Evolutionary Discrimination in Public Education

Discussion in 'Science' started by jcrawford, Nov 7, 2005.

  1. jcrawford

    jcrawford
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    There are currently five categories which the U.S. legally recognizes in which persons may voluntarily identify and classify themselves as, according to their self-evident, self-recognized and self-identified common ancestral racial traits of national and geographic origins. None of these categories are Homo sapiens.

    http://atlas.usafa.af.mil/meo/Discri~1.htm

    http://www.withylaw.com/distopic.htm

    http://www.wvf.state.wv.us/eeo/NO.htm

    http://mountain-prairie.fws.gov/dcr/Basis.htm

    http://www.niehs.nih.gov/oeeo/national.htm

    As far as the U.S. legal system is concerned, there does not seem to be any legally protected class of persons called Homo sapiens or any ancestral category of persons named Homo erectus from whom Homo sapiens are believed by neo-Darwinists to have descended.

    Since it may reasonably be considered to be a violation of their civil rights to have their human ancestors related to, or called, anything other than what the U.S. Government recognizes as legally protected classes of persons, I respectfully submit that teachers and students in U.S. public school systems who publically volunteer to self-identify and self-classify themselves as members of any of the legally recognized and protected classes of persons established by law, may not be involuntarily labeled and classified as Homo sapiens in public schools without their written consent or the written consent of their parents or legal guardians.

    Otherwise, if state governments continue to mandate and impose evolutionary neo-Darwinist beliefs and teachings about the human ancestry of the five legitimate racial catagories in which students and teachers have voluntarily chosen to identify and classify themselves as, then public school students and teachers have every right to sue the state for civil rights violations and a redress of racial and ancestral grievances.
     
  2. Petrel

    Petrel
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,408
    Likes Received:
    0
    Whoa there! There certainly is. You can read the protections given to Homo sapiens here.

    Well, that's because they're all dead, so they don't need legal protection, right? [​IMG]
     
  3. jcrawford

    jcrawford
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Whoa there! There certainly is. You can read the protections given to Homo sapiens here. </font>[/QUOTE]The government doesn't specifically mention, recognize, categorize or legitimize the rights of self-identified and self-proclaimed neo-Darwinist Homo sapiens as such, and would have to create a special category of protected persons in order to classify and register neo-Darwinist Homo Sapiens as such for census, civil rights and immigration purposes.

    Our ancestors only need the legal protection necesary for them to rest in peace in their designated burial grounds or cemetaries. We, the living need legal protection concerning the ancestral origins of our ancestors in order to prevent and prohibit slander and defamation by neo-Darwinist Homo sapiens about our ancestor's ancestral origins.
     
  4. Petrel

    Petrel
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,408
    Likes Received:
    0
    Being a Baptist, I think they will rest just fine no matter what I do!
     
  5. jcrawford

    jcrawford
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's true, but as a Baptist, why should you let neo-Darwinists define, name and call some of your human ancestors as different 'species' than yourself? If you let them get away with that, then neo-Darwinists will be further encouraged to dictate the religious terms and conditions under which all Baptist scientists must operate.
     
  6. jcrawford

    jcrawford
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    In the United States of America, we and our ancestors are legally recognized, classified and registered for census and civil rights purposes, as five races, not species. These social classes are self-defined, identified, organized, and legally established by each racial group as a means of racial identification for the purpose of census taking and legal status in cases of racial discrimination. Each group has a legally protected status.
    Each racial group is classified and registered according to the geographic or national origin of their ancestors.
    All five racial groups recognize and agree with, the equal right of each other group to self-define, identify and assert themselves in terms of their ancestral origins.
    None of the groups have the right to classify any other group’s ancestors as anything other than that which each group has racially defined, identified and established as its own unique ancestral heritage and origin.
    In order to racially represent one of these five groups in terms of their racial status, progress or ancestral origins, a person must be legally recognized as a member of that group or have a family member in that group who elects their representation.
     
  7. Paul of Eugene

    Paul of Eugene
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2001
    Messages:
    2,782
    Likes Received:
    0
    So, JC, are you of the opinion that the different races of man represent incipient speciation that will eventually come about if evolution is allowed its way over time?
     
  8. Paul of Eugene

    Paul of Eugene
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2001
    Messages:
    2,782
    Likes Received:
    0
    If evolution is true, then that's their proper perogative. If you feel evolution is false, feel free to share your evidence for your feeling. Your preferences, as expressed by accusations of racism, for example, are not evidence.


    Now you've got me curious. What religous terms and conditions do you see as being imposed on Baptist scientists, and by whom?
     
  9. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    So what? You're claiming "evolutionary discrimination". Once again, your ignornace on the topic is displayed in abundance.

    I have no problem telling people I'm part asian, part white. You would have us believe that making such a statement is "evolutionary discrimination". Not only does your claim lack merit, it's, frankly, stupid.
     
  10. jcrawford

    jcrawford
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Theoretically, the neo-Darwinist concepts of genetic mutation combined with 'natural selection,' must apply to racially diverse populations within a species, since the basic theory of evolution is that a few individuals within a species genetically mutate adaptively, and through 'natural selection' and further mutation, evolve into the small population which eventually becomes a new 'species' within that genus. Until that time, this new population may only be classified as a distinct sub-species or race within the original species.
     
