[R.M. Schultz]That Axis History Forum Guy Again...

[The Yosemite Bear]

not to mention it's part of the social heirarchy instinct too. does that mean we fix every last domesticated dog, because bisexuality is their natural instinct? (yes a male dog will just as easily fuck another male dog as it will a female dog. cats and dogs both male and female use their toungs to masturbate. chimps, deer etc. Those that aren't top dog and getting all of the female population fuck each other.)

[Wyrm]

So — if I were to say that armed robbery were worse than theft, would I be trying to justify theft? Grow up! Be man enough to attack me, not some straw man that you pin my name to!

You are strawmanning, fuckhole. You dare to compare sexuality, a process known to be at least in part biological, to crime, which is purely behavioral and usually influenced by circumstance? You suck at the internets, tampon.

No, I was comparing murder to theft. Both are crimes, n'est-ce pas?

A lie. You compared armed robbery to theft as an analogy to comparing genocide to your 'democide'. Armed robbery is different from theft because armed robbery has a much higher potential of getting someone killed. On the other hand, there's no moral difference between your democide and proper genocide, as they both involve the extermination of an abitrary group of people.

^quote fixed -Helpful Wyrm

Or you could just uphold the long established Stardestroyer Forum history of mindless name-calling …

Careful, cuntface. Watch your words lest they be counted as libel.

Let me get this straight — I point up that this forum is full of mindless name-calling and you respond with a nasty insult, and then accuse me of libel?

It's not mindless name-calling, you nasty bout of diarrhea. Take out the nasty names, and the points still stand. Calling you names is part of our fun. ("Mockery of stupid people", remember?) Why? Are you about to commit a Debate Rule 4 violation?

You are perpetrating hypocrisy by naming yourself as bisexual yet trying to defend the total eradication by Hitler of anyone with homosexual tendencies.

I have never, in any way, defended the policies of Hitler.

Except by knocking down his genocide of gays to mere 'democide'? Without an ounce of real justifiaction why this 'democide' is anything worse than regular genocide? And you say you're not defending ol' Goosestepper?

If such a statement is not falsifiable, then it is just one more example (of which there are so many on this forum) of name-calling.

It is falsifiable, it just merely happens to be true by our observation ('our' includes the board database itself as well) of your words.

Okay, excellent, now we are getting somewhere! Just tell me what sort of “evidence” you will need to prove that I am not homophobic and then we can set about putting matters straight.

Too late, bitch. You don't get infinite bites at the apple. We've already seen your true colors. Get over it.

Well, I've heard enough. This is all I need to know that you're nothing but a dishonest, self-centered homophobe. In fact, you've gone even so far as to quote opinionated letters to the Chicago Reader as "statistical evidence", which is totally laughable ...

Read it again. I posted that letter as an example of a bad use of statistics. Still, if you want statistics, why don’t you answer that one?

What? You mean this one?

Since only two percent of adult males are homosexual, and since forty percent of child molesters are homosexual, we can conclude that homosexuals are twenty times as likely to molest our children …

Simple, the numbers came out of this guy's ass. No citation of a study showing either the base rate of homosexuality, or the rate of homosexuality in child molesters. No evidence, no credibility. Simple as that.

You loose, shitchugger.

And why do you keep insisting on a Jewish "race" when the majority of Jews in Europe looked virtually indistinguishable from non-Jewish Europeans?

Uhm — the point is not whether Jews constituted a race, or whether race is important, but rather that the Nazis defined Jewisness as a race. (If you don’t believe me, then go re-read Mein Kampf.) The Nazi intention in killing Jews was Genocide, not Democide.

STOP USING 'DEMOCIDE', YOU WORTHLESS FUCK!

You use that word 'democide' as a flimsy shield, to try to pretend that there's cuplability on the part of homosexuals (among other 'opt-in' groups targeted for liquidation) for their own persecution. It's pathetic, and no one is buying it. Therefore...

Until such time as you show 'democide' is indeed less an atrocity than genocide, you stop using it, you cancerous testicle!

I have three questions for you, R.M. Schultz. Is murder intrinsically immoral?

