Breitbart has published a quite fantastic piece on the reality of race, and the idiocy of the liberal theory that it is a “social construct.”


Most scientists will tell you that race has no biological basis—it is, in academic-speak, a “social construct.” But a new book by distinguished journalist Nicholas Wade challenges that assumption, concluding that race is real and human social behaviour is subject to natural selection just like everything else.

As the New York Review of Books put it, in its coverage of Wade’s A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History, there is now a “statistical sense” in which races are real. Scientists can tell, based on genetic variance, which continent a DNA sample comes from. That might not sound revolutionary to you, but it’s only recently that we’ve had the computer processing power to do it.

Wade doesn’t shy away from the disquieting implications of his theories: our genes, he says, could explain why some countries are wealthy while others languish in penury. In fact, the more we discover about ourselves from genomics, the more it becomes apparent that science and ideology are on a collision course.



Why? Because it’s totally unacceptable to say in public these days that different races might have different behavioural characteristics, and that those characteristics might be genetically determined… even though that’s the way the science seems to be pointing.

To be fair, it’s easy to understand why researchers get cagey. The all-consuming cult of equality struggles with any suggestion that social behaviours might be genetically determined: that habits and predilections might have diverged along with skin colour. No scientist wants to be responsible for research that justifies crude observations about white sɛҳuąƖ mores or black dietary preferences.

It’s one thing to say that tribal cultures have smaller trust circles; quite another to say that science can explain why black people smoke menthol cigarettes, or why Asians are good at maths.

For over a decade, it has been Chinese academics, unencuмbered by political correctness, who have embarked upon the race-based research enabled by genomics. The Chinese particularly enjoy IQ-versus-race league tables, because they invariably come out on top. That sort of research makes Westerners squeamish, to put it mildly—which is why today, most research into the genomics of race is still carried out at the Beijing Genomics Institute. By and large, the subject is un-fundable in the West.



Assuming we were to discover biological and behavioural differences attributable to race, does that mean we should start treating different races differently? Could we develop better addiction treatment programs for Native Americans, or more effective medication for Hispanic asthma sufferers?

Unsurprisingly, doctors have already been at this for decades. There are medicines prescribed every day in America targeted at specific racial groups, such as hypertension drug BiDil.
When BiDil was given the nod in 2005, the FDA’s Robert Temple stated plainly: “The information presented to the FDA clearly showed that blacks suffering from heart failure will now have an additional safe and effective option for treating their condition.”

But the pills remain controversial, because they undermine the idea of race as a purely social construct.
One female doctor, appalled by the idea of race-based medicine, said in 2005 that she wished BiDil had never been approved, even though she knew it would save lives.


Responses like that are common even today. Nicholas Wade’s résumé is such that critics who find his ideas uncomfortable cannot simply dismiss him as a racist. Indeed, he told the Spectator podcast that only one review of A Troublesome Inheritance so far had done so.

Nonetheless, entrenched hypersensitivities persist. Journalists are often silent—or, worse, resort to name-calling—when they encounter research they find uncomfortable. Ian Steadman, a science writer for the British New Statesman, admitted he had not read Wade’s book when he referred on Twitter to extracts from it as “pretending racism is science.”

“[I’ve] read enough reviews to know what it’s pushing,” he told me later.
Steadman declined to answer further questions, but he did say he has since read A Troublesome Inheritance and intends to review it at some point in the future.

Jason Pontin, publisher of MIT’s Technology Review, wrote yesterday: “I can’t imagine what compelled a science journalist of Nicholas Wade’s stature to take on the subject of race. We don’t know much right now, and while genomics will tell us much more, it can’t yet.
For a journalist to go wading speculatively into the subject is asking for career-ending trouble.”


Please Know that by products of Interracial parents, cannot receive bone marrow or organ transplants. Is this GODs way of telling us not to meddle with his creations and nature?



Interesting Scripture:


Leviticus 19:19
Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled (mixed) seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.



 
Deuteronomy 7:3-4  
 You shall not intermarry with them, giving your daughters to their sons or taking their daughters for your sons, for they would turn away your sons from following me, to serve other gods. Then the anger of the Lord would be kindled against you, and he would destroy you quickly.



2 Corinthians 6:14  
 Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?



Deuteronomy 7:3  
 You shall not intermarry with them, giving your daughters to their sons or taking their daughters for your sons,



Hosea 5:6-7
 With their flocks and herds they shall go to seek the Lord, but they will not find him; he has withdrawn from them. They have dealt faithlessly with the Lord; for they have borne alien children. Now the new moon shall devour them with their fields.


Deuteronomy 23:2
 “No one born of a forbidden union may enter the assembly of the Lord. Even to the tenth generation, none of his descendants may enter the assembly of the Lord



Jeremiah 2:21
 Yet I planted you a choice vine, wholly of pure seed. How then have you turned degenerate and become a wild vine?

I don't think you will find anyone on this board who disagrees with the notion that there are real, inherent differences between the races, and that race is more than just a skin color and social construct.

With that being said, the Church has never condemned, prohibited, or restricted inter-racial marriages.  While perhaps some discernment is advised (which would be true even if two people of the same race but of different cultures wanted to get married), any suggestion that interracial marriage is sinful or somehow offensive to God is wholly un-Catholic.

What is un Catholic about marriages between those that share blood and genetics?

