Say - Just what kind of Asian are you?

It's not just in places such as Appalachia, either. My father's family, who were wealthy and well-educated, and who lived in New York, in the city, were just that same type of disgusting racists. That was where you could learn all the choice names they had for other people. My aunt married a Jew, and they all but disowned her. I got an earful from her, and i'm glad i did.

Sometimes the most disturbing words come from people you would never suspect held such odious beliefs. It's a mistake to believe ugly sentiments only exist in the South.

I encountered racists in Brooklyn who would have been at ease in Texas or South Carolina.

Well, only WASP's are really the Americans that can claim that they were here to celebrate the first Thanksgiving, so to speak (or at least arriving in the 17th century sometimes).

But, my point is that an ethnic group includes white ethnics, and German-Americans are the "most respected" regardless of how many people might not think they are so peachy. Maybe I should add that sociologically, if one wants to get academic, sort of, the German-Americans that are Protestant are just likely more "accepted" into mainstream America, since let's be honest, Protestantism is a membership card amongst many (Protestant) Americans, in my opinion.

In my opinion, my willingness to be totally honest in an opinion, without the sterile (sugar-coated) opinion of many, might "creep" one out?

Are you making a statement, or asking a question? It seems to be a statement up until the last four words, then you end with a question mark.

In my opinion, one shouldn't be necessarily critical, since the prejudice went both ways oftentimes. A Jewish family might have disowned many a family member that married a "goy," be it a shiksa, or shagitz. And, might have nothing to do with the "other" family. Or, at least might have had very little to do with that family member. Actually, over the years, I've come to the conclusion that this might not reflect "racism" per se, but might reflect maintaining one's social standing in a respective cultural social class. In my experience, only highly educated academics/professionals are able to mix freely with other highly educated academics/professionals from all backgrounds, since the high education has just supplanted the ethnicity/race/religion as the common ground. In effect, for the non-highly educated there is a certain condescending that might appear like "racism" for all its manifestations, in my opinion.

P.S.: If you were really being sensitive to Jewish sensitivities, it would not be phrased, "married a Jew," but "married a Jewish person." Silly perhaps, but I am just pointing out how we are products of our cultures. For example, in the South one wouldn't necessarily ask a person, "Are you 'a' Jew?" Or, "Are you Jewish?" But, rather what is considered by many Jews as pejorative, "Are you Jew?"

The question mark can also be used to show that one is not sure if one is stating something that is correct, or just possible, but not correct.

I don't know why I even bother.

It's a complete waste to time to respond to the Foofie/Miller sock puppet. That nasty bigot is just trying to get a rise out of people.

I honestly don't know what Foofie is talking about. I had to read one post three times before I was sure he/she wasn't trying to say the Puritans came from Germany. Is history no longer taught in schools?

This assumes that the common culture of Texas and South Carolina is racist. This is a highly offensive thing to assert.

Am I now? I was just giving my opinion, which doesn't coincide with yours. But, you should not have responded, since by responding with the sock puppet canard, and the "nasty bigot," "just trying to get a rise out of people," shows you are willing to make accusations that only a mind-reader would be making.

I don't want to "get a rise out of people." I would like other posters to understand that the recipient of prejudice (i.e., the Jewish person that married into your family) might have had a similar reaction from the Jewish side of the family. In other words, it is just not "bigots" that shun inter-marriage, but those that believe that marriage is more than just between one man and one woman, a la the conservative position. There are people that just believe that marriage is between one Jew and another Jew, or one Catholic and another Catholic. Or one Protestant and another Protestant.

This is not necessarily bigotry. It is in the eyes of many just maintaining one's family tree for cultural social class. Let's be honest, if Jews started intermarrying with Gentiles en masse, how many decades before there would be no Jews? Now wouldn't some people think that that would be peachy, since the children of Jewish-Gentile intermarriages usually marry Gentiles? So, if one does not think the world needs Jews in any way (perhaps to buy an eggcream in a bygone era), then hell with ethnicity, let's just do through intercourse what Hitler could not do with bullets and gas. Just another perspective from yours, once again. But it is honest. Too honest perhaps for the sterile Gentile culture of hinterland America.

P.S.: More than once I've thought that after WWII, if Christians really had remorse for the Holocaust, some clerical person would just put a moratorium on marrying Jews, since like the situation when some type of fish is near extinction in a lake, the game warden says that fish cannot be caught for the time being. I say that since estimates, of how many Jews would be in the world today, if there had been no Holocaust is 32 million. Well, today there are 14 million. Before WWII there was 18 million. After the Holocaust most were lost through a secular lifestyle and inter-marriage.

And, notice how many different ethnicities of Catholics intermarry today. So, the children continue marrying Catholics, often enough, so the world population of Catholics remains steady. That is because Catholicism is a religion. So is Judaism; however, too many Jews today marry out, and that wouldn't happen if Gentiles just had a moratorium on marrying Jews. Not a legal moratorium; an ETHICAL MORATORIUM. But, that would have been done just after WWII. Today it is too late. But, by the fact that it wasn't done, makes be feel that every Jewish-Gentile marriage after WWII makes some dead Nazis laugh in their graves, since it spells the end of Jews, outside of Israel. Now you might understand why Jews are so intractable about Israel. It has nothing to do with physical danger; it has to do with the danger of inter-marriage. A slow, but insidious, final solution of sorts, in the opinion of some (not yours of course, since my opinion could be called "bigoted.")

Well, I'll be damned, I have not read such utter nonsense ever before. Something tells me there is more where that came from.

It might be of some value (albeit I doubt it very much) if you directed the extract of your spleen towards a specific target.

Setanta's way of not formulating a reasonsed response:

"Foofie/Miller sock puppet."

Can there be a ridiculous assertion? Foofie and Miller one and the same?

Setanta is the personification of acidic insults in A2K and yet he tries, desperately, to tell us he is not...it is our fault if we think so.

Topic done then?

Let us hope.

Just my opinion, but Setanta is really not so unique. In my opinion, he is an archetype of a nominally educated non-practicing Catholic that is only comfortable with those that accept his persona. If secular Jews only interacted with those that were philo-Semites, they'd not be able to live in the U.S. Wait! Sentanta is not in the U.S.? Can he only interact with philo-Setantites?

This is to Roger, too . . . yeah, when those who are just looking for an argument show up, it's done.