English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I got slammed saying that there was no such animal as a "native american" = they are from asia.

Should I have called them a mineral or vegetable? Humans are ALL animals. LOOK IT UP.

2006-09-28 14:26:47 · 26 answers · asked by The Hell With This Constitution 7 in Politics & Government Immigration

26 answers

if you were born here (USA), then you are a native american. the census doesn't use that term anymore because too many americans weren't playing the PC game and going along with the libs. Besides, everyone here in the USA originated somewhere else. Indians happened to walk across a land bridge connecting asia and alaska many moons ago. Their ancestors may have been here first, but that doesn't mean much. If it does, then the moon belongs to the USA. so which is libs: first here means they own it? then the moon belongs to the USA

USA
USA
USA

2006-09-28 14:35:29 · answer #1 · answered by Marvin 3 · 2 4

Did you get slammed because of "animal" or because you said that there's no such thing as a "Native American"?

In the first case "no such animal" is just a figure of speech that's applied all over the place, frequently to things that aren't animals by any definition, even to abstract concepts. A philosopher might say "there's no such animal as freedom." So I would say that slamming you for that was inappropriate.

In the second case. Following your reasoning, there's virtually no such thing as a native anything. I've been reading lately that scientific evidence from anthropology/paleontology (i.e. fossils), genetics and linguistics all point to the fact that the entire human race originated (evolved) in East Africa and then about 50,000 years ago began a diaspora that took them all over the world. Including, eventually, over an ice bridge from Asia to North America. Given all the possible senses of "native" (look in a dictionary), I would say that "Native American" is a reasonable term for the people to which it applies and it's definitely much more appropriate than "Indian", even though their ancestors may have passed through what we now call India on their way to the Americas. Conclusion: I woulld go along with slamming you for saying this, but how hard I'd slam you depends on the point you were really trying to make by saying it.

2006-09-28 21:57:31 · answer #2 · answered by pollux 4 · 2 0

I think that what most of us objected to was your statement that there are no Native Americans because the Native Americans are supposed to have migrated here from Asia. That's like saying that the Europeans are all Africans because that's where their groups originated.

As for the phrase "no such animal," only one or two respondents commented on it-not everyone

2006-09-28 21:56:19 · answer #3 · answered by meridocbrandybuck 4 · 2 0

It's not that they are uneducated. It's that they think they are educated.

Incidentally, while the people who were found to be here on this continent by Europeans are indeed "from Asia," they had been here so very long that their language and their customs and their very genes had changed enough to be considered a separate ethnic group.

There are many people who do not realize that there is a colloquial phrase "no such animal," to mean that a thing does not exist. And there are people, obviously, who are not well enough grounded in language use and language play to figure out that a colloquialism is being used.

As above, it's not that they are uneducated, it's that they think they are.

2006-09-28 21:43:20 · answer #4 · answered by sonyack 6 · 3 0

Yes, humans are 'mammals', the human animal. But, you are wrong, there IS such an 'animal' as a Native American. Native Americans are the 'First People" of the land now known as the USA and parts of Canada. Yes, it is believed our people came across the Bering Straits from Asia to N. America approximately 13,000 to 30,000 years ago, after the last Ice Age. I believe the Native American people have been here and 'stayed' longer than any other people. My people deserve that title.

Why is it when a question is asked, some people?
ARE SUCH A** HOLES?
Miss 'hot tamale- up^there.. FYI We are as educated as anyone else. We go to college, get our degrees. You seem to be showing an abundance of ignorance by your response to this question. It might behoove you to shut up in order to hide your stupidity. You, obviously, know nothing about the Native American people. Tsk, tsk, a mind is a terrible thing to waste. I've heard ignorance is bliss. Are you feeling blissful?

2006-09-28 21:37:56 · answer #5 · answered by «»RUBY«» 4 · 7 2

You have to be considered Native after 30,000 years. Ever heard of Kennewick man?

First.... Many Indigenous Nations have calendars which have
been counting the years for a very long time. I am aware that
the calendar of the Mohawk Indian Nation has been counting
the winters for over 33,120 years. This pre-dates the so-called
'land-bridge' of the Bering Strait theory, unless, of course, the
Bering Strait scientists decide to move their interestingly illusive
time period for our "early migration" back to 40,000 years!
Many American Indian early histories tell of events that took
place on this Turtle continent (North America) long before any
so-called ice age. But, for political reasons, our histories
have been mostly ignored. You see, the Bering Strait, in truth,
is a theory that was born of the politics and propaganda of
early America. In the midst of the American 'Manifest Destiny'
social climate, the Bering Strait theory provided a 'scientific'
means to justify the taking of ancestral Indian lands. In short,
the mythical theory eased the conscience, as it was a way for
land hungry immigrants to believe that, because Indian people
were only 'recent inhabitants' of this land that it was not our
'homeland'. Therefore we were, in their minds, not any more
the 'original people' in this land than they were. This was, and
still is, the political power of the infamous 'Bering Strait theory'.

There is such a thing as a Native American.

2006-09-29 02:26:39 · answer #6 · answered by RENEGADE. 2 · 0 1

You are correct on both counts, native americans are technically originally from Asia. Furthermore, in essence human beings are animals. There is alot of slamming that usually goes on here, I would just take it with a grain of salt.

2006-09-28 22:50:24 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Sorry, but on this issue you are mistaken. To be specific on the matter on who is considered as a "Native American", Indian Tribes are considered to be Native Americans. I don't know who gave you that kind of garbage, but if you were to get onto the Google website and type in the words native americans, you would get a better description. You may also source it out by using the Microsoft Encarta, or what I prefer, which is the Encyclopedia Britainica software. It is fantastic and very informative, and you will find it as such on this and as well as on other matters which may concerning to you.

2006-09-28 21:35:28 · answer #8 · answered by kravitz44 3 · 1 4

You are correct. I will add this

Just like having access to Knowledge and speaking well is one thing and could be helpful.
Knowing how to apply it to life well is another very few possess.
A lifetime of education cannot replace a single day of experience.
Many Madmen were well spoken and good looking
Many of the Great people of the World were simple and plain.
Use all your skills but never become so pious to think your above others--usually that
means you are lacking in many things. See example on some posts.

2006-09-28 22:02:19 · answer #9 · answered by *** The Earth has Hadenough*** 7 · 9 0

As far as general knowledge is concerned,latest survey shows that between age 18-24,if we give them map of the world,88%can not find Afghanistan,66% Iran or Iraq.And in US map 67% could not find Ohio,50% could not tell where New york is.Do not be upset about all this.

2006-09-28 21:39:26 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

fedest.com, questions and answers