Pioneer1

Troy I like the new avatar Thank you. Garvey his a personal hero of mine. man I can drink dairy and eat ice all day long and I'm in my 50's now what? Also people from other parts of African are also able to digest lactose. Again skin color is genetically determined (ignoring environmental factors), but as we've written numerous times; skin color is insufficient to to determine what you understand as race. I'd bet most of the genetic variation we observe in human is due more to environment (geography, available food supply, climate, etc). Cultures come and go too quickly to have much of an influence on our genetics. I know a lot of Black people in their 40s and 50s who drink milk and consume other dairy products. And almost all of them suffer from adverse side effects ranging from gas and upset stomach to chronic bronchitis and constant colds. The milk is bothering them, they just don't know it. And even when it's brought to their attention a lot of them still consume it anyway....like a smoker with emphysema who keeps on smoking. I know East Africans and Sudanese drink a lot of milk but their genetics is differnt from Black Americans (and the milk they're drinking is different too). Most Black Americans as I said are descended from WEST AFRICANS. Now because of slavery most of us in America have Northern European ancestry as well, so we share SOME of their European gene. Some of us have European genes that cause our skin to be lighter. Others have European genes that cause our hair to be straighter. Others have European genes that allow us to consume dairy products at an advanced age. But these are minor exceptions to the GENERAL RULE that we as decendants of West Africans should be living by based on our genetic heritage. Generally speaking those of West African descent CAN NOT and SHOULD NOT be consuming dairy products after adulthood as it could lead to all types of health problems that you'd think were totally unrelated. Another example of "culture versus genes" is alcohol consumption....... Most White people consume alcoholic beverages on a daily basis, with meals, while watching televsion, after work, for celebrations, for sad occasions...yet most of them can still function and operate a society. Yet the Native American community is nearly DESTROYED from alcohol consumption. Why? Because of genetics. Native American genes don't allow them to process alcohol as effectively as Europeans. Neither do most Black Americans. I'm sure you've seen in college how White kids could drink and drink and drink until they fell out in a coma on the weekends, but Monday morning they are up and in class with their eyes clear and mind sharp. Black students try to drink HALF as much as their White friends and it fucks their lives up. Their eyes turn red, they get violent, can't remember their studies....many end up having to drop out of school and end up alcoholics. Why? Because our bodies weren't designed genetically to consume alcohol the way Whites can. In WESTERN CULTURE (not our culture) alcohol is so common it's almost a staple food.

Lol @ the exchange between CD and Sara......... It reminds staff meetings where you see those highly intellectual brothers who pretty much keep their emotions under control but there's always a sista who knows how to make him go "pop". Next thing you know he's cussing and sweating in the forehead....LOL. All Allow me to just go back to my original point. The military offers a lot of benefits to Black youth from backgrounds of poverty who ordinarily would have few chances of improving their condition...that's undeniable regardless of the drawbacks experiences by thousands of vets; however that's not the MAIN reason I support Black people having a significant presence through out all branches and in all levels of the military. The main reason I support it is because this is OUR nation (whether or not we're treated like it is) and it would be wise for us to make sure there's a BLACK PRESENCE in almost all of this nation's institutions to ensure that White supremacy doesn't entrench itself in them. I support more Blacks joining the local police and sheriff's departments, FBI, and other law enforcement agencies for the very same reason. If we're going to live in this nation we should have as strong of an influence as possible in all of it's operations in order to protect ourselves and our interests.

Not only did I like the few Congolese people I've met over the years, I can honestly say that I like most of the Africans that I've met. I'm talking socially, intellectually, and sexually (women). Me and a few brothers I roll with often talk about how feminine most African women tend to be and how attractive we find it. Infact a long time ago I used be friends with a Congolese sister and tried to get something going with her but I was the same age as her....which meant I was too young for her, lol. I got an opportunity to go to Belgium a while back and was suprised at how many Congolese people I saw. They had their own television channels and entire markets with salt-fish and other Congolese products were on the street. It took me to the end of the day to put together that The Congo had been a colony of Belgium. I think more Blacks Americans and Africans should mingle with eachother because we both have things to teach eachother.