^more fixed quotes. Learn them, bitch! -Wyrm

Yes, but are there not degrees of guilt? Saying that “killing is killing” makes manslaughter just as bad as murder for hire, and I think anyone would concede the difference.

Genocide is the deliberate, intensional murder of a group of people, wholesale. Your 'democide' is the deliberate, intensional murder of a group of people, wholesale. I don't see any fucking difference between the two, and you have yet to explain why they are different degrees of atrocity deserving a different name, instead of the same degree of atrocity.

Are homosexuals people?

Homosexuality is a lifestyle, not a quality of being. One does not lose or retain ones humanity by actions, humanity is an ontological fact.

You pathetic turd. Was the answer "YES!" so fucking difficult for you, without going into your "homosexuality == lifestyle" sound-byte?

And if you say yes, then why are they not entitled to the same standard of moral treatment that you are willing to accord anyone else?

It has never been my assertion that homosexuals deserved persecution of any kind. Anti-sodomy laws are bad laws,

CONSESSION ACCEPTED, FUCKTARD!!!

but they are laws and they can be obeyed by anyone. This puts persecution of homosexuals on a different moral order than the persecution of Jews or cripples, neither of whom even have the chance of obeying the laws against them.

This was an argument about ethics and morality, not legalism, fuckwit! We have you on record for stating that anti-sodomy laws are wrong, yet you still ship this bullshit about how homosexuals can choose to obey the law or not.

Never mind that the anti-sodomy laws are weasel-laws specifically targeted at homosexuals as a group without naming them specifically. What if I were to pass a weasel-law that barred wheelchairs from use outside a house? That'll fuck over every mobility-impared handicapped person who needs a wheelchair to get around. Yet by your logic, it's not as bad as a law directed against cripples because now a cripple can choose to obey the law.

You are a worthless fuck.

[Big Orange]

I have never, in any way, defended the policies of Hitler. I have said that all of his policies are bad, just that some were worse than others. To twist this into saying that I have in any way justified any of those policies is simply dishonest.

Uh, how is killing an innocent homosexual supposedly a lesser evil than killing a innocent Jew?

Uhm — the point is not whether Jews constituted a race, or whether race is important, but rather that the Nazis defined Jewisness as a race. (If you don’t believe me, then go re-read Mein Kampf.) The Nazi intention in killing Jews was Genocide, not Democide.

How is "genocide" worse than "democide" when they're both essentially the same act where a totalitarian regime singles out a large section of the population and liquidates them with no mercy or justification?

Though not as bad as Elizabethan England, where more Protestants were killed per annum than all heretics put together in Spain. Religious intolerance has been the normal condition of society until very recently, but one of the few good things we can say about the great world religions is that they preach the brotherhood of all mankind and thus tend to ameliorate racism.

OK so we must kill them because they are unbelievers and not because they have a different skin colour or facial features?

We must remember that Spain had been engaged in a 500-year struggle to expel the Moslem invaders and that it was a reasonable supposition to believe that those Moslems still within Spain were potential traitors. Again, it is disingenuous to apply modern notions of religious toleration to pre-industrial societies.

We must remember than Germany had been engaged in a four-year struggle to become a Imperial power, but losing badly and having outrageous treaties imposed by the victors. The economy was ruined, with the country in danger of being taken over by Communists and other dangerous revolutionaries. Worse still parts of Germany were annexed by France, Poland and Czechoslovakia. Due to these dangerous times the Nazis were rooting out potential traitors. Again, it is disingenuous to apply modern notions of toleration to pre-WWII societies.

Yes, but are there not degrees of guilt? Saying that “killing is killing” makes manslaughter just as bad as murder for hire, and I think anyone would concede the difference.

How is a gay man in a dention camp having his brains blown out comparable to manslaughter?

It has never been my assertion that homosexuals deserved persecution of any kind. Anti-sodomy laws are bad laws, but they are laws and they can be obeyed by anyone. This puts persecution of homosexuals on a different moral order than the persecution of Jews or cripples, neither of whom even have the chance of obeying the laws against them.

