Why exactly would interracial relationships and marriage be a sin?

[ChristineES]

They can't.

There is only one race and it is the human race.

:yes:

You're right about that. People make these divisions, in my opinion, so that they can separate themselves (I am not sure why they need to). I would guess it's easier to know who your "enemy" is if they look different than the other. There are so many divisions between people that make absolutely no sense to me: Ethnic group, religion/faith, nationality, etc: Those are superficial reasons, to me. The way I see things, people are all different from one another (even identical twins) but they also have a lot of similarities to share, as well.

 

[sojourner]

I agree, asserting that one ethnicity, race, or genetic group is better or purer can lead to violence. You say it is violence, but that is simply a lack of wisdom and understanding on your part. You are assuming that I have said such things, but you are sadly mistaken.

Take note that your buddy columbus did actually say something like what you are falsely accusing me of, but I doubt you will reprimand him. You guys are buddies.

He just said, in his post #114, "multiracial children are better."

What a sad day to be you aye?

1) it is violence, because asserting such excludes all other races, and exclusion =violence.

2) In saying that interracial marriage is sin, you imply that racial purity is better than a mixture. That implication further implies that one race is superior to another. Such assumption of superiority is a form of racial violence.

3) Who said Columbus is my "buddy?"

 

[sojourner]

So I am a violent person if I exclude oriental people from my mating rituals?

No. You're perpetrating violence if you imply that oriental people are, somehow, inferior. The assumption of inferiority is what excludes them from sharing an equal measure of respect within the human family.

 

[sojourner]

And so therefore you believe that multiracial people are better and superior to everyone else? Interesting.

This says a lot.

No. That's not what he said.

 

[sojourner]

I don't know. It's a conundrum.

Cliffs Notes version: "My statement is illogical and means nothing."

 

[sojourner]

Interracial marriages are not necessarily always sinful, but they sure can be.

If that's your position, then your original statement has no meaning whatsoever, because any human endeavor "can be" sinful. But that's not what you said, is it? You really like using fallacies as a crutch don't you? This one happens to be "moving the goalposts."

 

[Parsimony]

Well, I imagine, if an interracial couple were to have their parents blessing, one could not say that their marriage was sinful on account of dishonoring their parents.

I take it that your position has changed over the course of this debate? You've gone from "interracial marriage is a sin" to "interracial marriage can be a sin". Is that right?

 

[Sonofason]

Not at all. Their worth as human beings is neither greater nor lesser than those of "pure" ancestry. Being a typical Midwestern American, I can name 7 different ancestries from my family heritage, and when I was in Europe, I found it fascinating that people were 100% from one ethnic background, and they found it fascinating that I have such mixed heritage. We didn't think of each other as being greater or lesser based on our ancestry or background. We were simply different in terms of our family history, and we appreciated that difference. There was no condescension or racism involved.

You are attempting to take my statement of an objective fact of genetics and medical science and twist it to make it sound like I'm saying any one group of people is inherently "better" or "worse" in terms of their intrinsic value. That is not at all what I am saying, and I don't appreciate your attempts to accuse me of racism, especially when you yourself have blatantly stated that interracial marrriages are sin.

Out of curiosity, would you consider me a product of many sinful marriages? In my ancestry there are Germans, Dutch, Irish, Scotch-Irish, Scots, Hungarians and French-Canadians, all intermarrying with one another over the course of centuries. Am I born of many sinful marriages according to you?

Or what about my former roommate? He's 25% Cherokee, and the rest is all white. Were his ancestors sinful for marrying outside their "race"? Is he a product of sin?

I really don't know. You'll have to ask the Cherokee Nation if they see anything wrong with their heritage being procreated into oblivion. Personally, I really don't care that much.

If there are such things as small sins as compared with great sins, I'd say that the degree of sinfulness of inter-racial marriages is rather trivial in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Sonofason]

The thing is, it's not biased. When you have a background in biology (which I have had a few classes and read more literature on it) it becomes clear and easily understood how genetic diversity is superior to genetic homogeneity. This is because genetic homogeneity keeps passing the same genes from one generation to the next, increasing the likelihood maladaptive traits will not only be passed down but show us as dominate genes and expressive traints. Genetic diversity increases the likelihood maladaptive traits will not be passed down to offspring, and it the genes are passed down there is a better chance they will be recessive and not expressive. This has nothing to do with the individual itself, but is a fact of biology that genetic diversity has a much greater chance of producing healthy offspring with fewer maladaptive genes.
As for race, again, this is basic biology. It is also strongly supported by anthropology. If the dictionary definition is given, suddenly "race" becomes an extremely complicated subject and can mean there is a race of rural dwellers and a race of urban dwellers, even though biologically this is not supported.
Now, how can interracial marriages sometimes be sinful? To any degree greater than what any normal marriage can potentially be sinful?

