1. A few definitions.

• Rationalize: to employ reason; think in a rational or rationalistic manner. 
• Rational: agreeable to reason; reasonable; sensible
• Reason: to form conclusions, judgments, or inferences from facts or premises.

Please explain how programming would be incapable of any of these.

2. Definition of think: to have a conscious mind, to some extent of reasoning, remembering experiences, making rationaldecisions, etc.

We are still debating "to have a conscious mind". But the other criteria can all be performed by a robot.

3. Are emotions required for consciousness? Even if they are, what proof do you have that otherr humans have emotions that cannot be applied to robots?

4. Oh really? Educate me.

5. This was in response to your earlier statement, where you said "Because every human, when presented with the question of "do you exist" responds in the same affirmative manner." to prove that other humans have consciousness. I have refuted this because some humans have consciousness, yet lack the ability to respond to the question "do you exist?" I'm speaking about severely mentally handicapped people here.

2. Let's make this easier. What is your definition of consciousness?

3. Physical pain discourages people from things which cause bodily harm. Fear is an emotion induced by a perceived threat which causes entities to quickly pull far away from it and usually hide. It's a basic survival instinct that has helped our species. Fear does not mean you have to overract. It's simply a sensation that makes a being seek shelter.

4. I will watch this movie for you.

Yes, I agree- I do not think it is possible, however a lot of people think the Singularity not only is possible, but will happen. You should read a book called "Radical Evolution," where it talks about the exponential rise of artificial intelligence (it uses Moore's Law).

The thing is, IF the singularity does occur, then according to David Chalmers and others, this AI will self-replicate and become smarter by itself. All AI will want to pursue its "basic AI drives," which according to Steve Omohundro, the AI will want to be rational, self improve, self replicate, perserve their utility functions and prevent counterfeit utility, and most importantly: acquire scarce resources. The robots will be smarter by modifying its source code.

That's the thing - once robots are able to reach human intelligence (if, when - let's assume they do) then humans are doomed to extinction. It probably won't be by any malice, like in THE TERMINATOR or THE MATRIX, but by indifference. The machine will acquire resources that humans need, and humans will die to it. It's like when we acquire resources from animals (ie deforestration) we don't have the intention of killing them we do it for us.

So, the question shouldn't be "Will robots ever deserve rights?" The question should be: "When robots reach human intelligence (and they will surpass our intelligence within a microsecond once reaching human intelligence), will HUMANS receive rights?"

To those questioning how we can "code" a machine to be intelligent or advanced you're looking at this wrong. The answer is to build a machine that will learn and develop, you're giving it the building blocks to improve itself rather than tell it each step to develop. The question is given all the ethical questions would we ever allow a AI to develop far enough to be considered conscious. We could solve a lot of transplant problems by aggressively pursuing human cloning but there are so many ethical issues that it is not considered viable. I suspect robot advances will be a similar taboo.

From my point of view, if a robot ever achieves a level where it can debate for its rights without influence from humans then it would probably deserve the rights.

Only if they shout loud enough.

Yes.

Fetus's have rights, animal species have rights, frozen piece of rock has rights (Antartica), robots will get rights too.

Sentient computer programs won't begin with robots though. And why assume that robots will have individual minds, a hive mind scenario might be more plausible. Humans never had the benefit of always online, with robots that will be natural. So will skynet get rights?

We can already make programs that can learn.
http://venturebeat.com/2012/12/18/numenta-grok/
http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/513696/deep-learning/
A sentient program will first be made using the cloud.

Of course they will, you must be stupid, ignorant and pretentiously skeptical not to think so.

It's unevitable that someday, through various methods an AI will be able to think by itself and feel, it's unevitable that if it can, it'll either surpass humans or reach some kind of threshold below the full capacity of a human mind, the same way humans try to reach perfection in the image of their god but never can.

Then the question will be ask : do these thinking, intelligent, sensitive, emotional robot deserve rights? Most likely it'll simply follow the same path as jews in Egypt before they were freed, or africans before they were freed etc...

The rights of Dolphins are being debated, so it is very possible http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-17116882

Humans are complex carbon based machines, in the future other complex machines may also have similar attributes that warrent rights, it may even come to the point Humans aren't the ones to dictate who has rights

The future is a vaste expanse of time and events before us, anything could happen that is beyond our own imaginings

Hell no. They all belong Stuffed on my Wall.