Apparently Germany has no problems. So the taxpayer-financed German Institute for Human Rights is sending an insistent reminder to strike the term “race” from Article 3 of the Constitution. The term “race” is, well, racist. Aha! And if the institute is still has a problem, no white person comes from the black person, the Indian, or the Asian. In other countries, it is more advanced.
In America, for example, it is common before medical treatment to ask about racial background because it it known that individual “races” react differently to medications. (Good heavens, how racist!) Dpa reports:
Each theory that bases itself upon the existence of differing races is in itself racist, said Director Beate Rudolf on the occasion of the publication of a positional paper by the institute Tuesday in Berlin. The European Parliament has already declared itself against the term “race” in the legal texts of the European Union. A few European countries have distanced themselves from the term in their national law.
“Such a step is overdue in Germany,” Rudolf said. The term “race” should be replaced with a ban against “racial” discrimination or preference. For already a year and a half, the institute has called for the removal of the term — without echo.
In the Constitution, the term appears in Article 3 (equality under the law), paragraph 3: “No person may be discriminated against or favored on the grounds of his sex, ancestry, race, language, homeland or country of origin, faith, religious or political view. No person may be discriminated against because of his handicap.”
The German Institute for Human Rights, which is funded by federal means, was founded in 2001 upon the recommendation of the national parliament. Its purpose is to report on the condition of human rights within the country and abroad.
It seems as if there are really no problems to report concerning human rights in the country or abroad…
(Contributor: AlterQuerulant / Translation: Anders Denken)
4 comments:




















(5 votes, average: 4.20 out of 5)








Perhaps one day a Turk will beat some sense into her.
Moderator
I believe you have a scamming problem.
Perhaps this is right. Making distinctions on the basis of race is dangerous and groundless. However, they must replace it with the terms "culturism" and "culturist."
Culturism is the opposite of multiculturalism. It recognized the right of majority cultures to defend and guide their cultures. England can have culturist immigration laws, for example, just as Saudi Arabia does. And, unlike the multiculturalists, culturists recognize that each western nation has a majority traditional culture to defend. They are not a-historical neutral multicultural zones.
SInce race means little, and folks cannot change their race, being racist is wrong and counterproductive. But because cultural diversity is real, culturism is rational and necessary.
http://www.culturism.us
Very much so. I'm curious how these trackbacks appear. They aren't comments. I wonder if they can be turned off.