Are Prejudiced People Mentally Handicapped?

Dee

. Are Mentally Handicapped people prejudiced?

Well yes I agree  you're  mentally handicapped and prejudiced  , you also  hate blacks, jews the Irish and anyone that isnt a bigoted  bible thumping racist like you and your buddy Bogend.




For example there has been a heap of authoritative and viable studies that overwhelmingly suggest that religious people have lower intelligence than normal people.



Well done Barndoor , it's a brave man who admits his st-pidity publically......here is Barndoor talking about how much he loves God.........ROFLMAO 

In the end when you look at it it comes down to faith and belief and we all need that because it is impossible to know every thing. It is so clear that the creator of every thing has got to be on a total different level from every thing we know which makes sents as why we cant see or hear God.

You have faith and belief that the Broncos are going to win but you dont know that or have the proof that they are going to win and if you betted money on it then you are so sure about it. So why not take a bet on God and all you need to do is have faith and belief because if you win the bet then you will go to paradise in the end but if you didn't bet then you are going to suffer in hell for eternity.

John_C_87

@Barnardot
Are we to asking about legally prejudice people being handycapped as well ?

MayCaesar

Arguments involving such sentences as "obviously" or "we know that" as a basis for assertions are unsound logically. One makes an assumption and presumes that everyone else makes the same assumption, so anyone who does not can immediately be dismissed as contradicting some ground truth. I could make the opposite argument to yours on the same basis: "We all know that black people are inferior to white people, so..." - and logically my argument would not be any less sound than yours.

Regarding your question, there seems to be no evidence that prejudice is associated with intellectual impairment. Prejudice is a consequence of extrapolation of trends observed in a small sample on the entire population. For example, people in a village may have had some bad experiences with potion brewers, and over time those experiences were encoded in stories about witches and their covenants - so now there is prejudice against potion brewers who are suspected of being witches. From the 21st century city dweller's perspective this may sound silly, but from the perspective of a villager who has never been far outside of their land, has received no education, and his best data source is the local priest, this prejudice is not that illogical. It is much like having your partner cheat on you and assume that your partner frequently cheats on you: even though you only have one datapoint, you now suspect that it is part of the more general trend - and that few people would call irrational.

Furthermore, it is possible to have prejudice against a group of people, while simultaneously realizing that not all members of the group will justify that prejudice. I can have prejudice against politicians by default assuming that they are dishonest manipulators - I fully realize that there are exceptions from the rule, but unless a politician proves that he is an exception, my go-to assumption will be that he is dishonest, and my go-to strategy will be to tread with caution. There are very strong incentives in politics to be dishonest and manipulative, and those who do not exercise these behaviors routinely do not prove me wrong, but merely prove that humans do not always act in alignment with the incentives.

Bogan

First point.   If you prejudge people who prejudge others, by claiming that prejudgers are mentally handicapped, then you must be mentally handicapped yourself.

Second point.    As the lead in question to this topic reveals, everybody prejudges.      Even those who have been culturally conditioned to think that only racists prejudge.   Whoever wrote this topic heading obviously has a problem with understanding how people think, and they can not recognise their own hypocrisy.

Barnardot

@MayCaesar ;Arguments involving such sentences as "obviously" or "we know that" as a basis for assertions are unsound logically.

Well that is right about a sentence in isolation but if that sentence is properly qualified by the following sentence as in this case it is perfectly logical and valid right. Yes right. 

So let’s move on from your usual deception of quoting out of context shall we. Yes okay right.

And I did also mention that people with prejudices like race or sexuality use only half there brain. It is no excuse to use culture or tradition as an excuse. People who live in such communities are oppressed and are not allowed to educate themselves on all the facts. So even if there not mentally impeared at birth they are only allowed to store information in the negative side of the brain when it comes to blacks and gays. 

And then we get to people in civilized communities who have access to all the information about blacks and gays yet they deliberately choose to be ignorant of the facts that deal with the positive sides of blacks and gays. Add to this that our communities accept blacks and gays to be equal as any body else and even make it illegal to pubically vilify minorities. 

So I would say that these people are the worst of the worst and you cannot say that they haven’t got some sort of brain impearment even if they did bring it on them selves. I bet you’ll find that these meen sons of beaches will tend to limit what they know about other things of life also. For example they don’t  want to know about different types of music or food. So when you analize it in the end you have to ask your self if these people even use any where near half of there brain. You only need to look at @Bogan for example.

Dee

@Barnardot


So when you analize it in the end you have to ask your self if these people even use any where near half of there brain. 