Are you obligated to challenge my opinion or prepared to express one of your own??? My opinion is under that scenario, perhaps the best option would be to follow a path similar to what WEB Dubois outlined in his "Talented Tenth". Promote the most intelligent and conscious of our people into positions of leadership and get behind them. Even under the scenario I outlined where Whites on average were genetically more intelligent than Blacks on average. The law of averages would still allow for a smaller number of Blacks to be just as smart as the smartest Whites. A small number of leaders could lead just as effectively (if not more) as a large number of them given the masses get behind them and submit to their leadership.

Sara Perhaps you missed this: 1. Arrogant - how dare you treat me like a child and say I'm not "mature financially" to manage my money. Tell me I HAVE TO go to a school (of your choice?) and take courses YOU deem in MY best interest. Imply I am so stupid as to not know anything about the law; tell me ANYTHING when you actually believe the only thing between me and money and wealth is my lack of knowledge when people who look like me are being discriminated against for everything imaginable, as well as gunned down like dogs in the streets, EVERY FREAKIN' DAY in America. How dare you put the onus for my lack of wealth on me and not the society that does everything in its power to keep me down no matter how hard I try to rise. Perhaps you missed me saying it's not the GOVERNMENT TELLING US how to spend our money but US TELLING THE GOVERMENT what we want as reparations! We (the recipients) would be the ones not only determining what "The Big Pay Back" would be but how it would be used...no one else. 2. The above assumes "good will." The above assume a level playing field. The above assumes black Americans are the sole cause of our present-day condition, or that we are in a position to actually change our bottom of the barrel position without outside interference. I hear what you're saying but that's almost a given. As long as there is more than one race in a society you're going to have racism to various degrees. Receiving reparations in an unjust society is better than receiving NOTHING and still having to survive in an unjust society. Troy That said, there are groups of people who are building their own communities on the own land, we don't need reparations to do this we, just the the desire, and it is simply not there Which is why I say part of Reparations would be a EDUCATION. Because even if we get the land, we still need the KNOWLEDGE of how to properly work it. When we go around Flint preaching the New Flint Project people often ask why don't we just ask the government for money and do our own thing. Or why can't private charities just donate some money without getting the federal government involved. I tell them all the money in the world won't help you if you don't have enough sense and technological expertise to put it to good use. We need experts from the government who have went all over the world to places like Honduras and Afganistan building up urban infrastructures to teach us how to do the same here. .....or else we'd just be wasting the money given to us as well as our time.

Troy of course phenotype is defined in one's genetics but "race" is not (and I wrote I wouldn't debate this fact). Again, there is no Black gene or genes. You can't look at someone genes a say this person is Black and this one is white. In other words one can not come up with DNA test for whiteness. Actually, skin color IS a genetic trait that is passed along. But as we make our way out of the grass and weeds and back on the path, my original point is that the CULTURE of a people is based in part on their GENETICS. Another example is dairy products....... Unlike most West African and East Asian societies, Western society places a huge emphasis on consuming milk and other dairy products even at an advanced age. Why? Because most Northern Europeans are GENETICALLY equipped with the lactase enzyme all the way into old age that allows them to process and break down the lactose sugar that milk and milk by-products contain. So you can go to the state fair and catch an old White couple holding hands and licking on ice cream cones or sucking down milk-shakes together. Just grinning away. Let YOU, me, or most other Black people over 30 years of age try it. Inside an hour you'd be feeling back for the poor suckaz that had to walk behind you you'd be blowing so much gas...lol. We don't have the genetics to naturally produce the lactase enzyme after a certain age and that is why milk and milk products weren't an original part of the West African diet and culture. Trying to imitate White folks! Too often our people see THEM doing something and try to imitate it with disasterous results. As I said before, your genetics influences your culture. One should not adopt the culture of those genetically different than them.