Look, I am well aware of my racist tendencies. I'm trying to work on that. I believe it has absolutely nothing at all to do with the notion I have that interracial marriages are sinful. If they cause any harm whatsoever, then I believe they are sinful to some degree. And they do sometimes do harm, in my opinion, even if it is simply a bi-racial child being treated unfairly because of his skin color.

Discrimination and racism is slowly departing, and I'm happy to see it. I'm sorry that I have racist tendencies, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't. Maybe one day that will change.

 

[Sonofason]

They can't.

There is only one race and it is the human race.

:yes:

Yes, that is true, but at the same time there are many races, and this can be determined simply by reviewing the definitions I put forth earlier. You figure it out.

race: a family, tribe, people, or nation belonging to the same stock
Race - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

stock: the descendants of one individual
Stock - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

race is for sure a nonsensical word and has absolutely no meaning whatsoever.

 

[Sonofason]

No. You're perpetrating violence if you imply that oriental people are, somehow, inferior. The assumption of inferiority is what excludes them from sharing an equal measure of respect within the human family.

I have never implied that any particular race is inferior to any other particular race. So why are you telling me this?

 

[Sonofason]

No. That's not what he said.

Actually, he did. Was it what he should have said? No
Was it what he wanted to say? Perhaps no

I just don't know. Perhaps he should tell me what he meant to say.

 

[Sonofason]

Cliffs Notes version: "My statement is illogical and means nothing."

Feel better?

 

[Sonofason]

If that's your position, then your original statement has no meaning whatsoever, because any human endeavor "can be" sinful. But that's not what you said, is it? You really like using fallacies as a crutch don't you? This one happens to be "moving the goalposts."

If the truth causes me to move goalposts, then the goal posts must be moved.

Perhaps a congratulations is in order?

 

[Sonofason]

I take it that your position has changed over the course of this debate? You've gone from "interracial marriage is a sin" to "interracial marriage can be a sin". Is that right?

It appears so. Keep going maybe we can get me to say it's never a sin.

 

[sojourner]

Actually, he did. Was it what he should have said? No
Was it what he wanted to say? Perhaps no

I just don't know. Perhaps he should tell me what he meant to say.

Actually, he didn't. Here's what he said:

people of diverse ethnic backgrounds have fewer genetic health issues. ... Inbreeding within a very small gene pool ... leads to diseases and abnormalities very, very quickly. It's a fact of genetics.

Your summary:

And so therefore you believe that multiracial people are better and superior to everyone else?

"People of diverse ethnic backgrounds have fewer genetic health issues" =/= "I believe multiracial people are better and superior to everyone else." First of all, the term "multiracial" never appeared in his post. Second, "genetic health issues" is not a synonym for "inferior."

He didn't say what you claim he said. You claimed twice, now, that he said it. You're wrong, you're putting words in his mouth and arguing against what he didn't say, which presents us with a fallacious argument. Apparently, that's the only way you know how to "argue."

 

[sojourner]

I have never implied that any particular race is inferior to any other particular race. So why are you telling me this?

Yes, you did imply it when you said:

Compared to red, a mixture of red and blue is tainted.

in reference to whites marrying black. You said this about it:

I consider it sinful and selfish.

because then the colors were no longer "pure." You used the example of blue being mixed with red. You said that the blue "tainted" the red. That implies that red is superior to the color purple that results from a mixture of the two. And if the blue "taints" the red, then that implies that red is superior to blue.

You certainly have implied that one particular race is inferior, based upon color (of all things). I'm telling you this to remind you that your arguments are generally fallacious.

 

[sojourner]

Feel better?

Not until you stop presenting your bigoted and provocative posts as truthful using fallacious arguments.

 

[sojourner]

If the truth causes me to move goalposts, then the goal posts must be moved.

Perhaps a congratulations is in order?

Truth never moves the goalposts. :face palm:

Fallacy moves the goalposts.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Look, I am well aware of my racist tendencies. I'm trying to work on that. I believe it has absolutely nothing at all to do with the notion I have that interracial marriages are sinful. If they cause any harm whatsoever, then I believe they are sinful to some degree. And they do sometimes do harm, in my opinion, even if it is simply a bi-racial child being treated unfairly because of his skin color.

Discrimination and racism is slowly departing, and I'm happy to see it. I'm sorry that I have racist tendencies, but I'd be lying if I said I didn't. Maybe one day that will change.

Of course your racist tendencies play a part in your views of race relations, such as interracial relationships. I know what it's like, since I've been very racist in the past and sometimes still struggle with those feelings. But I recognize what they are and that it's not only wrong, but illogical. So I no longer consciously support anything that's racist. You can do it, too.