You tuly are comedy gold you cannot string a sentence together and yet you talk about people with half a brain , you're possibly the dumbest brute to ever post on this site and theres no improvement in sight.......


Seriously 35 mistakes in one short piece , ....you're probably the genius of your family ......LOL 

35

We’ve found 35 writing issues in your text.

Hide results

Grammar

4

Spelling

13

Punctuation

15

Conciseness

Readability

Word choice

1

Additional writing issues

2

No plagiarism found

John_C_87

@Dee

As a person practicing law without a license in public by acting as your own attorney at law, self-representation, how do you feel Grammarly demonstrates what is told and corrected should never be repeated before any court of law as grievance dismissal without prejudice?

John_C_87

Are Prejudiced People Mentally Handicapped?

Who has a reason to obstruct that all men should not be held as created equal before law? Who has reason to obstruct that all women should not be held created equal before the law? Those who practice law correct, both those people licensed or not licensed by a state of law? Prejudice is the united state of all women not being held equal to all woman before United States Constitution. U.S. Constitution meaning the judical system as a entirety union of both State and Fedral justice. Prejudice is a united state of all men no longer as declaration of independence held by right to be created equal by their creator. Why did American criminal law and the civil Court then create Prejudice?

Is it because a crime can never create all men equal, one man may be innocent the next may be guilty of the same pending criminal law. The men who however hold the identical self-evident truths as right, it is these men who are in fact held as created all equal by their creator. Are they not? No man waits to be found guilty and is possibly presumed innocent for a lifetime of dishonor. All women who had followed this established line of justice would then also be created as equals. Does this stand to reason. Not just to themselves but also to all men, this feat would have been what could be said to be a reachable star. A star on a flag of liberty and justice for all?

MayCaesar

Barnardot said:

@MayCaesar ;Arguments involving such sentences as "obviously" or "we know that" as a basis for assertions are unsound logically.

Well that is right about a sentence in isolation but if that sentence is properly qualified by the following sentence as in this case it is perfectly logical and valid right. Yes right. 

So let’s move on from your usual deception of quoting out of context shall we. Yes okay right.

And I did also mention that people with prejudices like race or sexuality use only half there brain. It is no excuse to use culture or tradition as an excuse. People who live in such communities are oppressed and are not allowed to educate themselves on all the facts. So even if there not mentally impeared at birth they are only allowed to store information in the negative side of the brain when it comes to blacks and gays. 

And then we get to people in civilized communities who have access to all the information about blacks and gays yet they deliberately choose to be ignorant of the facts that deal with the positive sides of blacks and gays. Add to this that our communities accept blacks and gays to be equal as any body else and even make it illegal to pubically vilify minorities. 

So I would say that these people are the worst of the worst and you cannot say that they haven’t got some sort of brain impearment even if they did bring it on them selves. I bet you’ll find that these meen sons of beaches will tend to limit what they know about other things of life also. For example they don’t  want to know about different types of music or food. So when you analize it in the end you have to ask your self if these people even use any where near half of there brain. You only need to look at @Bogan for example.

As far as I know, that is not how brain works at all. It is impossible to only use half of your brain as the brain is a cohesive structure and the work of different parts of it depends on the work of other parts. If you were to somehow shut down half the neural pathways in a human brain, the person having it would not be able to function in any meaningful sense - and would probably die instantly. If you actually read in a scientific paper that this is not so, I would ask you to please reference that paper.

Next, I do not think anyone ever "deliberately chooses to be ignorant". In Russia there is a saying: "Who knows less, sleeps better" - and yet I have never met a person who would say that they prefer to know less. Rather, people adopt the epistemology that allows them to consistently feel relatively confident and comfortable, and that epistemology can be counterproductive when it comes to acquisition and processing of select pieces of information.
That almost everyone 2,000 years ago believed that there was nothing wrong with slavery was not a manifestation of universal deliberate ignorance, but the predominant systems of values. And systems of values tend to be localized and communized, so even if the country in which you live at large believes that there is nothing wrong with being Black or being gay, there will likely still be certain groups and communities that do not subscribe to that. Not everyone adopts new sets of values as they emerge - and that is the mistake so-called "woke" people make nowadays, when they come up with some new moralistic drivel and then are genuinely surprised that the day later not everyone in the Universe subscribes to it.

Lastly, values are not objective. There are many views that you do not hold, yet that some other people will say every mentally well person must hold. There are people who believe that someone who is not a vegan partakes in a genocide. You are not vegan, as far as I know (lest you would not be talking so much about your chickens) - so should those people conclude that you are mentally handicapped?