Oh so anti-sodomy laws are OK if people can obey them? Also how about we bring back laws that bar women from voting or something?

[Surlethe]

By Shultz's logic, a rapist who rapes a woman who's walking through the slums at night drunk wearing nothing is less morally culpable than one who breaks into her house and rapes her.

[Big Orange]

It's no use guys, common sense and basic morality clearly does not compute with R.M. Shultz and it's a futile act trying to convince him otherwise.

[Darth Wong]

It can't be evaluated objectively... but you're certain you know how it works? Certain... from ANECDOTES? Pffffft.

Not certain at all, willing to enter into a dialog about it. My thesis offers only usefulness, nothing more. Offer up your own thesis, let’s bat that about for a while.

You don't have any idea what a real thesis looks like, do you?

Seriously, I would pay money to watch you hand in your evidence-free rantings to an academic review board to see if they qualify as an acceptable thesis. I would pay the money just to watch them laugh until they drop.

[Simplicius]

Yes, but are there not degrees of guilt? Saying that “killing is killing” makes manslaughter just as bad as murder for hire, and I think anyone would concede the difference.

Ethically, you idiot, murder is murder. Whether I kill you in cold blood or hot, the action and the outcome are the same - you are dead, and I have caused the ultimate harm to another human being. Unethical, without qualification. Your legalist argument does not apply here.

Not only does your legalist argument not apply, it is incorrect. The Nazis didn't execute gays in the heat of passion, nor by accident, nor in self-defense - it was cold-blooded, premeditated murder, just as it was with Jews and other persecuted groups. So, where is your pitiful argument now that "lolz diff'rent legal classifications" is no longer the case?

Homosexuality is a lifestyle, not a quality of being. One does not lose or retain ones humanity by actions, humanity is an ontological fact.

Way to dodge the fucking question. Yes or no - is a homosexual a person? It's an easy question; even a dumbass like you should get it right.

It has never been my assertion that homosexuals deserved persecution of any kind. Anti-sodomy laws are bad laws, but they are laws and they can be obeyed by anyone. This puts persecution of homosexuals on a different moral order than the persecution of Jews or cripples, neither of whom even have the chance of obeying the laws against them.

Way to dodge this question too. Yes or no - are homosexuals entitled to the same moral considerations as heterosexuals?

Anyway, the hell it hasn't. Your fucked-up reasoning claims that homosexuals can 'choose' not to be homosexual, thereby avoiding persecution. So what if they stay homosexual? Then what? They deserve what they get, right? Right, you cunt?

I'm going to type this verrrrry slowly, in the hopes that it will sink through your thick skull:

1. Jews are people. It is unethical to kill people.

2. Homosexuals are people. It is unethical to kill people.

3. You claim that it is somehow less unethical for a Nazi to kill a homosexual than to kill a Jew.

What about homosexuals makes their lives worth less than the lives of Jews?

[Big Orange]

And R.M. Schultz keeps saying these absurd notions that the scientific evidence of homosexuality being innate was the result of the gay political movement somehow doctoring scientific research. And it cracked me up when he accused me of being PC as if it was an insult and also said that I fell for pro-gay dogma.

[Big Orange]

I'm going to type this verrrrry slowly, in the hopes that it will sink through your thick skull:

1. Jews are people. It is unethical to kill people.

2. Homosexuals are people. It is unethical to kill people.

3. You claim that it is somehow less unethical for a Nazi to kill a homosexual than to kill a Jew.

What about homosexuals makes their lives worth less than the lives of Jews?

Let's see if R.M. Schultz can comprehend this basic synopsis as well:

ALBERT EINSTEIN WAS A DESCRIMINATED AGAINST BECAUSE HE “VIOLATED” THE NURUMBERG LAWS.

ALAN TURING WAS DESCRIMINATED AGAINST BECAUSE HE “VIOLATED” THE ANTI-SODOMY LAWS.

ERGO, BOTH MEN WERE GREAT THINKERS WHO HAD THEIR TALENTS WASTED IN THEIR HOMELANDS DUE TO DESCRIMITORY LAWS THAT WERE BASED ON BIGOTRY.

