[brightball]

You mentioned that the end outcome of being on a registry is historically followed by extermination. If that is the case, how is the reason for being on that registry given of a difference of weight? There are also historical patterns for what happens following a weapons registry...and none of them are good.

Also, regarding the Asimov quote...I'd challenge you to think nothing is so black and white. If you believe one person is merely ignorant, that the summation of what they've experienced in their own life that created the way they see things is dismissable is worth less than your own...you may want to look a little deeper.

Even somebody cooking meth has a story and a reason that drove them to it. You might not like it. You might not find it justifiable...but it's that person's reality and if you're not willing to understand the perspective of a person you view as ignorant then you are feeding your own.

[ashark]

> Being put on a registry because of your religion isn't a reward, and historically that kind of thing has been followed by extermination.

> You mentioned that the end outcome of being on a registry is historically followed by extermination.

Where did your interlocutor claim that being on any registry is historically followed by extermination? You're broadening their position to introduce contradictions that don't exist in the original.

It's like claiming that someone who doesn't support one kind of tax because that kind of tax has a history of causing very serious problems and very little benefit must necessarily oppose all taxes. If you want to prove that they should, based on their stated position, oppose all taxes, you'll need to demonstrate that all taxes cause very similar balance of benefits and problems to the one they oppose.

[brightball]

Edited to clarify. Good catch.