Cynique If hypothetically speaking is not an absolute, then the question is meaningless because the "almost" factor leaves a window for broad speculation open. In a hypothetical WORLD almost anything is possible. In a hypothectical SCENARIO the only things that are possible are those within the boundaries set by the presenter. All You can't present counter arguments to this (or try to "flip" it Sara....lol). It's like going to a sci-fi movie and arguing over how unrealistic the show was. It wasn't presented as reality in the first place. In a hypothetical scenario you either you entertain the idea and the questions posed within it or you don't.

Now THIS is a slavery-time flick I wouldn't mind spending my money to see. I'm sure Snoop Doggy Dogg Lion wouldn't either. Movies like this and Glory aren't as offensive as Roots or 12 Years a Slave because more than showing helpless Black men and women getting raped, whipped, and killed....it actually shows the resilience of Black manhood in the face of oppression and violent opposition. People often go to the movies to ESCAPE reality. Especially Black men who live in a society where their manhood is constantly challenged.

Sara I don't know what question you're talking about, but if it involves debating the BASER points of enforced servitude, I'm outta here If you are unaware of the question I've asked multiple times already let me POINT to it: "At what point in their lives do you think most of our ENSLAVED ancestors made the transition from freedom to bondage" This isn't a question to spark a debate about the "baser" points of servitude, it's a question to get a better understanding of why you insist on calling them "enslaved".

Damn information gets around fast online...lol. I just saw this 15 minutes ago in USA Today and was going to post the article in this thread and Troy beat me to it. It seems like every week or so people are presenting me with the same information I was going to present to them. Troy I believe Snoop feels the same way you and I do about the series but I don't think he articulated if frustration properly. He basically started cussing and complaining about them always showing movies about Black slavery rather than the improved more wealthier state of Black America today. But the way he expressed his frustration.....it leaves White America open to say, "Well you just can't please those people. We try to get past slavery and racism and they keep bringing it back up. Then we put on a movie about it and talk about it and they complain about THAT.....geez!" He should have cut down on the cussing and did a little more explaining and putting his anger in context.

Troy If I were a betting man I'd be willing to wage there are thousands of homeless Black families in New York alone who would settle for a half-acre of land somewhere down in South Carolina or Virginia than to continue living on the streets of the Big Apple where they face constant harassment from the police, rats, criminals who prey on homeless, ect.... Sara Again with the telling OTHER people what they can and can't do with their money. If any governmental agency said ANY of the above were reparations for 300 years of forced servitude, I'd be just the Japanese internee and slam the door in their arrogant faces. But check out what it's called: REPARATIONS. Not PLACATIONS Or ACCOMODATIONS It's calld REPARATIONS because it is supposed to REPAIR the damage that has been done to our people from slavery. It takes more than just money to do that. Unlike the Japanese interns who were still around to collect, the slaves are long gone....but the damage done by slavery is still here. Some things can't be fixed by money alone, you also need knowledge, legal protection, land, and other tools the help repair the damage centuries of servitude has caused and this will build you all the money and wealth you desire. In this case it wouldn't be the government telling recipients how to spend their money, but the people themselves TELLING THE GOVERNMENT what forms of reparations they need to make things right.