[Pint0 Xtreme]

Well, I've heard enough. This is all I need to know that you're nothing but a dishonest, self-centered homophobe. In fact, you've gone even so far as to quote opinionated letters to the Chicago Reader as "statistical evidence", which is totally laughable ...

Read it again. I posted that letter as an example of a bad use of statistics. Still, if you want statistics, why don’t you answer that one?

What? You mean this one?

Since only two percent of adult males are homosexual, and since forty percent of child molesters are homosexual, we can conclude that homosexuals are twenty times as likely to molest our children …

Simple, the numbers came out of this guy's ass. No citation of a study showing either the base rate of homosexuality, or the rate of homosexuality in child molesters. No evidence, no credibility. Simple as that.

You loose, shitchugger.

I find it interesting that how Schultz is so well versed in making dishonest arguments sound good and yet, fail to see the distinction between actual statistics and numbers someone pulled out of their ass.

[Big Orange]

I find it interesting that how Schultz is so well versed in making dishonest arguments sound good and yet, fail to see the distinction between actual statistics and numbers someone pulled out of their ass.

Well he's a complete and utter butt-fucking moron, what do you expect?

[Darth Wong]

I find it interesting that how Schultz is so well versed in making dishonest arguments sound good and yet, fail to see the distinction between actual statistics and numbers someone pulled out of their ass.

It's rather painfully obvious that he has the scientific aptitude of a hamster. He probably has a degree in Political Science or Communications, based on his preference for obfuscation and rhetoric over meaningful arguments.

He knows enough to poke at the weaknesses of psychology relative to the harder sciences (as does Tom Cruise, to give you an idea of where this guy is operating), but he knows so little about how any of these sciences really operate that he can't form a decent-looking scientific argument to save his life. That's why he doesn't realize how far his "thesis" lies below even the weakest psychology theory in terms of credibility.

The funniest part of his argument has to be him inadvertently revealing that he personally suffers from massive sexual dysfunction, based on his attempts to "explain" what's going through the minds of most men. It's pure projection; he is taking his own feelings about women and sexuality and assuming that this is how all men think.

[R.M. Schultz]

So — if I were to say that armed robbery were worse than theft, would I be trying to justify theft? Grow up! Be man enough to attack me, not some straw man that you pin my name to!

You are strawmanning, fuckhole. You dare to compare sexuality, a process known to be at least in part biological, to crime, which is purely behavioral and usually influenced by circumstance? You suck at the internets, tampon.

No, I was comparing murder to theft. Both are crimes, n'est-ce pas?

A lie. You compared armed robbery to theft as an analogy to comparing genocide to your 'democide'. Armed robbery is different from theft because armed robbery has a much higher potential of getting someone killed. On the other hand, there's no moral difference between your democide and proper genocide, as they both involve the extermination of an arbitrary group of people.[/quote]

Armed robbery is the same as theft in that the outcome is the same: the victim loses his property. It is, however, different because it is readily understood to be a greater threat to social order. Violence may ensue, whereas one might reasonably resist a purse snatcher one would be chary of resisting a man with a gun, the psychological violence against the victim is vastly greater, etc., etc.

Similarly, both genocide and deomocide have identical outcomes: the victim is dead. But the threat to social order is less with democide because the potential victims have a chance of escape. From my own perspective, if a genocidal campaign were to be started against the Welsh (and I am mostly Welsh) I would have no escape. But if a purge were to be directed against Catholics, or grand opera fans, or bisexuals, I could change my behavior and avoid prosecution (or, in the case of my Catholicism, accept martyrdom).

Let me put it to you in personal terms. If someone were to go after your ethnic group (and I’m not sure what that is), you would be stuck; but if the government decided to round-up all science fiction fans, you could change your habits and avoid persecution.

Now I know you think you were born a science fiction fan but (trust me) you weren’t!

Just as an academic exercise, let’s see what you could do to hide your “Sci-Fi lifestyle:”

The first thing you could do is change your appearance.

