While this thread has been about whether or not racial profiling is okay, my original point was not about racial profiling, but rather about prefacing an argument in a condescending fashion.

1. 1968 Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by
a. Superman
b. Jay Leno
c. Harry Potter
d. a Muslim male extremist between the ages of 17 and 40

Did anyone choose a, b or c? I'm thinking not. The problem here is that the argument is insulting to a thinking reader. Hence, my statement:

… condescending rhetoric does not do much to further intelligent discussion.

It is certainly true that good, intelligent people can disagree on sensitive topics. But when the discussion goes away from the content and begins to insult the individuals engaged in the discussion, no good is going to come. In the end, the discussion will not be one of what is actually right or wrong, but rather one of who gets to decide what is right and wrong.

I think this is a very relevant point as our club and hobby are quite possibly about to embark on discussions on the topics slabbing and counterfeiting. Very touchy topics indeed . .