"Well, it is America after all"

First of all that's not a definition of a social liberal. Social liberals beleive taht they should be able to do whatever they want as long as they don't interfere with other's rights.  Then again I've heard convervatives liek you call liberals "mentally ill" many times, so I'm not surprised you hold such views.

Second, what does it matter if they're sociopaths or not? The ideea is that they're religious people who think gays and gypsies should die, and beleive it or not, most of them (the peopel who make such comments) are serious (I say this from personal experience)! So your ideea that only a socially liberal atheist would tell someone that they should die is unfounded.

1)  Er, I happen to be socially liberal thanks.  For gay marriage and all that.  The only "non socially liberal" think you could "get" me on is that I believe abortions should only be legal till about 12 weeks because that's when Brainwaves start, and brainwaves seem to make a lot more sense for when life begins then what pro life and pro choice believe.

But yeah, that's my point.  Sociopaths would MUCH perfer a system where people are free to do whatever they want without hurting others... then one that restricts them for no good reason... becuase it frees them up a LOT more.  Socially conservative peoples arguements are mostly morality based.

Sociopaths don't give a shit about morality.  Even if they believed abortion was murder... they'd want it legal incase they needed one.   Gay marriage?  They'd want it legal so they could con people of the same sex out of their money too... etc.

When you have no morality (the defining trait of a sociopath) it's hard to be for things based on a moral arguement.

2)   It matters because the whole point of this line of conversation is your contention that sociopaths aren't mostly socially liberal and atheist.

The fact that they want gypsies and gays dead is completely irelevent if they aren't sociopaths.  It's like me trying to argue that Sony is better then Microsoft because the Wii is awesome.

In general, you seem to be going off on a weird over the top tangent because you want to start an arguement where there is none.

Nope, the point of this conversation was that the people who made those comments (the one directed at Richard) were not necessarily socially liberal atheists (and I gave you an example of people who make such comments and are certainly not socially liberal, nor are atheists - religion being one of the driving points for their ideeas taht certain people should die).

You made an unfounded claim (that those people were social liberal atheists sociopaths), and I confronted you about it. You can try to spin it all you want, but there's no way you can proove that the people who made those comments are social liberals, atheists, or even sociopaths.

And FTR thinking that certain people should die (like people who live off wealfare) isn't necessarily an immoral stance, as morals are subjective. An economic conservative (especially if they're also social conservatives, a group which supports wars and the death penalty) may think it's perfectly "moral" for someone leaving off wealfare (which they probably view as a leach) to be killed and stop wasting the money he pays on taxes. And his religious affiliation may not matter (most people I know who support the death penalty are not atheists for example). So there's really no reason for you to beleive that people who would make such comments are "sociopaths".

Except... you didn't?

You brought up two completely opposite cases for two different reasons.

It's like saying someone who says "Obama should die the liberal prick" would could be made by a Liberal, because you found an internet comment that said "Bush should die that facist prick!"

On one case we have "He should kill himself so my taxes are cheaper."

A clear mark of a sociopath.  He wants someone to die so his taxes can be cheaper.  He wants someone to die... for his own benefit.  He specifically states a sociopathic reason.

Your counterguement is

"Gays should die, because got hates them."

What?  You are flailing around without making a point here... it's exactly like your poor sociopath/psychopath arguement.  The person who told richard to die specifically said why he wanted him to die and that reason was sociopathic in nautre.

You're trying to twist my words (as I've noticed you tend to do).

YOU: The people who made those comments against Ricahrd are socially liberal atheist sociopaths.

ME: You have no proof that they're any of those things. In my country (for example) people make such comments all the time regarding several groups (gays, gypsies, politicians, atheists), and those people aren't atheists, socially liberal, nor (by your definition) sociopaths.

You actually can't make such as statement (like you did) without giving proof. By reading a single comment you can make out that a person is a socially liberal atheist sociopath? What makes you think that the people who made those comments didn't think that by people like Richard (who live off wealfare) killing themrselves all of society would profit (case in which they no longer qualify as sociopaths)? I'm very sure many people could think like that.

Stop making stuff up trying to sound smart and give soem actual proof for your statements!

Because he didn't say that? 

He said "He should kill himself so my taxes were lower."

He didnd't say "He should kill himself so everyones taxes are lower."

or

"He should kill himself so the deficit is lower."

or

any other number of reasons.

He said "He should die.  So I can have it better."

Pretty cut and dry there.  Though I bet if you just up and went to that guys house he'd end up being embarresed about what he wrote.

A non sociopatic comment would be like this one... but without you know wanting someone to die

"this pretty much sums up what is wrong with this country, when a whinney baby like this complains about his government handout finally ending. It is obvious the the writer is a big time liberal, when he whines about a senator trying to rein in debt that we can't afford to accumulate. Unemployment would drop if the Obamanator would slash taxes instead of raising them and give small companies the reason and confidence to hire more workers. The nanny state exists in Europe, which is why their economies are stagnant. How about incouraging people to work rather than encouraging them to collect? Oh I forgot, in the liberal world workers have responsiblities and those that don't want to work only have rights."

or

"As someone who is unemployed I certainly do not share the views of Mr. Hutnick. Should congress decide to extend unemployment benefits ,the money must come from other sources rather than piling on more debt. It certainly is no great mystery why this moron is out of work. He may may be better off living with my parents (they have been dead for thirty years)"

Someone telling someone to die so they can have a better life is basically the definition of a sociopath though... I mean, what more proof do you need?

I really hope he would. I mean how could someone honestly think something like this? 

 FTR there were other comments on that site, similar to that one, but not specific ("He should kill himself so my taxes were lower."), so those people may have thought that it's better for society as a whole if people like Richard were dead (granted, just because the guy said "my taxes" doesn't necesarily mean that he only cares about himself - as I said, one little comment isn't enough to create a person's accurate profile).

Like I said, 1 comment isn't enough to determine that. Plus this 1 comment certainly doesn't suggest he's a social liberal, or an atheist.