• Those Sci-Fi Fans who are not actually morbidly obese almost always have a pot-belly because they are essentially couch potatoes. You’ll have to take up exercise (i.e. voluntary physical exertion undertaken for health reasons) and get your waist-line under 36” or thereabouts.
• Next, get a haircut — one that costs more than $10-!
• Throw out all of those T-shirts (with the cryptic messages stenciled on them) and sneakers and get yourself some shirts that actually have buttons and collars and some normal shoes. (Thigh-high suede boots do not count as “normal!”)
• Shave regularly using a mirror so that you are sure to get all parts of the face and neck and not look spotty.
• Remember: lots of “stick” is no substitute for regular bathing!

Next, get rid of the stuff normal people don’t have in their houses.

• Throw out all Sci-Fi movies, books, and fanzines. You may keep two of the following items (but no more): literary books with a mild science fiction element (e.g. “Brave New World,” “1984,” “The Handmaid’s Tale,” and maybe some H.G. Wells, but NO Jules Verne or ERB!), allegorical Sci-Fi movies (e.g. “Metropolis,” “The Day the Earth Stood Still,” or “Invasion of the Body Snatchers,” but NOT “Planet of the Apes” or the re-make of Body Snatchers).
• Burn all of those infantile toys that clutter up the shelf over your bed, including all light-sabers, action figures, and even that Godzilla cigarette lighter!
• Posters — the rule is that no adult has posters up on their wall after they leave college. Time to grow up and get rid of your favorite JO-pic of Xena: Warrior Princess (or Spike from Buffy, if that’s more to your taste).
• Games: keep Risk and Monopoly, get rid of D+D and Magic: the Gathering.
• Rainbows and unicorns? Out they go!

Adjust yourself to main-stream culture.

• Read books of literary merit. (Ask a librarian, or just confine yourself to the Modern Library editions).
• Watch serious movies. (Rule of thumb: the fewer shootings, car chases, and special effects a movie has, the greater its intellectual worth.)
• Read a newspaper and keep up on the events in the world that matter.
• Take up a hobby that requires more than just sitting on your ass eating chips (like kayaking, bird watching, or soft ball).
• Attend a symphony or operatic performance. (That will REALLY throw off the Sci-Fi Gestapo!)

Here’s the hard part: social adjustment.

• I know you were bullied in middle school, but you’re an adult now. Get over it and quit bullying people on the internet!
• Learn to engage in what is called “general conversation.” This consists of topics that virtually anyone can be expected to comment upon (like the weather, current events, favorite foods, etc.) instead of parochial, Sci-Fi minutiae. Remember, most people don’t know what a "tesseract" is, don’t have a favorite Dr. Who, and cannot recognize obscure scraps of dialog from “Attack Of The Clones.”
• Start dating women that are attractive instead of just available. [How to tell? Does she dress like you — then she’s a looser!]
• Keep in mind that an actual relationship with a person of the opposite sex is not just about keeping a lid on that pesky old sex urge, it’s about coming to know and appreciate them as a person and (perhaps) forming a family.

Finally, you could do the two things no Sci-Fi fan ever does!

• Move out of your parents house and live on your own!
• Volunteer for something socially useful (e.g. Work one afternoon in a soup kitchen, coach a Little League team, show up and pitch in when it’s park clean up day.) !!!

See — it can be done! A normal life can be yours with a little work and application! Good luck, I know you’ll need it. Once I was a Sci-Fi fan myself, but then puberty set in and I was all right. Some of you are not so lucky, but my prayers will be with you.

[Big Orange]

It's rather painfully obvious that he has the scientific aptitude of a hamster. He probably has a degree in Political Science or Communications, based on his preference for obfuscation and rhetoric over meaningful arguments.

Yes, he often uses obfuscation and rhetoric in many threads over at the Axis History Forum and is often fucking smug with it, but I caught him out when he thought that Alan Turing's charge of homosexuality was within the bounds of the law and not comparable to Jewish persecution.

And it is interesting to note about science, Darth Wong, because he often decried how the Nazis ruined scientific progress through their Nurumberg Laws but did not bat an eyelid when Alan Turing (the man who arguably invented the modern computer) committed suicide due to being shunned by the British government due to his homosexuality.

