WHY DID GOD MAKE THE VARIOUS RACES?

[2Dbunk]

This summer it seems we are in a war between two races. Donald Trump would add another race (to the south of our border). If God is so loving and compassionate why is there so much disparity between blacks and whites? (Let the Hispanics out of it for now.) Is this violent clashing of the races for "His" entertainment? Is He playing us?

I dont think so because a wonderfully loving Creator wouldnt have mankind at each others throats " so, there is the answer: This god that everyone talks about just does not exist!

Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

[Zzyzx]

.

Muslims evidently think that honor killing is right and that killing infidels is right.

Most Muslims dont kill people and Islam refers to Jews and Christians as people of the book. Only in modern times have the two groups become hated by the most radical elements of the Muslim world.

"Only in modern times" . . . Is this to indicate ignorance of the history of Christians and Muslims killing each other for a thousand years? Ignorance of Muslim conquests? Ignorance of the Crusades?

Many Christians think that killing "witches" or homosexuals or adulteresses is right.

I think you have a novel interpretation of what many means.

I use the term many in accord with its definition in common-use dictionaries:

Consisting of or amounting to a large but indefinite number (www.merriam-webster.com)

Do you wish to supply a different definition?

African-Americans are by far the most observant Christians in the US and I have NEVER heard an African-American minister argue for capital punishment for witches or homosexuals.

I trust that you are at least somewhat familiar with Christian literature that condones or encourages or mandates killing of witches, adulteresses, homosexuals.

We quit doing that when forced to quit is a rather poor argument. The Bible which Christians tend to claim is the word of God and which they claim to follow STILL says such things.

Neither religion seems to have, or have had, difficulty accepting killing of opponents of their faith.

Atheist dont seem to have a problem killing opponents of their cause clbre. Whats your point?

Are there examples of I kill you in the name of no gods or My disbelief in gods tells me to kill?

Atheism (without belief in gods) has no unifying doctrine or literature instructing adherents to kill people. Religions DO have such doctrine and literature.

Muslims think that praying less than five times a day (or whatever) is wrong, that women appearing in public without being completely covered / without male family supervision / driving automobiles / etc is wrong -- and that "honor killings" are right.

Your generalizations of Muslims would be called Islamophobia by many Muslims.

Rather than generalizations I cite known Muslim beliefs " which are represented in the Quran. Is that disputed?

Islamophobia is defined as hatred or fear of Muslims or of their politics or culture
If Muslims regard what I said above (exactly) as indicating hatred or fear they are welcome to be dead wrong. Likewise, Christians are dead wrong if they regard my position as hatred or fear of Christianity.

I strongly DISAGREE with many teachings and practices of both those religions. Many who are heavily emotionally invested in their religion regard any disagreement as hatred or fear " perhaps projecting onto others their own tendency toward hatred and fear.

Do you take issue with people walking naked down the street?

Not at all. I do not care how people dress or undress. That is their business, not mine.

Nudists think your prudish imposition of your morals upon them is wrong.

It is hilarious that you address that comment to someone who as been a card carrying nudist and who has lived in Clothing Optional communities off and on since the 1970s.

I have no tendency to be prudish " but observe that many people are very prudish.

Do you raise the issue because you are a nudist " and are familiar with nudist peoples' attitudes?

Is there a point you want to make?

I make my points regularly " the major one of which is that religions and their sacred characters cannot be shown to be anything more than overworked human imagination, myths, legends, folklore. AND that basing one's life and decisions on such things is contrary to reasoning based on verifiable evidence.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

Muslim theology makes a number of claims about the status of humankind. As do Hinduism and Buddhism. Do you care?

No " I dont care and Im not bound by those claims. If they say, This is the teaching of our faith I dont get bent out of shape about it like you do " specifically because I dont think Im bound by these claims.

If/when Muslims become numerous enough in this country to band together to become an effective voting block... when Muslims begin to vote based largely upon the instructions of their religious leaders... when Muslims begin to win important political office and positions on school boards which allow them to dictate the curriculum... when Muslims manage, through the popular vote, to get portions of Sharia law made legally binding... and when Muslims become a political force intent on imposing their views on morality on society as a whole... will you get "bent out of shape?" Because I don't feel that I am "bent out of shape" at Christians who are already doing these very things. I feel Christians have every right under the laws of the country to express their political views. Just as I and others have every right to expose and undermine Christianity and Christian claims for the nonsense that it has always been. Muslims should expect the same.

