Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sethomas
You contradict yourself in that you accuse the use of race as a factor when you argue against a point that reflects specifically genetic bloodlines, not race.
|
When we reference slavery, we're speaking of "race", not genetic bloodlines. There is no genetic bloodline that evolved as a result of Slavery, just like there's no genetic bloodline that evolved from life in Auschwitz. What you're inadvertantly saying is that slavery created a race of people with genetic ties where they had never been previously. That's a little scary sounding coming from white bread America. Even so, if race is merely a construct that alters itself genetically based on experience, then at what point do we consider this constructed race a legitemate race? 500 years?
Anyway, I'm not qualified to argue genetic biology, and I'll be the first to admit it.... but I got trapped at a dinner party about a year ago with someone who was researching these race specific drugs for a trade publication, and I played devils advocate with her for a while.... contrary to what you're saying, there is a scientific field opening up of scientists who are exploring race specific medicine, specifically because they do not believe race is a construct. I'm not equipped to defend the merit of these studies, but when I did try and pose various questions about these genes developing as a result of persecution, climate, location, diet, lifestyle, etc. there were strong deductive reasonings for why these had been ruled out.
Hybrid Mode