And I imagine Third Reich scientists had more credibility than R.M. Schultz ever does in terms of scientific know how....

[General Zod]

I've noticed he's ignoring my point that you can't prove something solely based on logic alone. How convenient for him.

[Big Orange]

From my own perspective, if a genocidal campaign were to be started against the Welsh (and I am mostly Welsh) I would have no escape.

So at least we have one thing in common. But your "genocide" over "democide" argument still sucks complete monkey balls and you're still flooding us with faulty data.

[Ghost Rider]

So being a fan of fiction is the same as being gay, by your logic? Shit dude, you really honestly need a better tactic.

I'll let other poke because you honestly are trying the circular logic of coming up with an unfounded conclusion and making the pieces fit to your hypothetical conclusion.

[The Spartan]

Funny how none of your Scifi fan stereotypes fit me...

Given that he's now ignoring all points made and engaging in nothing more than silly, ad hominem charicatures (Look at the st00pid n3rds!!!) might I respectfully request that the Senate begin banning procedures? And, further, that he be temp-banned per the Senate's recent discussion until such time as his fate has been decided?

[SirNitram]

Let me put it to you in personal terms. If someone were to go after your ethnic group (and I’m not sure what that is), you would be stuck; but if the government decided to round-up all science fiction fans, you could change your habits and avoid persecution.

Now I know you think you were born a science fiction fan but (trust me) you weren’t!

Just as an academic exercise, let’s see what you could do to hide your “Sci-Fi lifestyle:”

The first thing you could do is change your appearance.

Why? Professional ties, button downs, and khakis look good on me.

• Those Sci-Fi Fans who are not actually morbidly obese almost always have a pot-belly because they are essentially couch potatoes. You’ll have to take up exercise (i.e. voluntary physical exertion undertaken for health reasons) and get your waist-line under 36” or thereabouts.

Oh sure. Discriminate against the malnourished sci-fi fans. Just because I've been underweight since the 80s...

• Next, get a haircut — one that costs more than $10-!
• Throw out all of those T-shirts (with the cryptic messages stenciled on them) and sneakers and get yourself some shirts that actually have buttons and collars and some normal shoes. (Thigh-high suede boots do not count as “normal!”)
• Shave regularly using a mirror so that you are sure to get all parts of the face and neck and not look spotty.
• Remember: lots of “stick” is no substitute for regular bathing!

You disturb me in that you think anyone would miss thesse. WHat kind of person are you that you once never bathed regularly?

Next, get rid of the stuff normal people don’t have in their houses.

• Throw out all Sci-Fi movies, books, and fanzines. You may keep two of the following items (but no more): literary books with a mild science fiction element (e.g. “Brave New World,” “1984,” “The Handmaid’s Tale,” and maybe some H.G. Wells, but NO Jules Verne or ERB!), allegorical Sci-Fi movies (e.g. “Metropolis,” “The Day the Earth Stood Still,” or “Invasion of the Body Snatchers,” but NOT “Planet of the Apes” or the re-make of Body Snatchers).

Sorry, my wife forbids me to throw out any of her sci-fi or fantasy, nor any of the early-publishing Verne.

• Burn all of those infantile toys that clutter up the shelf over your bed, including all light-sabers, action figures, and even that Godzilla cigarette lighter!

I bet your that kind of kid who never even played with legos.

• Posters — the rule is that no adult has posters up on their wall after they leave college. Time to grow up and get rid of your favorite JO-pic of Xena: Warrior Princess (or Spike from Buffy, if that’s more to your taste).

What kind of life have you lived that no artwork is on your walls? That's just kinda depressing, I can't bring myself to mock you.

• Games: keep Risk and Monopoly, get rid of D+D and Magic: the Gathering.

Why the fuck would I get rid of how I met my wife? Oh yea, because you're an idiot.

• Rainbows and unicorns? Out they go!

Adjust yourself to main-stream culture.

You mean where the 80% of the population that are morons do? No thanks, fart jokes bore me.

• Read books of literary merit. (Ask a librarian, or just confine yourself to the Modern Library editions).