Troy Pioneer race is ONLY about phenotype and has nothing to do with genetics. There is no Black gene. If you got to African today you could easily find a "black person" who is genetically more different from you than you are a typical white boy. A person's phenotype is arrived FROM their genes. It's passed along as alleles in the DNA. However a person's phenotype is only a FRACTION of their genetic make up which is why you can find the same genes in people of different races. Men and women are clearly different sexes but their share the same genes that give them hair, a nose, a mouth, eyes, ect..... But just a fraction of genetic variation can make a world of difference. Hell, apes and humans share over 90% of their DNA but look at the vast difference. As far as the sex stuff you sound pretty open minded on paper in reality I'm not so convinced. We happen to live in a culture where women with multiple partners are looked down upon and men with multiple partners are revered. A women is not likely to freely admit to her lover, that she wants all of her holes plugged by three other dudes--fantasy's like this are typically frowned upon. You're right and part of the reason why women catch the shittiest end of the stick is because we not only live in a sexually repressed system but a PATRIARCHAL one as well. Under sexual repression....sex is considered vulgar nasty sin that should only be engaged in when absolutely necessary...procreation. But under a Patriarchal system, it's all about men receiving pleasure while women aren't counted. So ofcourse if sex is necessary for the continuation of humanity and SOMEBODY has to get some pleasure out of it...let it be the man....lol. So women are thrown under the bus. But both of these sadistic cultural traits come from a sexually repressive Northern European culture that was imposed on NON-Northern Europeans. But another part of the reason why women would catch hell for this goes back to what I mentioned earlier. Because MOST (not all) men tend to have a higher sex drive and DESIRE multiple sexual partners.....when a man engages in sex with multiple women society sees him a success. One who wants a lot of women and has accomplished his goal. We know there are women with high sex drives but MOST have no desire for multiple sexual partners. Society knows most women want one man they can call their own. So when society sees a woman (who isn't a prostitute) with multiple men at the same time they almost instinctively frown upon it because they know that's not where she wants to be in her life and she's probably letting herself be used by men because of some sort of psychological issue. Cynique As I mentioned before, people in America are petty much LEGALLY free to engage in any type of sexual activity they wish as long as it's between consenting adults. But the problems aren't necessarily coming from the sex itself but how an society places GUILT on those individuals who choose to exercise their sexual freedoms. As Troy pointed out, women who engage in sexual promiscuity are often labled as whores and tramps from their very friends and family members. Men who engage in sexual promiscuity are called sinners, "sick", influenced by Satan, ect.... And it all stems from foreign CULTURE that was imposed on the population by those who had a repressed and warped view of sexuality to begin with. Families, religious institutions, and society at large all get thier disdain for sexual freedom from WESTERN CULTURE which condemned sex as sinful and primative. A "necessary evil"...

Cynique One of the beautiful things about a "hypothetical" situation....is that there is no hidden factors in it. We know there is almost no way most people (especialy most Black people) would accept such a claim in real life. There are too many environmental and other subjective factors involved as well as how one actually determines "intelligence". Not to mention the pride factor which has been known to send some people to their graves not willing to accept certain "truths". But almost anything is possible in the "hypothetical world".

I can take you to parts of Detroit (or Chicago or New York) where brothers are suffering from PTSD and never left their neighborhoods....lol. They've been shot, stabbed, beat up...have seen and done the same to others and never had to sign their name on enlistment papers. And I won't even get into the hell some of these brothers and sisters are catchins in the prisons and jails. I just got through reading a good book by a brother Shaka Senghor who did 19 year and wrote about the unspeakable horrors he witnessed in penitentary. Atleast when they go through it in the military they get SOME sort of promise of benefit for their physical and psychological suffering. The U.S. military isn't my cup of tea, but atleast it seems to offer a way out for a lot of Black and Brown men who don't have the money, pull, or brains to make it in professional America. One of the problems with bringing back the draft is rich and influencial people will ALWAYS find a way to keep their children out or atleast get them the easiest and safest position in service. Look at what old man Bush was able to do for his son George W. He sported around with fighter jets while the war was raging in Vietnam. However in an ideal society which met all of our basic needs (universal healhcare, guaranteed shelter, ect..) I believe that all young men and women coming out of highschool should be required to do some sort of NATIONAL SERVICE for a couple years. Options would include: -military service -helping feed the hungry in America and abroad f-ighting wild fires -caring for the sick in various hospitals and nursing homes Not only would it be a show of gratitude for a great nation that protects and provides for you, but it would also teach young people valuable LIFE EXPERIENCE that they wouldn't get in college or working a menial job out of highschool. Teach them discipline, how to cook their own food, do their own laundry, ect.... But again, under this CURRENT system I wouldn't support it because the influence of race and class are just too strong and rich White people would find a way to get their children in the nice cushy jobs while shitty ones would be left for the poor and Brown.

