[251EPyso]

It's against nature and it should be banned.

Pure white Russian women should't marry men that are african/asian mixed.

[lorryuncori]

You mean because we're all the same species? You still don't mate a Rottweiler with a Chihuahua.

Dog breeds have been genetically modified to have abnormal differences. Humans have not. As a comparison this actually makes no sense at all. EDIT: a closer comparison would be to say Andre the giant mixing with any average sized women is not natural, but even that would be off kilter

[M_Marked]

Dog breeds have been genetically modified to have abnormal differences. Humans have not. As a comparison this actually makes no sense at all. EDIT: a closer comparison would be to say Andre the giant mixing with any average sized women is not natural, but even that would be off kilter

You don't consider being Black or Asian as being pretty different from being White?

[SergeyMaikov]

Not as much difference as a Rottweiler and a Chihuahua. More like a Rottweiler Shepard. They're negligible differences, such as coat color, and snout shape.

[Tndfpcin]

Not as much difference as a Rottweiler with a Chihuahua. More like a Rottweiler Shepard. They're negligible differences, such as coat color, and snout shape.

If the differences were negligible, then the behavior and performance of Whites and Blacks would be pretty much the same, like Rottweilers and Shepherds are both herders.

But that's not how it works. We are not the same.

[pongeystrhjst]

Well I personally am jealous of anybody with a hot girlfriend

cosign lol but yea it actually makes me feel better knowing that some ugly guy can get a really hot girlfriend haha

[kertionderf]

If the differences were negligible, then the behavior and performance of Whites and Blacks would be pretty much the same, like Rottweilers and Shepherds are both herders.

But that's not how it works. We are not the same.

This still doesn't explain the ridiculous comparison of breeding a Rottweiler and a Chiwawa with interracial marriage (breeding/marriage). Breeders would breed any two large dogs regardless of behavior, they would just breed for the personality they want. Furthermore, culture is what influences human behavior and performance, not "breeding". You see, dogs were created by man for specific functions, humans developed naturally to various environments, so it wouldn't make sense to compare them to dogs at all. Our function has consistently been survival.

[weO1bVp1]

I'm against it for reality-based reasons in respect to the potential children that could possibly be created.

Mixed race couples of an extreme nature such as black and white are betting everything on the assumption that elements such as myself and many others in the world won't one day come to power in their region.

Historically speaking this is a catastrophic assumption. The other side is never gone they are just suppressed for the time being. The ideological other always returns. History is full of this reality.


Mixed race couples of an extreme nature bet everything on the current multicultural consumerists maintaining power. What if they fail? What if they are defeated in the future, which historically speaking is inevitable? Those mixed race children will then exist in a world that no longer harbors them. They have no community to run to in the times of chasm. They are not the white community. They are not the black community. Their benevolent multicultural consumerist society has fallen and they have nowhere to run.

This is why I am against such unions and couplings. They aren't fair for the children in respect to reality. I'd never have children based on the assumed future supremacy of an artificial consumerist libertine society.

[ValintinoV]

I'm against it for reality-based reasons in respect to the potential children that could possibly be created.

Mixed race couples of an extreme nature such as black and white are betting everything on the assumption that elements such as myself and many others in the world won't one day come to power in their region.

Yeah, that too. Historically speaking, the attitudes Westerners have nowadays towards different ethnic groups are extremely unusual, and can be traced to the trauma WWII caused(and probably WWI to a lesser extent). Betting your lineage that those attitudes will still be present 50 years from now is plain shortsighted.

[CarmenSanches]

The tittle should be renamed to: "Black & White" Marriages in America.

usualy when americans mean interacial they mean white and black hahahaah they exclude everyone else.

as for me, I could care less about who's marrying who, life is to short to dwell on other's private lives....

[ibiDb4uu]

Yeah, that too. Historically speaking, the attitudes Westerners have nowadays towards different ethnic groups are extremely unusual, and can be traced to the trauma WWII caused(and probably WWI to a lesser extent). Betting your lineage that those attitudes will still be present 50 years from now is plain shortsighted.

Yes this is true and nobody acknowledges it.

The Wests current sycophantic multiculturalism is in large part due to Europe being internally annihilated twice in a row to the point of the average European throwing a fit if the word gun is even in a newspaper. HOWEVER core sentiments on race have not changed and won't. A people is a people and they'll always have their default racial instincts. Europeans are no different in that regard than any other people.


Personally as a racialist I see the glory days as being ahead of us. I don't see multiculturalism lasting. If a cultural movement doesn't have masses of young men willing to die for it over prolonged periods of time then it cannot historically survive very long. I don't see the diminishing European populations being willing to die in multicultural armies in the future. They'll split eventually into ethnic/racial factions just as when Rome fell.

[AnriXuinriZ]

I personally am not in favor of banning interracial marriage, each must be free to get together with who want and this is an inviolable right.

But I am surprised as the human, in nature, gives so much importance to conservation of all species and specially subspecies and races, and then humans can think that the mixing is of minor importance or good.

Speaking of what I know best, birds of prey, such as the peregrine falcon has many subspecies. And it tends to protect ensuring the survival of the subspecies considered an ecological disaster that is lost or cross each other. And as the peregrine falcon is another example, the eastern imperial eagle and iberian imperial eagle. At first subspecies and then classified as different species. When the only thing that differ is a white patch on the shoulders!!!. And this consideration, the preservation of both is very important, being his mix a sacrilege. The same occurs in other animals such as brown trout, today is strictly prohibited in iberian rivers restocking with centroeuropean brown trout , and even occasionally do genetic studies to control the degree of genetic pollution (they call it) exists in a river.