Islam currently represents about 10% of the French population and is growing rapidly, largely due the the size of an average Muslim family. And their political impact is already being felt in France.

[2Dbunk]

Does anyone wonder why "God" has opened this Pandora's box of unabated hatred? Well, "God" didn't do it . . . mankind did! Mankind devised god or gods as a sort of whipping boy to control the behavior of the populace.

A loving, all-knowing creator would have no dog in this fight. His/her's/it's so-called judgment day would weigh pro-con evidence as to each individual's worth, and reward or punishment meted out accordingly. Ideally, that is what IMO reasonable religionists would like to see.

But that's not going to happen because there is no proof that any kind of god exists.
Certainly no god exists who would banish to eternal fire one of "his" creations just because they cite "there is no proof that deities exist."

Yes, these burdens and accompanying conflagrations has been brought on by religious, fear mongering zealots that have had too much time on their hands (like the Saudi young men who participated in the aircraft high-jackings of 2001 . . . living in the lap of oil revenue, they had too much time on their hands).

The Genie cannot be stuffed back into the bottle. For all of religion's survival attributes through the millennia, it's dogma and sanctimoniousness is no longer required. But the Genie is out, and will continue to receive supplication (hopefully in lesser and lesser amounts).

(Maybe I'm a bit off thread here and should start another thread)

[JLB32168]

"Only in modern times" . . . Is this to indicate ignorance of the history of Christians and Muslims killing each other for a thousand years? Ignorance of Muslim conquests? Ignorance of the Crusades?

Most Christians didnt kill Muslims. Most Muslims didnt kill Christians. The Ottomans didnt execute the peoples they consider Millet " non-Muslim communities w/in their Empire. You and those of like opinion as you continuously cite the extreme examples to prove a point and thats illogical argumentation.

I use the term many in accord with its definition in common-use dictionaries.

Where in the US, for example, do these many Christians who think its okay to execute witches and homosexuals live? Since there a large but indefinite number of them it should be easy to answer.

I trust that you are at least somewhat familiar with Christian literature that condones or encourages or mandates killing of witches, adulteresses, homosexuals.

You said that there are many Christians who advocate willing witches, adulteresses, and homosexuals. Books/People " pick which one youre discussing and where on the globe they are STILL following those things?

Are there examples of I kill you in the name of no gods or My disbelief in gods tells me to kill?

No, but why is that important? What is the value of the argument, We killed in the name of something we advocated, but not in the name of something we disbelieved. Of course, that second half isnt true either. Atheism was official state policy and believers of any religion were culled and shipped off to Siberia or the local gulag simply for being a believer.

Atheism (without belief in gods) has no unifying doctrine or literature instructing adherents to kill people.

They surely have found a unifying force to trump up a reason. Adhering to the opiate of the masses is counterrevolutionary and those who advocate belief need to be liquefied. Once again, the historical illiteracy of some atheists is fascinating.

As I understand it, your rebuttal is, We killed millions in the same of something else, but not in the name of atheism, which you seem to think is a superior argument. That would be laughable if we werent talking about the deaths of millions.

Rather than generalizations I cite known Muslim beliefs " which are represented in the Quran. Is that disputed?

How many Muslims do you know that have participated in honor killings? Even in the Muslim Middle East, Orthodox Christians arent required to pray towards Mecca five times a day.

Not at all. I do not care how people dress or undress. That is their business, not mine.

At least youre consistent on some things.

I make my points regularly " the major one of which is that religions and their sacred characters cannot be shown to be anything more than overworked human imagination, myths, legends, folklore. AND that basing one's life and decisions on such things is contrary to reasoning based on verifiable evidence.

You failed to mention one consistent point you make " atheists arent responsible for any mass murders over the last century, but are the paragons of enlightened thinking.

[Strider324]

JBL Scribed:

Where in the US, for example, do these many Christians who think its okay to execute witches and homosexuals live? Since there a large but indefinite number of them it should be easy to answer.

You think because nobody is wearing a sign that says "I believe the bible and God wants to kill fags and witches", that they aren't legion?