From someone who admits to having not bathed regularly in his life and who thinks artwork and toys are evil for adults to have, this is hilarious.

• Watch serious movies. (Rule of thumb: the fewer shootings, car chases, and special effects a movie has, the greater its intellectual worth.)
• Read a newspaper and keep up on the events in the world that matter.

Now taking bets on whether idiot here ever looked in N&P.

• Take up a hobby that requires more than just sitting on your ass eating chips (like kayaking, bird watching, or soft ball).

Rockclimbing, heavy melee fighting, and jogging take up too much time for your pansy-ass shit.

• Attend a symphony or operatic performance. (That will REALLY throw off the Sci-Fi Gestapo!)

Anyone want to tell him that there have been the Philharmonic has done sci-fi and fantasy music? Yea, it'd break his brain.

Here’s the hard part: social adjustment.

What kind of loser are you that you considered faking the idiocy of the mainstream person hard?

• I know you were bullied in middle school, but you’re an adult now. Get over it and quit bullying people on the internet!

Ah-ha. Here's the problem. Kiddo here thinks he's being 'bullied' by being asked to actually support a conclusion he came to. Man, you never went to college, did you?

• Learn to engage in what is called “general conversation.” This consists of topics that virtually anyone can be expected to comment upon (like the weather, current events, favorite foods, etc.) instead of parochial, Sci-Fi minutiae. Remember, most people don’t know what a "tesseract" is, don’t have a favorite Dr. Who, and cannot recognize obscure scraps of dialog from “Attack Of The Clones.”

Maybe in your backwards States, but most Brits seem to have a favourite Who, given the reactions from those Expats I've seen. But then again, this relates back to you being the epitome of what you're criticizing and not a well-adjusted nerd: You never learned to be both.

• Start dating women that are attractive instead of just available. [How to tell? Does she dress like you — then she’s a looser!]

Bit late for dating, married to a hot redhead. But I'll pass this on to anyone who, like you, is too stupid to spell 'loser'.

• Keep in mind that an actual relationship with a person of the opposite sex is not just about keeping a lid on that pesky old sex urge, it’s about coming to know and appreciate them as a person and (perhaps) forming a family.

Which of course includes learning what you enjoy together.

Now, you disturb me again, in a way I can't bring myself to mock you over: You once thought a relationship was just about sex urges...

Finally, you could do the two things no Sci-Fi fan ever does!

Act like you?

• Move out of your parents house and live on your own!

Damn those engineers, scientists, and other geeks, never going to college and getting their high-end degrees! ...Wait.

• Volunteer for something socially useful (e.g. Work one afternoon in a soup kitchen, coach a Little League team, show up and pitch in when it’s park clean up day.) !!!

I suppose if you're too stupid to contribute more, these minimal activities function.

See — it can be done! A normal life can be yours with a little work and application! Good luck, I know you’ll need it. Once I was a Sci-Fi fan myself, but then puberty set in and I was all right. Some of you are not so lucky, but my prayers will be with you.

You keep talking to your sky faerie, I'll keep living actual life.

[Big Orange]

R.M. Schultz has essentially lost his argument here and is now resorting to insulting us by calling us nerds. Can we kick him out now?

[LadyTevar]

I don't know... is "nerd" an insult?

[The Spartan]

I don't know... is "nerd" an insult?

I don't take it as one. Though one might find his stereotypical charicature of nerds to be one.

[SirNitram]

I don't know... is "nerd" an insult?

I don't take it as one. Though one might find his stereotypical charicature of nerds to be one.

Yea, but we're looking at someone who hates Jules Verne. An uncultured little monkey is not the best measuring stick.

[Big Orange]

I don't know... is "nerd" an insult?

I don't take it as one. Though one might find his stereotypical charicature of nerds to be one.

And remember he thinks all gay men hang out in leather bars and dress like Freddie Mercury.

[Surlethe]

Now taking bets on whether idiot here ever looked in N&P.

Why, of course he has; we're all liberal fearmongers who have no real grasp of news and current events, so he's perfectly justified in caricaturing us.