　 Troy I know I spend the day challenging everything you wrote today, but I know you welcome your ideas being challenged and are not treated by it or take it personally Lol....((shakes head)) I figured you were just bored. So you disagree with Muhammad Ali's position on serving in Vietnam? No, I actually agree with it because: 1. He was making a political statement revolving around the legal condition of AfroAmericans at that time. 2. He was confronting the policy of drafting people against their will. If there were another military draft, do you think Black boys should be compelled to go? Despite my firm belief that Black people should be well represented in all branches and at all levels of the U.S. military....I don't support a military draft policy. One shouldn't be FORCED to take another's life except in direct self-defense. Do you think America has been completely justified in all of the military campaigns (killing) that has taken place in your life time? If not do you think Black people are better off participating in these campaigns? Ofcourse not. Especially with regard to the wars in Iraq and Afganistan. However I think the fact that men and women of all races are forced to participate in unjust wars says more about the public and what they allow their leaders to do than it does about the men and women in uniform doing the bidding of corrupt politicians. When you write: "I know a lot of Black men and women who did and most of them came out better for it." I'm forced to ask better than what? Better than what they were before they went in, or better than what they would have been if they, say, went to college, gotten a decent job, or learned a trade. All of thee above. Most Black men and women I know who were in the military (and came out....as many have stayed and made a career out of it) came out with college education, skilled trades they wouldn't have learned in civilian life like being helicopter and air plane mechanics. Even inside the miltary structure itself I've heard over and over again on how much fairer it seems to be and less racist than the "outside world". Atleast in the miltary it's more about performance and whether you can get the job done or not than race or socials status. It's the proverbial "equal playing field". I'm sure CD Burns can bear me witness to much of this.

Actually, I envision the government giving out plots of land for us to make use of it how we see fit. Kind of like the early Homesteaders. But even that would be nearly useless without the necessary education/knowledge of how to cultivate that land and extract the minerals from it.

