If Evolution is true, then Racism can't be wrong. Comment?

Question

In our society, we believe that life evolved. So how can people be equally evolved?

Terracine, slavery is not condoned in the Bible. Slavery, however, in ancient times, was for some destitute people a way to survive in the sense that they could attach themselves to a wealthier person and have food and shelter. In the NT, slaves were to treat their masters with respect, but if it became possible for them to get their freedom, by all means they were to go for it. In our current world slavery still exists. Much of it sadly is sexual slavery, and the civilized world is not doing much about it.

Forbidden says that evolution is branching and adaptive. So, who is to say that the branching and adaptation is not in process in the family of homo sapiens? After all, in evolution, the dog size creature doesn't become the horse in one leap. It has to start somewhere, right? And some of the dog size creatures have to start being different from the other dog size creatures, even slightly.

Answer 1

Look... for racism to be valid, the first thing you'd have to do was have a concrete definition of exactly what it takes to be one race or another, and there would have to be no overlap at all. If you want to use genetics to support your argument, you'll need a clear genetic distinction as well.

To date, NOBODY has EVER made ANY kind of definition of ANY race that stands up to this kind of concrete test. Period.

The fact of the matter is that most racists judge by readily observable and completely inaccurate physical characteristics. We have all heard stories of people of one race 'passing' as being members of another race. Pretty much all races have enough variation to do this, and pretty much all of them share not-to-distant mixing with each other.

To treat one population as evolutionarily separate from another, there can be NO new mixing of genes. None. Don't hold your breath waiting for that to happen. In an evolutionary context, all current races of humans are pretty much identical.

Answer 2

It's life, Captain, but not as we know it.

Read your own question and tell me if you see anything wrong with it. No? Okay, I'll point it out for you.

In simple terms, white, black, brown, yellow, red or blue with pink polka dots; WE ARE ALL ONE RACE: Homo Sapiens. We all evolved from the same root: primates. And we are ALL on the same branch of the evolutionary tree.

What did you think? That some people are Homo Sapiens, some Neanderthal and some Homo Erectus? Or maybe some even further back - Australopithecine?

And "racism" ("colourism" would be a more appropriate term) IS wrong. All bigotry is wrong, whoever it may be directed against.

Answer 3

Just because something is different, there is no justification in treating it as inferior. Or in assuming it as inferior. This goes for all facets of life, whether we are talking about people, animals or trees.
The Evolution of humans has occurred over billions of years, we split from the other apes about 7 million years ago, and the last African migration took place only about 200,000 years ago. In this 200,000 years, about the only significant things which has evolved in the human race are superficial features such as facial appearance and skin colour, as adaptations to different environments. Some racists, however, need very little encouragement to justify their distorted logic. If you can justify racism because of supposed differing evolution inequalities you should consider that the variation within each "race" is much broader than the differences between them. There is so much overlap of intelligence, character, strength etc etc, that the differences can easily be demonstrated as insignificant and superficial.

Conversely, if Evolution is wrong, and Creationism is true, then slavery is acceptable, since it is mentioned in the Bible as such.

Answer 4

No. 1) Not just all people but all life on Earth is EQUALLY evolved as everything has been evolving for an equal amount of time. 2) We are a very recent species - pick any 2 people on Earth and they are more genetically related to each other than sibling great apes are to each other. There is virtually no different between races, even at a population level. 3) Any subjective difference between races that you manage to identify (I haven't seen any) exists whether you accept evolution or not. 4) Evolution, like gravity, electromagnetism, etc is NOT a moral code.

Answer 5

From a logical perspective, this question is called a non-sequitur. One position does not logically follow from the other. The fact that Evolution is true has absolutely nothing to do with human morality whatsoever. You seriously need to take a course in basic logic. The ignorance of your post is an embarrassment to Theists and non-Theists alike... EDIT: Oh please Skye M, try reading a science book instead of the Bible once in a while. Or at least post this kind of garbage in the biology section if you need a tutor. My point is that the existence of human morality is a completely separate issue from the concept of the physical Evolution of species. Trying to claim that the two are related is a logical fallacy (and/or just plain old ignorance). You should be ashamed of yourself...

Answer 6

Evolutionary science doesn't hold that species evolve from "less" to "more" evolved levels. Biological evolution isn't linear or progressive; it's branching and adaptive.

Racists hold that inherent superiority or inferiority of people types can be discerned based on discrete physical characteristics. This is just incorrect. Homo sapiens is one species, and like all species there is some degree of physical variation across the range of humanity. That doesn't mean that arbitrarily discerned racial categories (that even vary significantly from culture to culture) have any discrete biological validity.

Answer 7

It is true that the standard of living and progress varies from nation to nation. These are a lot because of isolation and enviroment. However great people with great minds have and will continue to come from different races. So it would not be correct to generalize about the equality of the races. It is strictly an individual thing. From what little I have seen on some of these talk shows and online it is obvious that a lot of people have a lot of catching up to do.

Answer 8

In the New Testament, slaves were in fact paid employees or indentured. Often times they were adopted as members of the family and were treated with the same dignity. Race has nothing to do with slavery. The root meaning of slave came from the ancient word slav. The word SLAV refers to Caucasians or Russians that enslaved Germanic peoples. The first slaves in modern history in North America were Caucasians and they were indentured for a very short period of time.

You maybe interested in Reading "The Puzzle of Ancient Man" by Dr Donald Chittick and "Darwin's Black Box" by Dr Michael J. Behe

Answer 9

If you're looking at it in terms of the grand scale, then race really means nothing as far as evolution goes (As little a colour differences between animals from different continents).
How could anyone say that we HAVN'T all evolved the same way? Ten fingers, ten toes, hair in all the normal places, none of us have wings or gills...
Our skin colours are simply indicative of where we all specifically started geographically and if there are differences (such as Asians having, by comparison, smaller pinky fingers due to evolutionary disuse) then these differences are on such a small scale that they almost don't count.
Racism in that case is socially WRONG, yes, but also a small point on an enormous map. (Trouble is, it's hard to compare human evolution and human social behaviours on anywhere near the same level.)

Answer 10

What was with sw1 irly?

Of course racism is wrong and evolution can't prove that one race is better than another. Evolution began as a way to explain why animals look differently but were really quite the same. It extended to people not as a way to extend racism but a way to see why were similar to each other.