By David Thiessen
Recently, this newspaper ran an article about an East Indian man who took action against a Korean cab driver for his alleged racism. Soon after, the paper published another article asking the question ``Is Racism Serious Here?" which has kept westerners busy on their forums and blogs "discussing" this issue. Most responses were too one-sided, painting the Korean people as racists in a very broad stroke, while making it clear that the foreigners were innocent of any wrong doing.
These contributors to those Web sites were about as racist (secular definition) as they claimed the Koreans were, and they did not care if they condemned innocent people, just as long as they looked good and the Korean nation didn't. Whenever someone is treated in a manner they disprove of, we always hear the complaints of discrimination, bias, prejudice and so on.
Racism is always implied because the color of the skin of the participants is different from each other, not because the act was really racist. Never do we hear how the encounter was a misunderstanding or committed out of preference; it is always the label which draws the largest emotional response from the manipulated onlookers.
What truly is racism? In today's world, where definitions get distorted, or blurred due to the unintelligence or unwillingness of many, it is a proper question to ask, so we actually know what is a racist act. The Oxford Dictionary defines the word as ``the unfair treatment of people who belong to another race" or ``violent behavior towards them."
But this definition leaves us with a problem. It is too general and too broad to definitively set any boundaries and leaves the definition open to subjectivism. What people decide racism is ― that is what it will be, regardless if they are correct or not. Thus, in reality, even the shaking of a fist at someone with a different color could be considered racism.
That is just incorrect because then there is no real standard to apply to determine what is or isn't a racist act and no judge could punish people for being racist since the standard is as changeable as the people who define it. So we turn to the Bible for an answer and within its pages we read, ``all men have descended from Adam," which tells us that there are not four races as proposed by some, but only one.
With this information, we know that there is no such thing as racism because everyone is part of the same human race. Which makes more sense as the odds of producing one race by chance are astronomical, but to get four compatible ones whose only real difference is skin color, is beyond calculation and impossible to achieve.
Surprisingly, secular science is finding out through its research with DNA that the Bible is correct. Here are a few quotes, with their links for further reading on the issue:
``Race is a social concept, not a scientific one," said Dr. J. Craig Venter, head of the Celera Genomics Corp. in Rockville, Md."
"According to Craig Venter who led the private sector assault on the human genome, ``The Human Genome Project shows there is no such thing as race."
It's an old-fashioned, even Victorian, sentiment. Who speaks of ``racial stocks" anymore? After all, to do so would be to speak of something that many scientists and scholars say does not exist.
``The billions of pieces of human genetic code sequenced thus far are most notable for what they do not appear to contain-a genetic test to tell one race of people from another. All scientific finds point to the conclusion that race doesn't exist."
This means the Bible is correct and there is no such thing as racism, just hatred for others ― and that is sin. Korea is not racist and racism is not serious in this country; sin is, and that is not limited to the Korean people, for the westerner is as guilty as those they falsely accuse.
People create false labels so they can extract their version of how people should live from others ― that is wrong.
The writer is an English teacher in Icheon, Gyeonggi Province. He can be reached at jigufli@fastmail.fm.
