protonitron: If you can make zenkid understand the difference between being perceived as a total knob before getting a chance to be one (prejudice) and being perceived as a total knob in a completely reactionary way due to making a really dumb post, I'll have him removed from the thread for you. I just need to know that he's learning SOMETHING from all of this.

Well it isn't total prejudice because ZENBOY has a history of posting shit and the last few posts he has made on discussion threads have been almost invariably shit. Therefore it is a judgement made partially on historical evidence. Although I did jump to a premature conclusion that his post would be shit while I couldn't actually possibly know the contents of the post, I could make an educated guess. Furthermore I read a few sample segments of your post and what I read was not promising.

Pure prejudice would have been if I had no reason to believe that your post would be shit.

I hope that clears some stuff up for your ZENBOY/KID.

If you want to attack human nature and civil rights then yeah, give prejudice the death penalty.

Well really prejudice as murder will already get you a sentence of some sort. depending on the murder it might be the death penalty. However what we mean is, is being prejudice punishable. Not to say worthy of going to jail but more of in a parent's aspect or a school's aspect. But as mentioned earlier the things about prejudice that can be detected (verbal or physical) usually is dealt with anyway. That's the struggle with this topic. Most of the things about prejudice that you can detect is already punishable.

Time for story-time. Me and a friend were on a bus to college on a wednesday, It was only 9:45-ish and usually there's quite a lot of OAP's on the bus. We had this guy sit in front of us who was listening to music and in front of him was an OAP. The guy that was in front of us phone began to ring, since my friend had his phone out watching the Gotham TV series trailer with subtitles (it was also on mute) the OAP turned to my friend and began to tell him to turn it down. Simply because my friend had his phone out and was 16 (the other person with the phone was around 25-35 and it was definitely his phone, mainy because later in the bus ride it rang again and he answered it) and initially thought it was him. Zen, that's some context that will hopefully make you understand what being prejudice is (basically enforcing a stereotype can count as being prejudice)

Prejudiced behavior is already looked down upon socially, at least where I live, because ignorance is different from gratified dislike. if that's what you mean then ok.

Who are you talking to dude? I haven't seen a single argument saying that harmful acts (since I specifically said I was only referring to harmful and deliberate prejudice of you read my guidelines of what this thread should include) of prejudice should be punishable. I just asked your opinion. Which seems rather over aggressive since acts of severe prejudice are already being punished relatively frequently (people lose their jobs for sexism (although mainly only quite famous people who address the public such as football commentators or news anchors) and are sometimes even sued for it).

I am only saying this to make it clear what this thread was created to discuss since some severe misinterpretations appear to have emerged.

Have a nice day. Sorry for not addressing other people's posts but it would take ages.
-----

Sorry panda but no. I especially meant it in terms employment. Consideration of possible legal action (such as a fine or something) is also fair game.
-----

Or we could wait until people actually do harmful things (like I said in guidelines) that are harmful as a result of their prejudice. The thing to consider is whether the fact that the harm was caused by prejudice makes the harmful action any worse than it would have been otherwise.
-----

Interesting suggestion. Let's ask the dictionary if it agrees:

Prejudice-preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or logic

Or

Prejudice-dislike, hostility or unjust behaviour deriving from Unfounded opinions

I was referring to the latter in my thread starting post but the former is sufficient.

I don't know how you think prejudice has anything to do with others disagreeing with the opinion. Prejudice is still prejudice regardless of popular opinions on the prejudiced belief.

I hope this helps you understand what this thread is about.

Is this a valid argument? Y/N

yes it's perfectly valid we might as well bring back the KKK to cut down on crime

but on a serious note this thread is really confusing OP, what exactly are you trying to say? I don't think prejudice should be punishable since xenophobia based on ignorance is only natural and predictable, but if you're trying to go even deeper than that please explain, are you arguing about the word "prejudice" itself?

I have to say proto I agree with zking. Prejudice is in our nature, we can't help it when we do it. We could do it because of envy but all the same we've all been prejudice, I feel like that would kill the right to your own opinion if you made being 'prejudice' illegal. There would be so many people getting fined, sentences etc...

Are you reading what I am posting. I will discuss the meaning of prejudice with people who don't understand what it means. Otherwise it is unnecessary.

We can control how we act and if our actions are based on unfounded and possibly hateful beliefs then it is a viable argument that punishment wouldn't be unthinkable. I do not necessarily support such an argument since I don't have much of a strong opinion on this topic either way. I just thought the discussion board looked a little empty.