That's a matter of discipline rather than divine law, else no degree of dispensation would be possible.  In the earliest period of human history, familial interbreeding was inevitable but, with the flourishing of the human population coupled with increasing prevalence of genetic disorder due to interbreeding, there came to be no advantages and significant detractors to the phenomenon.

Some say interracial marriages are indeed offensive to GOD, Unholy and improper.

Nature itself rejects organ transplants from those of another race.

And yet if you have a particular blood type, a transfusion from an individual of another race but similar type poses no problem, but from one of like race but dissimilar type can kill you.  The Old Testament prohibition, which is intended to preserve "Jєωιѕнness", called yuhashin by тαℓмυdists, was because the covenant was tied inextricably to the Jєωιѕн race.


In the second case, despite the obvious differences of culture, and the societal taboos that may or may not be broken by such a marriage, this marriage would foster the singular end of that sacrament: the creation of souls that would be raised in the Catholic faith.  That is the exact opposite in the first case.  For that couple, first and foremost, the charity and devotion that the Catholic spouse would feel for the non-Catholic could, in time, foster a heresy of indifferentistm, believing that the goodness they so perceive is sufficient to get them through by the skin of their teeth.  And more importantly, in their parents, the children of such a marriage would have a much more difficult situation, in which they should have to toe the line between honoring father and detesting heresy, in which the former should always give way to the latter:

He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than me, is not worthy of me.

— Gospel of St Matthew X,37

[/b]

Can anyone see the inherent DEFECT in this?
Some might say that It is racial ѕυιcιdє. And Anti GOD and Anti Nature.

Worry more about the spread of the Catholic faith to every human creature, and less if they're going to have blue eyes or blond hair.  There is, naturally, a moral obligation to preserve one's culture as well as possible, for in culture is tied the duties to love of people and love of country.  But to place physical likeness before likeness of religion is unconscionable vanity on your part, and all those like you.

I believe that Jєωry runs our faith and promotes this nonsense, as well as the invasion of Europe and America with their shock troops-Illegals, blacks, africans and muslims. They are not us.

Faith doesnt trump race. Religion and Faith are transitory, they can change overnight via a conversion, lack of faith or marriage.  Blood IS forever.

Matthew, I politely request he be sent on a temporary holiday so that he can consider his position that blood counts for more than our fidelity to the holy religion.

Quote from: JohnGrey

Quote from: DonT

I believe that Jєωry runs our faith and promotes this nonsense, as well as the invasion of Europe and America with their shock troops-Illegals, blacks, africans and muslims. They are not us.

Faith doesnt trump race. Religion and Faith are transitory, they can change overnight via a conversion, lack of faith or marriage.  Blood IS forever.

Matthew, I politely request he be sent on a temporary holiday so that he can consider his position that blood counts for more than our fidelity to the holy religion.

Marxism practiced here?
Say it isnt so.
Because I have a different view than you, and debate with you logically, you request for me a 'holiday'?
That is insane.  Religious conversions come and go with the wind.
But while you and others ask for holidays, I too request one for you and your cultural Marxist views.

Catholicism is practiced here.  What you are spouting is not Catholicism.  You are spouting your own ideas, which the Church opposes.  That is why you should go.

Quote from: JohnGrey

Quote from: DonT

I believe that Jєωry runs our faith and promotes this nonsense, as well as the invasion of Europe and America with their shock troops-Illegals, blacks, africans and muslims. They are not us.

Faith doesnt trump race. Religion and Faith are transitory, they can change overnight via a conversion, lack of faith or marriage.  Blood IS forever.

Matthew, I politely request he be sent on a temporary holiday so that he can consider his position that blood counts for more than our fidelity to the holy religion.

Marxism practiced here?
Say it isnt so.
Because I have a different view than you, and debate with you logically, you request for me a 'holiday'?
That is insane.  Religious conversions come and go with the wind.

With all due respect, your "logic" is laughable.  Take, for instance, your claim that blue jays mating with robins is unnatural.  Oh, sure, it most certainly is.  BECAUSE they are different SPECIES.  They cannot reproduce.  Clearly if these interracial marriages are prolific, in that children are being conceived and given birth to in order to overrun the world, as you insist, they are not separate species anymore than a Doberman and Corgi are different species of dog.

Coconut oil can replace blood?  Tell that to the doctor when you're bleeding to death.  

The Holy Faith IS THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS.  Marriage is about PRODUCING CHILDREN AND RAISING THEM IN THE FAITH TO POPULATE HEAVEN.  Race is a trifle, especially in these times.  If you're not attracted to someone of a different race, THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT.  But neither is it unnatural or in ANY WAY wrong for two good Catholics of different races to be joined in Holy Matrimony.  

Due to conversions, yes...religion is transitory. Blood is permanent.

Heaven and Hell are permanent.  And marrying someone of a different religion has the very real potential to send you, your spouse, and your children to the latter as other posters mentioned.

Submit to what? Throwing my DNA away forever?
Id opt to marry a European Protestant than an African Negroid Catholic.
Id hope any sane person would. Eventually, she could convert.

First of all, I'm not advocating that you marry a person of another race.  You can marry whomever you like.  I am telling you that if two people of different race do marry, the Church does not see anything wrong with it and permits the union.  It is just as Holy a Sacrament as when two people of the same race marry.

Secondly, How exactly does one throw their DNA away by marrying someone of a different race?  The DNA and blood of the children of that union are God-given, just like yours.  Yours is not any better.

Mel Gibson did this in marrying a Protestant woman, not sure how he pulled that one off though.

They are divorced.  Worked out real well, didn't it?