Profile overview for ChallengerReproaches.
Submission statistics

This user made no submissions.

This user has so far shared a total of 0 links, started a total of 0 discussions and submitted a total of 62 comments.

Voting habits

Submissions: This user has upvoted 913 and downvoted 2 submissions.

Comments: This user has upvoted 446 and downvoted 0 comments.

Submission ratings

5 highest rated submissions:

This user made no submissions.

5 lowest rated submissions:

This user made no submissions.

Comment ratings

3 highest rated comments:

Steven Crowder goes undercover to steal jobs from illegal immigrants by underbidding them. Hilarity ensues submitted by EdSnowden to whatever

ChallengerReproaches 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago

I was getting paid that much for indirect tax analysis work. Seeing shit like this is infuriating

Were you liberal at any point in your life? What happened to change you? submitted by TheodoreKent to AskVoat

ChallengerReproaches 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago

You summed it up exactly. I grew up with liberal views and ideals, and they haven't changed all that much. These days so much as questioning the far left agenda is enough to be labelled a racist/fascist/homophobe/islamophobe or whatever.

Account Deleted By User submitted by rabidgentile to news

ChallengerReproaches 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago

No one is calling for government action against him. The economically rational decision is to fire him if the majority of the students are planning to be cops. The same would happen if you replace 'cops' with blacks at any credible college. You're right that a lot of Voat wouldn't be as outraged at a statement like that though.

3 lowest rated comments:

Were you liberal at any point in your life? What happened to change you? submitted by TheodoreKent to AskVoat

ChallengerReproaches 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago

I'm being sceptical, hence the vaccination analogy. How is a layperson to know if vaccines do or don't cause autism without sound science to back it up? Personally, I could give a shit less if people don't want to vaccinate their kids, but I sure as hell will vaccinate mine. And my feelings have no relevance, so who gives a shit how I feel about it. My point is behavior is characterized by actions. Once upon a time a dispute between civilized white men would end with a duel, so did genes change since then? What I am saying is society changed, not human physiology. Even in your example of wolves and dogs, environment plays a significantly larger factor in their behavior than genetics. Take two dogs from the same litter and put them in different environments. One where they're a spoiled housedog with friendly people, and another that is raised in a feral environment where they fight for their food. What is the outcome?

I'm not against studies that would be able to identify and isolate genes responsible for personality or behavioral traits. But the questions I have are: Are those genes prevalent in certain races because they are dependent upon the same genes that create physical differences? If I am to believe evolution, man originated in Africa then spread from there, if that is true then wouldn't environment be the main factor in any differences? Even if the genetic differences are the result of selective breeding (women prefer the man who kills off competition), it would still be the result of the environment in which homo sapiens lived.

My position is you're putting way too much emphasis on genetic differences than environmental differences. But I'll play devil's advocate and assume it's fact that genes are more responsible for behavior than I am willing to accept. It would still mean a gene that makes someone predisposed to violence could be present in anyone. Unless there is some proof that the same genes that make someone asian are tied to genes that make someone good at martial arts (or whatever), then it's disingenuous to start with the assumption that race is inherently tied to behavior.

Were you liberal at any point in your life? What happened to change you? submitted by TheodoreKent to AskVoat

ChallengerReproaches 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago

I didn't know that, and I generally don't accept comments on an internet message board as fact. How much of that violence is black on black or organized crime? If you get rid of all the minorities, I would argue the Aryan Brotherhood would just pick up the slack and get rich doing it.

I did listen to a debate about income equality, and apparently the disparity between whites and blacks is worse now than it was in 1955. My whole point is behavior changed, not the people. And I don't believe that change is the result of a gene that makes someone join a gang. If anyone makes the decision to finish school instead of sell drugs, it is because they chose to not because of their race.

And people used to demonize the left handed. It's simple minded nonsense.

Were you liberal at any point in your life? What happened to change you? submitted by TheodoreKent to AskVoat

ChallengerReproaches 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago

Hey, I appreciate an apparent expert's opinion. Of course, there is no way to substantiate what you said and an LA Times article isn't exactly a scientific journal, but my point still stands: claiming genes make people violent or criminal are like saying they make people fat. It might play a part, but isn't the 'answer.'

Thanks for participating and I'm open to being 'wrong' although it sounds like the solution would be more race mixing. Thanks for attacking me personally too, it made me more confident in my opinion.