You're right, I'm not doing all I can to raise awareness of the ongoing tragedy. That's my bad side - feel free to complain about it. I should be doing more.

It's not an extreme obsession to think every day about an ongoing genocide. In fact, any less is unwarranted apathy. OP's other traits are less benevolent, but they aren't showcasing them here, so, again, they're irrelevant. If OP had mentioned even once that someone should vote for Trump in this thread, I'd agree with you, but you're the only one bringing it up here, so in this case, you're the problem.

It fits pretty well for people who are really bad at sex. I mean... maybe it does... who knows? Definitely not me.

Hard to work the guillotine when everyone's suffering from great stroke.

This is a great point. The results of an IQ test aren't really measuring a person, they're measuring a byproduct of that person, which is significantly less informative.

It's important to define was "equal" is in this context. Some people hear "equal" and think they must measure exactly the same in every test, but that's not how the word is being used in this context. It's more that people are so varied from one person to another that no test can truly judge them well enough to differentiate them when it comes to inherent worth.

One person might measure above another in one test, but there are surely many others where the results would be flipped. There are so many different things you could test a person on that in the end none of them really matter; any one measurement is like trying to figure out what an extinct animal looked like from a single tiny piece of a fossil.

That's what the IQ test is doing - it's taking one tiny piece of human intelligence, which itself is one tiny piece of what might be said to make up a person's value, and trying to use that to extrapolate information about them that simply can't be taken from such a 1-dimensional test. It's not worthless, but it needs to be paired with a bunch of other tests before it can really say anything, and even then it wouldn't say much.

This is the real reason. A universally beaten-down workforce is how you keep people working hard for the minimum pay. One new employee being paid more than the others from the get-go isn't anywhere near as damaging to the bottom-line as one employee getting a nice raise and inspiring the rest of the office to demand one as well. With the taboo against asking people how much they get paid, nobody will ever know that the new guy gets paid more, and soon enough even they'll get paid well under what they're worth with inflation constantly rolling away.

I don't see any sugar. This guy made lemon juice instead of lemonade - no wonder life keeps giving him more lemons.

Well, with more teachers they could afford to give individual students the help they need, rather than shoving them all into a class despite being at different levels.

It's a statement comparing 2 objects that are forbidden to modify. Guns are forbidden due to their ability to kill even more people through modification, video game systems are forbidden due to their ability to hurt company profits through piracy.

People are pointing out the huge moral difference between the bases for those two similar rules, and how one cannot compare them fairly as being equivalent unless they also believe those bases are equivalent.

If it made sense it wouldn't be a conspiracy theory. All it takes is one guy claiming some private good-guy billionaire has been funding the real US this whole time and they'd eat it up, throwing it at anyone who doubts them as if it's some undeniable fact.

I'm in the middle of getting inspections for selling my house and thought I had some appointment I forgot about, haha!