　 Troy 　 If you are not clear to the lack of a genetic basis for race, then you are apt to draw the conclusions that you have. I won't debate facts with you once they have been presented. But I'd encourage you can to research genetics and race. Race is just as much PHENOTYPE as it is genetics. I don't care about a person's ancestral claim (unless they're applying for Reparations...lol), as far as I'm concerned if you look White you are White as this society has most likely TREATED you White anyway. 　 　 Culture has nothing to do with genetics. Sure people of the same culture often share the same phenotype, but this is a consequence, of not, the cause of the culture. I've met white people who I did not realize were "white," (as you define white) because they shared my culture (music, religion, cuisine, background, etc). I'm sure you have met people like this too. if not, perhaps you have met Black people you felt were "acting" white. Maybe you called them an "oreo." This is simply a Black people who is culturally white--despite their skin color. Usually when you find a culture where people of different phenotypes observing it together, it was as a result of one RACE (phenotypical) conquering and subjegating another RACE (phenotypical) and forcing them to either modify important aspects of thier culture (religious rites, mating rites, language, ect..) or erasing it all together and forcing them to adopt the conquerer's culture. Examples: -In America Blacks and Whites share the same culture because Blacks were FORCED to. -In Mexico Indians/Meztizos and Whites share the same Spanish culture because the Indian/Meztizos were FORCED to. And in both cases problems have arisen. Also, culture is most certainly affected by and even influenced by genetics: Race and tastebuds: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/science-july-dec10-geneticstaste_12-23/ Melanin and hearing: http://alkhalife.info/content/difference-starts-melanin Caucasian boys more prone to colorblindness: https://consumer.healthday.com/eye-care-information-13/color-blindness-141/caucasian-boys-most-prone-to-color-blindness-study-finds-686437.html 　 People who can HEAR more sound will produce a wider range of sounds. People who can TASTE more flavors will produce a wider range of flavor in their foods. People who can SEE a wider range of colors have a more colorful culture. I'm glad Sara corrected you on the polygamous catholic priests, on it's face that did not sound right, and I'm glad you conceded the point :-) Well if I'm wrong, I'm wrong....lol. However I'm not too quick to admit that my statement about married priests in Africa was incorrect because about a half dozen Africans who didn't know eachother told me this and I know a lot of what not only goes on in secret but actuallly ALLOWED in the Catholic church isn't mentioned in it's official cannon or doctrine. But since I can't find any evidence to prove it, I'll back away from it. As for testosterone levels, sex drive and skin color (what you call race), I have no idea what the connections are, but I strongly doubt the connections are as cut and dried as you suggest. For each anecdote you cite I can think of many others that go counter. Women can be promiscuous too and have high sex drives, but they will still have lower levels of testosterone than a normal man. Body builders take hormones, including testosterone, and generally end up reducing their sexual performance to the point of impotence. Sex drive as well as reproductive maturity are influenced by their testosterone levels more than any other factor. And it is scientifically proven that Black men (on average) worldwide have a higher testosterone rate than White men (on average). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/21534992_RacialEthnic_variations_in_male_testosterone_levels_A_probable_contributor_to_group_differences_in_health So it follows that Black men will have a high sex drve and have no business patterning thier social behavior and family structures on that of men of a lower sex drive. What works for THEM may not and often does not work for MOST of us. For each anecdote you cite I can think of many others that go counter. Women can be promiscuous too and have high sex drives, but they will still have lower levels of testosterone than a normal man. Body builders take hormones, including testosterone, and generally end up reducing their sexual performance to the point of impotence. You're now dealing with more psychology than actual chemistry There is a difference between women who have high sex drives and women who sleep around a lot. Some women naturally have high sex drives that call for multiple sexual partners to satisfy them, but this is RARELY the case due to their generally lower levels of testosterone. Unlike most men who do it for ego and PLEASURE, most women who sleep with multiple men do it either for money (prostitution) or as a form of punishing themselves because of low self esteem. 　 　 But to your point about sexual repression: Pioneer on some level I agree with you. The whole idea about waiting until marriage to have sex and staying with that same partner for life seems crazy. Virtually no one does this and those who try invariable fail, or are miserable, or have missed out on one of life's joys, but... Absolutely. This is why I'm in favor of a sexually free society where everyone has the freedom and opportunity to express themselves based on what's natural for THEM even if it's abnormal.....as long as it doesn't directly harm another. By imposing rigid rules based on the desires and norms of the majority, you represss the minority. If we want to find out what is natural and works for us, let people be free and they will naturally gravitate toward what works for them. 　 　 When you write something like this; "Rather than asking one group of men to control themselves in a sexually repressive society, why not flip it and demand that the other group be MORE SENSUAL and in accord with the dominant human nature?" What you are revealing, perhaps without realizing, it is the fact that we will in a male dominated culture. You talk about men marrying multiple women, and the sex droves of men from various cultures. Your solution and much of what you wrote fail to consider fully 1/2 the population--the women. Actually it wouldn't be inconsiderate at all. It would only appear that way because most women WOULD NOT WANT to take advantage of being able to have mutliple sex partners like most men would. Even among the most liberated of women, most don't have a sex drive desiring multiple sexual partners at the same time or in the same period or relationships. Most just want ONE man at a time per relationship. But most younger women don't understand (nor do they wish to understand) that most young men want the opposite and the the conflict comes when one REFUSES to respect the views and rights of others. Are you just as open that a bunch of other dudes bringing your woman to climax anytime she has the desire. Maybe your girl likes to have three other dudes up in her at the same time, raw. I dunno, but somehow I suspect your desire to eliminate sexual repression is not boundless. But I could be wrong let me know how you feel about this and we can continue the discussion No. Actually my woman isn't really "my woman" but just one of multiple women I'm occasionally intimate with who I actually vibe with the most....lol. I never was too big on relationships and I learned not to be too possessive of women I'm not married to and aren't taking care of. However she doesn't DESIRE multiple men running up in it at the same time even if she knew I didn't care. Again, it's about what the INDIVIDUAL desires for themselves as long as it doesn't directly harm another person or the society. Men and women tend to have different DESIRES so their behavior is different. Even now it's perfectly legal for a woman to have 5 boyfriends if she wants, but most wouldn't even think of such of thing because even if the men agreed she wouldn't DESIRE it. Perhaps my lady doesn't desire multiple sexual partners at the same time, however she shouldn't get upset because I do (and I don't anymore....lol...been there and done that..) as long as that understanding is there and we live in a society that permits it. Now ofcourse, this type of society is unheard of even on the African continent where even BEFORE the coming of Europeans and Arabs there were some pretty strict marital and mating rules and customs. But again, I believe freedom and understanding is the key that will allow everyone to naturally get in where they fit in and build families that work best for THEM.