The moral of the story is, be careful when you label someone as mentally unsound: your argument can boomerang back at you.

Bogan

Impeared……………………………impaired

Impearment……………………….impairment.

Pubically…………………………….publicly

meen………………………………….mean

analize………………………………...analyse.

just_sayin

I don't think it is fair to say the left are mentally handicapper because they hold some racist values such as support for Affirmative Action and DEI policies which discriminate based on race, or ideologies that think you can label someone as an oppressor/victim merely based on someone's race.  Yes, the left does embrace some racist beliefs, and while this is faulty thinking, it is not because they are not mentally capable of recognizing racism, they just choose to rationalize their racism as good racism.

ZeusAres42

Barnardot said:

This has been long debated and you could look at the converse and think also. Are Mentally Handicapped people prejudiced?

Obviously you have to think that any one who say for example hates black people will either have half a brain at birth or only use half of there full brain. It stands to reason because we know that prejudice people are ignorant. And it stands to reason that they have to ignore the good side of black people and focus on the negative side so they can think what they think. Or rather half think.

The same goes for other prejudices like hating gays and other religions and other races.

So is there any evidence to beer out what I am suspecting here?

For example there has been a heap of authoritative and viable studies that overwhelmingly suggest that religious people have lower intelligence than normal people. Could this be because they are made to learn only the things they are told and ignore the rest?

Hello @swolli or however you said you multi-user account (can't be asked to check it out right now).

How is Australia btw?

Now, how do I know all of this? Hmm, well, let me just put this awesome tune to ya: 

ZeusAres42

Ok I was having some fun. But in all seriousness it doesn't take a genius to work out that @Barnardot ;is a mutli-user troll! 

Perhaps if he wasn't so handi-capped mentally he might do a better job at covering his tracks! 

Bogan

ZeusAres quote  But in all seriousness it doesn't take a genius to work out that @Barnardot ;is a mutli-user troll! 

Got that right.    

Barnardot

@MayCaesar ;It is impossible to only use half of your brain as the brain is a cohesive structure and the work of different

Okay so your taking it to literarally and if you want to be over critical about the point most people only use no more than 20% of there brain for most thought processers. But for the purposes of this argument lets look at how people think. Im not a psychologist and for a more in deep explanation you would have to ask @Dee since he has done an awful heap of quality research on the subject. Ive met heaps of people who refuse to believe any thing more than what they want to know. So you have to think that they would only store a limited supply of information in there brain cells and if that information is of a particular leening say like racial prejudice then that person will be filling up the brain with distorted negative thoughts. This can be beered out by realizing that racial bigots will also have a lot of other prejudices as well.

So then you look at the all rounder prejudice person. And Im talking about religious people here. The churches know very well that these people are so week that they harbor just about every prejudice there is. So what does the church do? They pander up to these people and say Hay the Bible says you have to hate gays and you have to hate every other minority group. But the interesting thing is that these people are actually more brainless compared with normal people. Scientists have discovered that these people have a particular genetic mutation called the vesicular monoamine transporter 2 and which gives them a lower IQ than normal people. There has been heaps of scientific papers written on the subject and its up to you weather we should take this on bored and wake these people up to the fact.

Barnardot

@Bogan ;Impeared……………………………impaired
Impearment……………………….impairment.
Pubically…………………………….publicly
meen………………………………….mean
analize………………………………...analyse.

Okay so your point that your pointing out is what?

Were talking about weather people with prejudice ideas have less brains. For example an example would be what I learned about a cult of people who live in a real iceolated country. So what happens is that one of these guys reads a sentence like Black people have an average IQ of 165. Then because theres a cork dangling off of his hat it obscures the 1 on the 165 so he thinks that blacks have IQs of 65 and so it goes on that they not only store little information but they store mistaken information in there brains. Presumably this is what also leeds to these people to have a wired fascination for Barbie Dolls because what they do is put shrimps on them for some odd reason. And if you tell them that your coming over to visit then for some real odder reason, they put an extra shrimp on the Barbie. Like what the.

Dee

@Barnadot

YOU SET YOURSELF VERY LOW STANDARDS THAT YOU NEVER SEEM TO MEET , HOW UNFORTUNATE FOR YOU.

46 ERRORS IN YOUR SHORT RESPONSE , DEAR OH DEAR. ON A POSITIVE NOTE NO PLAGARISM REPORTED .......I CANNOT SEE ANYONE PLAGARISNG YOUR " WORK" EITHER   CAN YOU ?......LOL

We’ve found 46 writing issues in your text.

