That's being explained just few posts above yours - discrimination is apparently bad only if it's based on something people don't have a choice in. You can stop being a gamer just like you can stop being a Christian, or stop being an Apple fanboy. I guess that makes throwing all kinds of insults and other derogatory remarks at any of the above groups a fair game.
However, I am also convinced that with today's advancements in the field of medicine you can even stop being gay or stop being a woman (even though a typical far-left atheist liberal will likely disagree)!

Therefore I don't think that the line where discrimination starts is defined by the target group, but rather by the attitude the potential discriminator has towards the said group.
So someone saying that gamers are vile trash is demonizing them, but saying that it's better to study sciences than to play video games is as much discrimination as saying that life can only be formed through contact of male and female cells is homophobia.

In the 20th century, people feared that Orwellian state will control people by supressing thinking and limiting information.
But the situation become even worse - we have people who don't want to think and instead rely on The Government to decide what's good for them, and information is so widely available that people became saturated with it and no longer desire it.

If you think that uneducated or trollish users are a problem on Slashdot, then you've probably never been to 4chan or reddit (I guess that Facebook deserved a mention too). Granted, trolls and haters actually exist on Slashdot (just like with any other site on the Internet), and sometimes they will crawl out and hit you with their ignorance hammer when you least expect them, but their number is remarkably low for a site that allows commenting without an account and I haven't seen them take over a topic in years.
And Slashdot isn't today exactly among the Internet's most popular sites so I think that most of them are just passerbys with sudden "rebruttal" urges.

What a shame, I would actually applaud a webmaster willing to pay for an SSL certificate just to trick more people to see goatse

I've not seen a more hateful comment on Slashdot in a long time. If Slashdot stuff doesn't give a fuck about people who spew hate at someone for mentioning something that's even confirmed by FUCKING X-MEN DIRECTOR HIMSELF, I can only hope that NSA does and will lock you away before you cause a school shooting.

In case if you haven't figured it out, X-Men is really about gay people, and of course, they can doom us all, since we'll just stop reproducing. So the analogy still says.
Of course I know that gay people won't ever become a majority and the above was just a sarcasm. But the same could probably be said about unvaccinated people.
But of course, *merely* having a registry of unvaccinated people is still way better than having mandatory vaccination like in my country. Until they refuse to give you a medical treatment because you haven't been vaccinated against leprosy, or you don't pass at job test because your parents thought it's not a good idea to let you take some vaccine that has so far been tested only on rats.

This shouldn't surprise anyone. Wasn't there a case years ago where Yahoo helped Chinese authorities arrest a blogger?
Even the "Don't be evil" company would happily turn you to authorities if you happen to use their search engine to find out how to construct a homemade bomb (their "autocomplete/suggestion" feature isn't really your best friend), and it doesn't matter if you live in a 3rd world country or not, since a suspicion of terrorism is enough to have you detained indefinitely even in a "land of the free".

I'm not your personal Google or Wikipedia.

So, what when someone uses an Internet to reveal their plans of a terrorist attack? How would the police get them if their IP cannot be traced?
This seems like a well-written law for a change, and Brazilian government wasn't very Internet-friendly in the past as they used to block YouTube and ban video games (even rather innocuous ones like CounterStrike).

Would you rather go to Russia and be Putin's tool, or stay in USA and end up being sentenced for 35 years of prison? I'd choose the former.

So, she could be both gay and lesbian? I thought you can be only one of the above, unless you're implying that she's both male and female. And I thought it was only a phrase when people said that she got balls.

It doesn't make sense, but it also does make sense.
Sense = No sense, Schrödinger's cat must be sense!

I think that the GP is upset because Carter wasn't making such claims while he was the president. What if Obama says in 20 years how it was wrong to imprison Manning? Would it suprise you? Or it's just the type of hypocritical behaviour you would expect from a politician?

That's a privilege that religion doesn't have. It's hard to win an argument against someone who thinks you're guilty until proven wrong.

Everyone lies, not just religious people. I've been trolled by being called a creationist many times just because I defended religion, without even mentioning anything about creationism of course. Also, scientists tend to dismiss every natural phenomena that they are unable to explain as superstition, or even call some stuff that has little to do with science, and is not a threat to it (like conspiracy theories) as "dangerous pseudo-science".

Can science explain mediation? If not, then it's magic. Of course you could simply say that you use meditation because "it works". But every religious person will also say that prayer works. As I said (and you failed to prove me wrong, instead you obviously replied as AC so you can mod my post as troll - of course I wouldn't expect better from the likes of you), it's much like prayer, even though the other person who replied to me pointed out one difference which I don't disagree with. Both things are still very spiritual, and spirituality - not "magic" as you call it - is what religion (any religion) is all about.

I hope you haven't run out of mod points.