  11. jcrawford

    jcrawford
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    If evolution is true, then that's their proper perogative. </font>[/QUOTE]If neo-Darwinist theories are true and are applied to humans though, all racial groups save one must inevitably become extinct in accordance with evolutionist laws governing genetic mutations combined with the power of 'natural selection.' The only alternative to one race mutating and evolving on a more highly adaptive biological basis than another would be to have complete world-wide race-mixing and programs of human domestic breeding instituted in order to fully equalize the total human gene pool. Your guess as to what the chances or implications of that form of world-wide genetic government are, are as good as mine.

    Since no one can prove or disprove human evolution to the satisfaction of all racial groups in America, I prefer to particularly uphold and defend the civil rights of Native Alaskans, Native American Indians, Asian and Pacific Islander Americans, African Americans and Hispanic Americans to sue American school boards which authorize the use of the term 'Homo sapiens' as an accurate or relevent ancestral or descriptive label for any of these Americans.

    The fact of white school teachers applying the term 'Homo sapiens' to students of other self-identified ancestral racial classes, is evidence enough of racial discrimination.
    Devout neo-Darwinists would emphatically insist on Baptist scientists leaving their religion at home when they go to work in the lab. That's how neo-Darwinists get away with imposing their atheistic religious beliefs about science on everyone else. Such pharasaical pronouncements about the relationship of religion and science only serve to prove that neo-Darwinists are not true scientists.
     
  12. jcrawford

    jcrawford
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    So what? You're claiming "evolutionary discrimination". </font>[/QUOTE]It is evolutionist racism when white school teachers impose their own ancestral origins on persons of other racial ancestry without their consent.

    Not at all, since positive self-identification and affirmation regarding one's ancestral origins is a civil right, but people of Asian and white ancestry teaching students of racial origins other than their own that their ancestors also came from Africa is racist.
     
  13. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yet again, your ignorance on the topic is abundantly clear. Your claim is like saying the science of botany is prejudiced against red and yellow plants because it teaches that clorophyll produces the color green.
     
  14. jcrawford

    jcrawford
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your claim is like saying the science of botany is prejudiced against red and yellow plants because it teaches that clorophyll produces the color green. </font>[/QUOTE]That's a poor analogy because neither botany nor plants have any civil rights protecting the racial identity of their class from neo-Darwinist assumptions about their ancestors.
     
  15. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    :confused:

    Since you have continuously failed to make any connection between paleontology and "civil rights", your claims in this regard fall flat on their face, as they continuously do.
     
  16. jcrawford

    jcrawford
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    :confused:

    Since you have continuously failed to make any connection between paleontology and "civil rights", your claims in this regard fall flat on their face, as they continuously do.
    </font>[/QUOTE]At least they fall on a human face rather than the face of some neo-Darwinist Homo 'species.' The very fact that there is no scientific connection between paleoanthropological 'species' and the civil rights of all racially identified groups in America would be the very basis of my discrimination lawsuit against the teaching of neo-Darwinst race theories in US. public schools.
     
  17. Gup20

    Gup20
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,184
    Likes Received:
    1
    Act 17:24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;
    25 Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things;
    26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;

    All men are one race. They are one blood - decendants of Adam.

    FYI - plants are not alive in the Biblical sense. Plants do not have Nephesh Chayyah (soulish life) as do People and animals. They are biological machines which were created for the purpose of being food - or biological fuel - for the real life on planet earth. You cannot eat rocks for sustenance, for example. However, plants (and other animals) are similar enough to our own design that they can be used as food to our bodies. But a "very good" creation would not include a system where one soulish creature devours another for sustenance. It was not until the Fall and Curse that this corruption happened - and not until after the flood that God said it was acceptable for man to eat meat.

    Interestingly enough, this is one good explaination for the extinction of dinosaurs. Prior the curse, man did not have to till the groud for food to grow. It grew in terrific abundance. However, after the curse, the ground was not so giving, and the dinosaurs turned to eating other animals - a corruption of the original design.

    Gen 6:11 The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence.
    12 And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.
    13 And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.

    The reason there are no dinosaurs today is most likely because the dietary requirements could not be met. Elephants, for example, are few because they require such huge ammounts of food and the land can only provide so much.

    But, a public school student would never hear of this because public schools are churches which promote only 3 religions: humanism, atheism, and evolution.
     
  18. jcrawford

    jcrawford
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Time to rise up and assert our American Neanderthal origins, ancestry and civil rights in public schools, Gup. That's the only way to clear neo-Darwinist race theorists out of their religous pulpits in our public schools. After all, where did the Celts, Anglo-Saxons and Vikings come from if not from Neanderthal ancestors? African Homo sapiens? Professor Marvin Lubenow demonstrates and proves that Neanderthal Man was an interfertile racial combination of other erect (H. erectus) and wise men and women (early H. sapiens) in Europe, whose common descendents are alive and well in the United States of America today, just waiting to assert their racial identity and ancestral origins for U.S. census and civil rights purposes.

    Most of us are Christians now and share the same religion that so many other racial groups in America also enjoy.
     
  19. Paul of Eugene

    Paul of Eugene
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2001
    Messages:
    2,782
    Likes Received:
    0

Share This Page

Loading...