Hide results

Grammar

7

Spelling

18

Punctuation

12

Conciseness

3

Readability

Correct

Word choice

4

Additional writing issues

2

No plagiarism found

Correct@Barnardot

John_C_87

@Barnardot

First point.   If you prejudge people who prejudge others, by claiming that prejudgers are mentally handicapped, then you must be mentally handicapped yourself.
prejudice is a criminal law

: injury or damage resulting from some judgment or action of another in disregard of one's rights

: preconceived judgment or opinion

Prejudice Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster

Crime is behavior, either by act or omission, defined by statutory or common law as deserving of punishment or penalty. Although most crimes require the element of intent, certain minor crimes may be committed based on strict liability even if the defendant had no specific mindset with regard to the criminal action. For instance, parking violations are crimes that usually do not require prosecutors to establish intent.

crime | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (cornell.edu)

If you prejudge people who prejudge others, by claiming that prejudgers are mentally handicapped, no, we discriminate and make or pass judgment on some person as thought to that person might be innocent or guilty of a comparative crime. A person can self-incriminate themselves to be less developed in mental, physical, or social development than usual of one’s age. The group of people who misuse or mis-spell words are just as likely to be underdeveloped mentally or socially as the groups of people who cannot understand those who lower or raise the status quo of work required in how explanation is taken for social interaction.

Mean and angry people are more often lashing out without ever making a connection to what they fear. This is because some social issues are too complex to simply be understood without having principles highlighted for them. Dee and many others here simple do not believe in United States Constitutional Right therefore ignore the law all together, this is a mental handicap as they cannot understand law can be written and well labeled not as a crime but kind of right only, for a more perfect connection to the filing status of a social grievance. 1st Amendment United State Constitutional right is crime free. Any man here can act as a President of the American United States Constitutional Right, but they alone chose not to. It has little or nothing to do with being an America. Any women of the world do not have that liberty of principle being female described as only right. How is it right to be only a female. If a female does these base line three things and holds them together all women are equal and cannot be wrong. All these women are then held at liberty in a state of righteousness. A well-regulated republic can act without their vote as there is no criminal confession or accusation to base any need to hesitate. No intellectual only principle of rape to interpret by criminal law on then loss of something taken away from women.

Rape Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster

The next principle of prejudice outside of united state judical connection itself would be color of skin set by race. This principle is second by priority for no other reason than when all men had been created equal by thier creator to begining of a process of right only in legilsation of law had been started. Those men and women who deside not to take part and instead attack self-evident truth for personal gains of group advancment by delays created with broken states of order by obstructing the lack of clarity in the 1st Amendments A listening to grievance by the people, be it media or court, 1st ratified change by addition to the United State Constitution as a Bill of Right. 

It is impossible for a Congress to document criminal law to be said, written, or interpreted, chosing the way the people listning over others.The holding of a list which makes complete right from no cost to speech, freedom of speech, no cost to share understandings while not speeking in any form unverbal, freedom of press, listing at no cost to shared bliefs, freedom of religion bindings to three truths as whole truth, expression of right of the people, for peaceful assembly. to shorten vote. to shorten ratified united state consitutinal right the governing body's of criminal law / grievance. 

This is a rather fancy and detailed way to say only the lower judicial courts in the America's many states of law need criminal legislation. On a federal level if all men are held equal by the law, we can impeach them removing them until death from the practice of politics on all levers, all men, by one right, at one time, from citizen of our nation to are distinguished guest. The only exception a person who has come to America cannot be voted to be President in oval office or as executive officer in the oval office. There equality as men comes at the discharge of the impeachment process of other men. The creation of equality of this Bill of Rights is made simple for women, as they are to be filed as the right " Presadera " of the United State of America.

jack

Barnardot said:

Are Prejudiced People Mentally Handicapped?

Hello B:

Nahhh...  They're just afraid.  I dunno why.

excon

Barnardot

@jack ;Nahhh...  They're just afraid.  I dunno why.

Your quiet right there and I think I know why. For example take homophobes for example. They are gay haters right. But they have a phobia and really they are afraid of gays. And the greatest fear is the fear of fear itself and fear of the unknown. And because homophobics don’t know anything about gays and don’t want to they are horribly afraid.

The same goes for black haters. Take @Bogan for example. He knows nothing about black peoples except the negative extreme stuff he reads about. But in realty he is totally afraid of them and keeps carrying on about his fear that blacks are taking over society.