter is that there is no such thing as a "Superior Race". Only Darwinists believe in such flawed categorizations of the human species.
Nazis prescribed and Neo-Nazis prescribe to the prejudicial notion that some human beings are better than others; much like Charles Darwin... Prejudice is never something a civilized forum wants to encourage. This is not a "leap" to understand, darren3. At least, not to those of us with open minds, human decency, and common sense.
--
darren3
12 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
2
2
You read way to much into things. This is a site where all opinions are welcome (or should be) to discuss any topic the author chooses to ask. There is nothing inherently evil about asking that question. You can twist it anyway you want, but if you really are open minded you'd see that its an interesting, thought provoking question. Nothing more, nothing less.
--
darren3
12 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
2
2
Oh I almost forgot. My opinion on the polls question. "No" to superior races. "Yes" to some races being physically adapted to perform better at certain things than others (examples: Eskimos adapted to cold, Kenyans run long distance better than virtually anyone).
And one last thought. Darwin has been scientifically proven correct. I know this doesn't sit well with most religions, but then again neither does the age of the earth. Of course if you believe the earth is 6000 years old, that a man walked on water, a woman got pregnant without having sex, the earth was created in 7 days, Noah had an ark with a pair of every single species on it, a man rose from the dead, turned water into wine, made women from the rib of man...then Darwin will probably seem too far fetched also.
--
[Old Memory]
12 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
This is NOT a site where people can post whatever offensive blather they like... Is that the word on the street, darren3? There is a line that all posts should not cross on IIN. Simply because this site caters to odd and unusual subject matter does not mean that posters have carte blanche to be down-right rude, insulting, and racially insensitive. There is nothing neither interesting nor "thought provoking" about this old bigotry parlor game. Nor is it cute or quaint to compare the "God" given attributes of one human being to those of another and to deem one of these individuals lacking. Whomever created this poll is of the "low brow" variety and should have posted a poll addressing his/her eugenics issues instead... Like their being an inbred, half-wit.
Furthermore, excuse me. I read precisely the "right amount" of meaning into the painfully obvious issues presented on this forum. I believe my "primary" complaint was that this poll reflected the baser elements of, "Neo-Nazism", not, "Social Darwinism". The act of creating a poll to determine which race is superior is offensive and purely racist in intent. If you disagree, I am not going to argue the obvious with you. If you find enjoyment in such abhorrent discourse, I am not going to bother to plumb your soul for any higher purpose or meaning. I have better uses for my time. End of story.
--
KeyboardSolo
12 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
See More Comments =>
-
[Old Memory]
12 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
While I agree that this poll is unsound, dismissing it because you find it offensive is in poor judgment. There are sound arguments that intelligence is racially determined, whether you like it or not. Still, as much as I value intelligence, I would never call a race or culture superior or inferior because of it.
Well it was you who pulled Darwin into the Nazi conversation. From reading your posts I think you are quite neurotic. There are plenty of examples of how races are different. Why do you think we all look different? Aboriginals share 2% of their mitochondrial DNA with Indians. Every-one IS slightly different. That's a good thing for humanity to be able to continue. There are plenty of physiological differences between races - just do some research if you are interested. I have a Masters in Biology specialised in Evolution. People ARE different. Get over it. I don't think if you asked a tiger if it had different physiological traits to a lion it would call you a Nazi (if it could speak English of course).
lol!