People don't openly or readily admit to being a number of things - racist, alcoholic, homophobic, pedophilic, etc.

They tend to be especially reluctant to claim positions that society at large finds abhorrent. No one I know is silly enough to pretend those people do not exist.

They say 'In Vino Veritas'. I have found that especially helpful at parties where drinking occurs. It's amazing what people will admit to when under the influence. That's where you can find those 'many Christians' whose bible based hate and self-righteousness is reluctantly on hold. When I extrapolate from that data and include the number of people I know who actually HAVE stated they think homosexuals and witches should be killed, it is indeed a significant number.

Of course, they lack the integrity to do the killing themselves and thereby demonstrate the courage of their stated convictions - always preferring that someone else do it, so they can piously claim "Well, that's Gods will" while avoiding any active part. Go figger.

[Danmark]

Adonai did not create race, man did. It is a social construct designed to divide people by biological characteristics for various social purposes. I am not aware of any such construct in HaTorah. The divisions of humanity are based on belief systems and behaviors, not biological characteristics.

I agree, race is a social construct that does not represent biological reality.
The poll is based on a false assumption.

Biological races do not existand never have. This view is shared by all scientists who study variation in human populations. Yet racial prejudice and intolerance based on the myth of race remain deeply ingrained in Western society.

See:
The Myth of Race: The Troubling Persistence of an Unscientific Idea
October 6, 2014
by Robert Wald Sussman

[bluethread]

[Replying to bluethread]

No, physical differences are not social constructs. Giving them significance is. Biological "race" is not as defined as has been promoted. Human diversity is a range, ie. the constructs of bi-racial and multi-racial to maintain the integrity of the "race" concept. Isolation creates monoculture and when isolated communities have occasional interaction, those differences are noted and significance is applied to them.

You must be a lawyer. Only a gifted attorney could defend the notion of a god purposefully separating the races and, to be sure, they are separated if you have a functioning eye or two and a brain to process the data. If there is a "range" it has been a natural selection process of mankind that you no doubt would call a "sin."

This response is false from start to finish. There is absolutely nothing true in it.

[Danmark]

[Replying to bluethread]

No, physical differences are not social constructs. Giving them significance is. Biological "race" is not as defined as has been promoted. Human diversity is a range, ie. the constructs of bi-racial and multi-racial to maintain the integrity of the "race" concept. Isolation creates monoculture and when isolated communities have occasional interaction, those differences are noted and significance is applied to them.

You must be a lawyer.

No. I AM a lawyer, and a lawyer first looks at the facts. Your entire thread is based on a false premise, that there are separate races. There is only one race, the human race. Bluethread is right, the concept of race IS a 'social construct.' Some people have blue eyes, others brown. Some are blonde, others have dark hair. We ALL have skins of colors that differ. Some bigot, or groups of bigots, hundreds or thousands of years ago decided these insignificant differences were significant enough to call those who they thought looked different, "THE OTHER."

I generally disagree with Bluethread. I am not on his 'side.' I see no evidence of some god of popular theism. But he is dead on correct here. Your argument is based on a false claim. You might as well ask "Why did God make some people tall and others short;" or "Why did god give some blue eyes and others hazel or brown."

Before you continue this argument, you should first make the case that there actually are different races of homo sapiens.

[marco]

Before you continue this argument, you should first make the case that there actually are different races of homo sapiens.

I think anthropologists have already made this case, Danmark. I have no wish to walk unarmed between two battling armies, but I understand that homo sapiens is divided, generally, into 4 races: caucasian, mongoloid, negroid and australoid.

The word race generates lots of heat so perhaps we should speak of ethnicity. Obviously there are differences in appearance and in language between peoples on the planet and it would be absurd to deny this. The question is, why would God opt for such diversity? In Peter Pan I believe they ponder the question: What made the red man red? Perhaps the OP is merely an extension of this fascinating question.

[Kenisaw]

Will you likely "get bent out of shape" if / when Muslims begin injecting their beliefs into laws and forcing others (you) to abide?

Muslims and Christians think that killing is wrong. Do you take issue with their interjection of beliefs into laws and forcing you to abide by laws informed by those beliefs?

Change the question from "killing" to "gay marraige" and then answer it yourself...