Do you think it's wrong and inappropriate to mock/make fun of people who are intellectually impaired?

I would gather that then you believe popular politicians then ARE "fair game". Thinking of anyone as "a child who had been taught all the wrong values" don't you think is patronizing rather than compassionate?  Do we need to make people "victims" to feel compassion for them.  Can we not feel compassion just for the human condition in general?  Many of us have no great love for President Trump but we must be thankful to him for taking up the cause of protecting our freedoms when he didn't have to at all - he could have just gone on his merry way and not considered us at all.  Which many politicians have done and are doing.  The fact that he would be willing to take our part really is I think sort of moving. 

See Randy's above comment to Sharonna. While he was obviously screwing with her, I think it actually applies to you. 

Have a blessed day. 

Based on my own observations and experiences, there are a good amount of intellectual people who are a bit snobbish about it and sort of lord their intelligence over those who aren't as smart. I'm not saying that all intellectually gifted people are like this, but it's something I've noticed and thought about. 

I really hope that you're right and I'm wrong. 

That's sort of the point of my question, Slarti. For people who engage in this sort of behavior (ridiculing those who are or appear to be less intelligent), where do they draw the line? How do they KNOW that the person is smart enough to know better? 

While I truly enjoy dark humor, I can't say that I find that Darwin Awards business funny. Those are real people with real families who have died. A 14-year old girl who died while leaning out of a bus window? That's not funny (to me). 

And is disqualified, because children don't count. To qualify for a Darwin Award, the person must be legally adult, not impaired before the incident - and apparently devoid of common sense, as anybody possessed of normal intelligence should not have participated in the incident that removed them from the gene pool. Like the guy who held a lit cherry bomb between his knees while he opened a beer. Fast running fuse blew his gonads off, he survived but unable to reproduce. This post was edited by Slartibartfast at September 19, 2022 7:54 AM MDT

The girls on the bus was mentioned in the article about the awards. It said something about the standard age limit being 16, and cited the girl being disqualified. I'm sure that her family heard of her being considered and disqualified, thoughtlessly adding insult to horrible injury. 
It seems a bit like an oxymoron to me. If they're not impaired, they wouldn't be devoid of common sense and don't have normal intelligence. 

Maybe if all of the award-winning incidents were done by those who were impaired by drugs or alcohol at the time, I could get behind that kind of humor. Even then, not if it resulted in death or serious injury. Unless I am impaired by drugs or alcohol... I'll laugh at anything then. 
:)

You make a good point. 

Humans are gifted in different ways, and it's unfortunate that all aren't appreciated equally. We are all rather self-centered and even myopic by nature, and therefor we tend to appreciate things that we can personally relate to more. 

Yeah, I think everyone has at least some positive aspect to them. Even if you are a super genius, that doesn't automatically make you above everybody else. I know a mentally challenged man and although he's a bit slow he's also the sweetest and most helpful person I've ever met. He would go out of his way to help anyone and he's always very polite even if someone is being a huge turd to him, so just because he's not smart doesn't make him less valuable.

Absolutely. 

" . . . it's unfortunate that all aren't appreciated equally."

  I don't understand your point. If person A commits an evil act and person B commits a loving act, how or why should each be "appreciated equally"?  Appreciation shouldn't be equal for both positive and negative behaviors, because that invalidates its importance. 
~

It's unfortunate that all (human gifts) aren't equally appreciated. I wouldn't consider evil acts to be a gift. Well, unless it was really funny and toward a really horrible person. ;-)

I see where you misunderstood. I could have prevented that by adding the word 'gifts' after the word 'all'. 

My sincerest apologies, Grammar God. 

~

Inbreeding will do that.