Sara Pioneer, I am aware of the institution of slavery. To debate the "base" points of same is rather fruitless, IMO. I can really see no redeeming value to it. I stand by we are all born free. When, if and should we should at some point in our lives find ourselves enslaved, well, it is what it is. Btw, I am aware of the meaning of the word "considered," as well. It is not synonymous with the word "is." Lol... Well, should I CONSIDER your above response a dismissal of my question? Or IS it just the build up to an actual answer? Again, at what point in life do you think most of our ENSLAVED ancestors make the transition from freedom to bondage?

Troy Maybe it would be best for you @Pioneer1, to describe what reparations would look like. Does every so called "Black" person get a check? If so how big would it be? Are all so called Black people compensated equally? Will there be a "brown bag test" of sorts to determine relative level of compensation? I mentioned in the first post of this thread that monetary allotments wouldn't be the best form of reparations for us at this time. Infact, in many cases it would probably be COUNTER-productive and do more harm than good. Not only would giving 40 million people $50 million ignite skyrocketing inflation in the U.S. economy almost overnight; but since most of the businesses Black people spend their money in are NOT Black owned that means you'll just be empowering and enriching those who are already exploiting the Black community....not us. As I said before, reparations to AfroAmericans should come MOSTLY in the form of: -Education (REAL education dealing with science, agriculture, and technology) -Business opportunities -Land both in America and abroad -Medical care and knowledge -Legal and political exemptions This would be of much more benefit than just giving us money order or gift-card to Target. These are investments in HUMAN POTENTIAL that would teach us to build OUR OWN wealth far beyond what can presently be imagined. As far as determining who deserves what..... There are a dozen websites out there where a person can trace their ancestry back to determine whether or not they descended (in whole or in part) from slavery. If it be shown that any American had direct ancestors who were slaves, they could receive reparations regardless of how they looked or the number of relatives enslaved. Infact, perhaps this would be the BEST way to argue in favor of reparations anyway. There are many Whites and Native Americans who have Black slave ancestry who would certainly be in harmony with us to demand reparations if the argument weren't framed as racially based one but rather based on who actuallly descended from American slaves regardless of phenotype. Infact, I wouldn't mind letting a couple hundred thousand White people get in on the deal if it means me and most my people are the ultimate beneficiaries.

When I was younger and less experienced in the world I used to believe like Furious Styles, a Black man had no place in a "White man's" military. But years of observation both here and abroad changed my way of thinking. I never joined the U.S. military but I know a lot of Black men and women who did and most of them came out better for it. More disciplined, in better shape, family oriented, and most came out with skills. There were a few horror stories, but the good seems to have outweighed the bad so far. But even more importantly.... I don't want to live in a nation where the military has few if any Black people in it. I want to make sure AfroAmericans are WELL REPRESENTED inside the military just incase you get a General or even Chief of Staff with extreme right wing and racist beliefs who'd attempt to use his powers to carry out some diabolical extermination plan. We know some Black people may go along with the program, but I'm sure a great deal wouldn't.

