A Cornell University-led study suggested that “white Americans are both genetically weaker and less diverse than their black compatriots.”  Here is the link:  Link

Here are some of the comments I received when I posted this in my photoblog:

“I could have guessed that. Ever seen the American Olympic track team? The majority of Americans are white but the majority of our best athletes are not.”

“Haha, duh!”

2/22/2008 9:51 PM – cuteluvr21

 

“I can see that from observation. ”

2/22/2008 10:47 PM – Tallon5

 

I then received comments that would enter the mind of some people reading this study:

 

“OK wait. So it’s ok to say that blacks are genetically stronger, but it’s not ok to say that blacks genetically less intelligent?

Why is it ok to racist in one direction but not in the other?”

2/22/2008 10:24 PM – Bokgwai

 

“Reverse racisim/ said only half-jokingly.”

2/22/2008 10:31 PM – rebe1186

 

“Blah blah blah blah. So what? I’m sick to death of all this racist crap. Whitey can’t say anything about Blackie, but the reverse is not true. It isn’t racist for Blacks to make generalizations about Whites, to call us “honky” and so on. Why is that? Because they are a minority it is ok? A bunch of crap!”

2/22/2008 10:44 PM – Dontgimmedathup

 

“I think it’s funny that a study can find one race to be superior over another if it’s blacks over whites, yet if a study was published that whites are more intelligent than the majority of blacks, you’d have an NAACP lawsuit all over it.”

2/22/2008 11:06 PM – Haramzadi

It is interesting to me that some of the people felt it was obvious from observation.  But then others wondered immediately if it would have been racist to say the opposite.  Or if observations about intelligence could be made too.

I actually want to put all of those thoughts aside for a moment and just focus on one area.

From your observations, are blacks genetically stronger than whites?

A group in New Zealand have collected over 300,000 signatures to overturn what is called anti-smacking legislation.

The petition was put together after the government passed a law “outlawing the defence of reasonable parental correction in assault cases.”

The petition asked the question, “Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?”  Here is the link:  Link

Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence?

“Teen Spy” has developed a system that allows parents to track their kids driving.

The system works just like those trucks with the question “How is my driving?”  The car is given a bumper sticker that asks the question, “How is my teen driving?”  Each car is given a special code number plus a phone number that people can call to report bad driving.  Here is the link:  Link

Do you think it is controlling for a parent to track their kid’s driving?

I mentioned in my last post that a man has been charged with having sex with a 4-year-old female rottweiler.

When I posted about it in my photoblog, I received this comment from Squeakysoul:

“These kinds of cases (incest, bestiality, etc) do seem to be those historically “shocking” cases seem to highlight two separate schools of thought on what is immorality:

1) immorality is only that which “hurts” others other than the actor and is therefore a relative concept based on the standard of whether someone else is hurt and 2) there are things that are intrinsically immoral regardless if a third party was “hurt” or not and is based on a fixed standard.”

Does someone or something else have to be hurt in order for something to be considered immoral?

A man has been charged with having sex with a 4-year-old female rottweiler.

He broke-in to a garage and the owner walked out to her garage and caught him in the act.  He is being charged with “criminal sodomy and aggravated burglary.”  The burglary charge is because he broke into the home.

I want to focus on the “criminal sodomy” charge.  The rottweiler was not injured.  A spokeswoman from the Humane Society said that it qualifies as animal cruelty.  Here is the link:  Link

When I posted this in my photoblog, Trunthepaige sarcastically mentioned:

“And in my never ending effort to disgust people. The reason a 100lbs of dog, with very strong jaws and sharp teeth, did not bite, is because she was in season. The dog was willing.

So who are we in impose are own personal morality on others? Who are we to say that man dog ‘love’ is wrong?”

I think Paige has a point.  If the dog didn’t want to have sex, she could have resisted.

Is it animal cruelty to have sex with a dog?

A book has been removed from a school after a 12-year-old’s mother saw the content of the book.

The book is called “Prep” and the content is about a young girl who is “coming-of-age” and is allowed to attend a prestigious boarding school.  But some of the content is considered “pornographic” by a parent.

The book is recommended for 9th graders by is said to be appropriate for a 12-year-old.

Popped or unpopped?

It is being reported on the Advertising Age web site that Jennifer Lopez and Marc Anthony will receive up to $6 million for photos of their baby twins.

Celebrities have been selling photos of their children.  The thinking is that it will stop the demand for the paparazzi who are trying to snap a photo.

Christina Aguilera was paid $1.5 million for the photos of her son Max.  Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes released their baby photos for free.  Here is the link:  Link

I can understand releasing photos that you can control and drive down demand for the paparazzi.  But getting $6 million to sell a photo of your child when your child is not old enough to give consent is a different story.

Do you think it is wrong to sell photos of your child if you are a celebrity?

Here is the link:  Link  I received this link from Seedsower.

Tan or not?

Guess the job of the person who commented above you.