How can give so much importance to the genetic purity in the animal world to the extreme to make laws for the smooth natural, and instead in humans, is promote mixing of races like a good think?.

The iberian lynx is endemic in the Iberia. Is in danger of extinction. A good solution would be to import boreal lynx. But this is considered a natural crime, no one says so, it would lose the race of iberian lynx!

The iberian brown bear is in danger of extinction. They brought a bear from elsewhere in Europe (maybe from Russia or Germany) to introduce in the Pyrenees and it blew alarms ecologist, because this provoked miss the bear iberian blood. To be honest, a bear from Iberia and a bear from Centroeurope is totally imposible differenciate!! How then can give as much importance to the purity of blood in the animal world and in human world all the opossite?.

[Idonnaink]

I personally am not in favor of banning interracial marriage, each must be free to get together with who want and this is an inviolable right.

But I am surprised as the human, in nature, gives so much importance to conservation of all species and specially subspecies and races, and then humans can think that the mixing is of minor importance or good.

Speaking of what I know best, birds of prey, such as the peregrine falcon has many subspecies. And it tends to protect ensuring the survival of the subspecies considered an ecological disaster that is lost or cross each other. And as the peregrine falcon is another example, the eastern imperial eagle and iberian imperial eagle. At first subspecies and then classified as different species. When the only thing that differ is a white patch on the shoulders!!!. And this consideration, the preservation of both is very important, being his mix a sacrilege. The same occurs in other animals such as brown trout, today is strictly prohibited in iberian rivers restocking with centroeuropean brown trout , and even occasionally do genetic studies to control the degree of genetic pollution (they call it) exists in a river.

How can give so much importance to the genetic purity in the animal world to the extreme to make laws for the smooth natural, and instead in humans, is promote mixing of races like a good think?.

The iberian lynx is endemic in the Iberia. Is in danger of extinction. A good solution would be to import boreal lynx. But this is considered a natural crime, no one says so, it would lose the race of iberian lynx!

The iberian brown bear is in danger of extinction. They brought a bear from elsewhere in Europe (maybe from Russia or Germany) to introduce in the Pyrenees and it blew alarms ecologist, because this provoked miss the bear iberian blood. To be honest, a bear from Iberia and a bear from Centroeurope is totally imposible differenciate!! How then can give as much importance to the purity of blood in the animal world and in human world all the opossite?.

Animals subspecies are far more "genetically" diverse than human "races" So I dont think its neccessarily a good comparison, secondly many animals subspecies cannot breed with each other and produce offspring, usually if they do produce offspring the offspring becomes sterile, but I understand the point you are trying to make.

[Fuerfsanv]

Animals subspecies are far more "genetically" diverse than human "races" So I dont think its neccessarily a good comparison, secondly many animals subspecies cannot breed with each other and produce offspring, usually if they do produce offspring the offspring becomes sterile, but I understand the point you are trying to make.

I'm not talking about different species that may have infertile offspring (as the donkey and horse, tiger and lion), but the subspecies, which can interbreed and have fertile offspring, many of which are only distinguishable by analysis genetic, such as atlantic and mediterrean trout and all the animals I have mentioned, subspecies of the same specie.

[machpamb]

there's nothing wrong with interracial relationships, people who care about who other people want to love need to mind their own business.

[unishisse]

Film on interracial marriage to air on HBO tomorrow.

Source

[ChicasCams]

Animals subspecies are far more "genetically" diverse than human "races" So I dont think its neccessarily a good comparison, secondly many animals subspecies cannot breed with each other and produce offspring, usually if they do produce offspring the offspring becomes sterile, but I understand the point you are trying to make.

Actually, by defenition, subspecies can in fact interbreed. If they couldn't, then they would not be labled subspecies of each other, they would be completely seperate species.

[SNUfR8uI]

I don't give a fuck, basically.

[agiopwer]

This still doesn't explain the ridiculous comparison of breeding a Rottweiler and a Chiwawa with interracial marriage (breeding/marriage). Breeders would breed any two large dogs regardless of behavior, they would just breed for the personality they want. Furthermore, culture is what influences human behavior and performance, not "breeding". You see, dogs were created by man for specific functions, humans developed naturally to various environments, so it wouldn't make sense to compare them to dogs at all. Our function has consistently been survival.

1) The point of dog breeding is that you only mate dogs of the same breed. You never just put two large dogs together. If you want to interbreed but still get a good outcome, you can mate two breeds that are very very close to one another. Like two big sheepdogs or two medium sized terrier type dogs. This would be like mixing a French with a German.

2) Culture comes from race. For instance, if you put a Negro to grow up in China, he will not be Chinese with darker skin.

3) All races are adaptations to their environment. That's why we have races in the first place. So it doesn't make much sense to mate an individual adapted for life in Africa with an individual adapted for life in Europe.

[klubneras]

1) The point of dog breeding is that you only mate dogs of the same breed. You never just put two large dogs together. If you want to interbreed but still get a good outcome, you can mate two breeds that are very very close to one another. Like two big sheepdogs or two medium sized terrier type dogs. This would be like mixing a French with a German.

2) Culture comes from race. For instance, if you put a Negro to grow up in China, he will not be Chinese with darker skin.

3) All races are adaptations to their environment. That's why we have races in the first place. So it doesn't make much sense to mate an individual adapted for life in Africa with an individual adapted for life in Europe.

I don't even think YOU believe in the things you say.