This thought was inspired by a few questions Xeon raised in another thread: "Well, tell ya what...why don't you give me the name of one black African country in 2016, that leads the world in technological, medical and scientific development. Give me the name of one black African nation that is a global leader in engineering, economics, agriculture and education. How many black African nations are totally and completely free of technological assistance, infrastructure development and economic assistance from China, Europe or the US? And when you finish that list, give me another list of "non-Negro nations" and governments that are dependent on "black African countries" for technological advisors and developers. " 　 Hypothetically speaking..... What if it were proven beyond any doubt to both Blacks as well as Whites that the Black race is somehow intellectually inferior to Whites? How would that knowledge affect our outlook on life as individuals as well as collectively? How would it affect our social and political decisions? Perhaps some proud ones would argue in favor of mass suicide. Others for sure...infact many already are..would become open conformists submitting themselves to Whites as faithful servants and possibly even slaves. Would there then be a political movement by some Conformist negroes to convince the masses that their best bet is to humble themselves into docile servitude as a way of best getting along in society? How would it affect our relationship with OTHER races such as Asians and how we relate to them? How would it affect the LAWS? Could you no longer sue for discrimination since it would be "justified"? Would all the civil rights laws we fought for then have to be REVERSED? Or would Black people no longer be held accountable for certain crimes with the defense of mental deficiency...lol? Judge: "Ordinarily I'd give a person 25 years to life for such a heinous crime, but knowing how YOU PEOPLE are I'm sure you probably didn't know too much better. I'll let you go with a warning this time. Just make sure you apologize to his family at the funeral"

Sara The operative word is "considered." Doesn't negate the FACT that no one is born with chains. What DOES negate the "considered" part is that should the expectant mother follow the call of "Moses" and "slip away"; once in "the promised land," the newborn is NOT "considered" to be anyone's "property This is true indeed....except for being the property of her/his mother, lol. But as long as that mother is in the care of her "owner" then her and her unborn baby are considered his propery and both are in bondage until one or both are freed. However let me ask you...... Since you chose to call our ancestors ENSLAVED rather than SLAVES, this insiuates that after being born free they at some point in time were MADE slaves. So my question is at what point in their life do you recon most made the transition from freedom to "enslavement"? Birth? Puberty? Adulthood? According to your argument, if they weren't born slaves but rather started life free and were EN-slaved, then there HAD to be a set point in which their bondage began.

Sara I wasn't talking about black people. I was referring to Roman Catholic priests of all races, some of whom it is an "open secret" have sexual relations with women out of which are produced illegitimate children. I know you weren't just talking about Black priests. I figured you were making a point that sexual indiscretion happens among all races of priest and not just Black. Not only was I agreeing with you but also added that I didn't see them as problems pertaining ONLY to Black people incase you felt that this was what I was implying.

Sara As for 'clandestine' marriages - but MOSTLY illegitimate children - of Roman Catholic priests, that's an open secret. And it occurs on every continent in the world. Ofcourse promiscuity, cheating, and out of wedlock children occur all over the globe among all cultures and races. I'm in no way saying those are Black issues. However given our sensual nature that I believe is due in large part to our genetics/natural gifts, we need a culture that SUPPORS our heightened sexual activity...not one that represses it. We need a social and moral infrastructure that supports our strong sexual nature. -Extended families to take care of the many children -Effective birth control options for those who want to engage without children -Kama Sutra type philosophies to promote better and healthier sexual activity .....adopting the sexually repressive moral customs of hypo-sexed outsiders has and will continue to spell disaster for us because it was designed by and for people lacking sensuality to begin with and those are the only type of people it would work for.

Sara And one could also make the argument that we are all "born free." Afterwards, i.e., after drawing our first breaths, some of us are forcibly enslaved That's why I called it an argument, because I knew there were those of the above opinion....lol. Under the old Arab and Persian system of slavery, children of slaves were often free and accepted as full members of society absolved to not suffer the fate of their parents. Not all were, but many where...so under THAT system we could argue that many if not most children were born free with the OPTION of being put under the yoke of slavery. But there was no such option under the American system of slavery. Especially in the United States. Black people were specifically born and bred FOR the purpose of being slaves. The Black baby was considered "Massa's" property while yet still in the womb and was expected to earn him money some time in the future.