I'd like to point out that I was incorrect above, from a purely scientific standpoint interracial marriage does NOT reduce the aggregate fitness of the a genetic "race" group. I just read a rather effective rebuttal of this fallacy at
http://www.gnxp.com/MT2/archives/003447.html ..
Quote:
nterracial Marriage: Salter's fallacy
English people and Bantus have different frequencies of many genes. Suppose for simplicity that all English people are homozygous for a certain allele at a given locus, while all Bantus are homozygous for a different allele. An English man who marries an English woman will therefore have children with two ‘English’ genes each at the relevant locus. If on the other hand he marries a Bantu woman, his children will only have one ‘English’ gene each.
Therefore an English man who wishes to maximise the number and frequency of ‘English’ genes in the next generation should marry an English woman and not a Bantu.
Discuss.
The fallacy is that the argument considers only the offspring of the man, and not the other people affected by his choice.
|
it's an interesting read, for those of you (who, like me) thought there was scientific merit to keeping genetic pools seperate. Now these fools have NO excuse for spouting their propaganda -- sorry for the disturbance. :-D