[quote=Magic Magnum]
By that same logic the idea of dog breeds is a flawed scientific practice because they are capable of interbreeding.
Different races being able to produce offspring and therefore mixing the gene poll doesn't mean race no longer exists all of the sudden.

I mean sure, one day we'll reach a point where the gene's are mixed so much that there aren't really any defined races anymore. But we have not reached that point yet, and hell it's entirely possible for someone to be a race such as say Asian, but still say have some German ancestry. 

Also, I never claimed Irish was a race.
[/quote]

First off, humans are not dogs. There is more genetic variation between dog breeds than there ever was or will be between humans. Humans on different [i]continents[/i] are more genetically similar than than even monkeys within the same species. (I use monkeys as an example because we're closely related to them anyway.)

Let me make a point here:

[img=http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/03/31/article-2123050-125685B6000005DC-512_634x927.jpg]

Even though these twin girls girls are more genetically similar to one another than you and I (and we're both "white") are, they're considered different races. They're literally twins and one will grow up being called "black" and the other "white" because they're apparently so biologically different. And I'm sorry, but if you think that makes sense on a genetic, scientific, and objective level, you're an idiot.

And again, you seem to have this idea in your head that race creates diversity. And this is wrong. Diversity exists without race and race culturally exists as a consequence of diversity. Race creates groups--limited groups. Diversity is a spectrum, though, with no clear distinct lines between humanity as a whole. Denying race does not mean we're ignoring diversity. it actually means the opposite: it means we see that there is more diversity than our made up labels can contain. 

Race does not exist. I am an anthropology major (that means I study humans since I get asked a lot--everything about humans) and in literally every anthro class I've had, the first and most fundamental thing discussed is that [i]race does not exist outside of a cultural context.[/i] These are subjects taught by professors with Ph. D's who have been studying this subject longer than I've been alive (this is almost 20 years, btw). So I'm real tired of getting into "discussions" about this with people who keep insisting they know more about human diversity than these professors do. I mean, if a physicist explains quantum theory to a person, said person does not go "oh no, that's wrong." But for some reason, anthropology merits a debate. But I digress. 

 So again, race is not objective, scientific, or biological. There is no gene for race. It's purely social. And I understand it's a little hard to wrap your head around (it was for me), but it is what it is.

Edit: With all this said, though, I don't want to come off as demonizing the concept of race. It's acceptable on a cultural level and it helps people identify others and--more importantly--themselves. However, people give it more credit than it actually has.