[blueerica]

There also is that dimension of transparency, when it comes to these issues. Where is one argument, or position, or angle more important than another. In keeping with this - color of skin is valuable for describing someone I'm trying to find, but not IMO, something that makes a sound argument when talking about a charged issue of any point. It's not a point of gossip, and is not the all-encompassing factor in who someone is ______.

Which is the more "important" argument... Black vs. White? Gender Rights? Brown vs. Black? Gay/Lesbian vs. Straight? At what point is an argument invisible, or pale in comparison to another. I think the message Mara Keisling is promoting is one of not making these other issues pale in comparison to your own issue, that they all have their place.

But by this token, sure, "race" as it were is a way to physically describe someone - but how about describing how someone is on an emotional level? I think that's where the true wrong is. And what of someone in a minority that's not easily detected such as someone that's gay, lesbian, bi - someone with an unusual disorder, or someone with a psychological imbalance - some factor that cannot be truly seen from the outside? Do I say, "You know, my gay friend GC..." What purpose does that serve? Yet I hear statements like that, or qualifiers like "He/She's <insert feature here>, you know..."

I think that's where the grind is.