X-Men/Headscratchers

Should dangerous mutants be cured/contained?
Granted, a big part of this is the powers themselves are geared towards making people hate them. Mutants are designed to be freakish, ugly and with bad powers that range from Poisonous Person to Walking Wasteland. Imagine if a mutant was born with Fertile Feet and a super healing atmosphere effect. It stands to reason if mutant powers were designed to benefit mankind, more mutants would turn out to be good guys. Unfortunately, the comic medium is all about action and designed for fighting and destruction and nobody wants to read a story about mutants just going around helping the world out (Rising Stars being one tacit exception). Also, even if you only consider mutants with benign powers that are not inherently dangerous like Beast or Kitty Pryde or Jean Grey, the mere fact that they have such incredible power is still cause for concern. The thing that stops a shotgun owner from going on a killing spree is partly morality and partly the fact that he would be quickly arrested or killed in the process. But what's stopping a girl who phases through walls from walking into a bank vault and walking out with as much money as she can carry? What's stopping Jean Grey from pinching your carotid artery shut with her telekinesis if you piss her off? The very fact that they have incredible powers that no other human can hope to counter is a legitimate reason to fear them. Is it enough of a reason to also oppress them? Good question. There's the real debate. "the only way to enforce it is by force, obviously that would require anti-mutant tech, this would lead to sentinels," Whoa thar. There are plenty of anti-mutant measures short of big purple and blue robots, most notably superheroes. "if they get treated right by everyone," Counterpoint: Magneto. To quote the First Class trailer, "Peace was never an option." "why you can compare it to gays and minorities in real life," Except for the part where no real life minority can shoot lasers out of their eyes. Or has a split personality which is a psychopath with unlimited cosmic power. Or has a split personality that manifests as Onslaught. Or can walk through walls at will. Or can turn bulletproof at will. And remember, these are the good guys. There are some elements in common, but mutants. Are. Dangerous. Full stop.
 * For a group whose goal is human-mutant peaceful coexistence, the X-Men's solution for mutants who are Power-Incontinent walking death machines is full of potential disaster, as it amounts to "Wear some nice clothes to keep your powers in check". Let's hope no gust of wind blows off Cyke's glasses while he's out in public or the nice family walking ahead of him, and their little puppy, are now an ugly stain on 5th street. Wither is an even worse example; contact with his skin destroys all organic matter irreversibly; not even the Omega-level mutant with Healing Hands can fix it. And Wither has already killed someone with his powers. We'll put some gloves on his hands and hope nobody accidentally bumps into his head or any other exposed skin. He even erroneously thought he was cured of his powers and grabbed another mutant's hand, rotting it off permanently. Arguably mutants whose powers are that dangerous should have way more fixed and assured measures taken to keep their powers under control. Yet when the mutant cure essentially promised to do just that, the X-Men made it about the "anti-discrimination metaphor" because of the off-chance that such a cure might be used against unwilling mutants. If the cure provides the greatest probability that a Blessed with Suck mutant's powers won't cause some humans to die a horrible death, wouldn't that be the preferable alternative to allow the mutant to integrate into human society and gain some measure of normalcy?
 * That's why I've never liked the idea of mutant as racial and homosexual metaphors. A lot of mutants get the cool stuff like weather control and telekinesis, but there's also plenty of people like Rogue, who is unable to simply touch anyone without risking their life. Treating a 'cure' for being a mutant like a 'cure' for homosexuality carries all sort of Unfortunate Implications.
 * ^Exactly. The "mutants as racial/homosexual metaphor" thing is complete bunk, always has been. The real reason why racism/homophobia are wrong is because minorities and gays aren't inherently dangerous to the rest of society. In the end, they're no different than anyone else. But the same can't be said of mutants. People in the 616 universe have every reason in the world to be afraid of these people. In this troper's opinion the X-Men would make much more sense (and be much more entertaining) if it were portrayed as an examination of the conflict between security and civil liberties. Imagine for a moment that there really are persons of mass destruction living all over the country and the world. Most of them are totally indistinguishable from normal people and many have the power to kill hundreds or thousands of people and demolish entire city blocks (or worse) with the wave of a hand, a blink of an eye, or even a mere thought. Is it okay to have them placed under strict government control and/or segregated from the rest of society? Do their civil rights outweigh the need to ensure public safety? For that matter, do mutants even have rights? After all, mutants are technically a different species. They are homo superior, not homo sapiens. Can they even be said to have human rights when they aren't technically human?
 * From another Troper's viewpoint: If Everyone Is Gay were true, it wouldn't take long before it had societal consequences, even if the majority remain perfectly civil and "harmless" outside the bedroom. Even so, I fully agree that the mutant/gay metaphor is counter-productive to why it was started, and is an all-around bad idea. AIDS scare or otherwise, there is nothing about gays that even compares to someone who can literally kill you by taking his glasses off. No glance from a drag queen can literally microwave someone where they stand. So when this same troper overhears an LGBT get-together on campus embracing the metaphor...
 * The metaphor in and of itself isn't the problem. Let's be real: it's the basis for the X-Men's popularity and mass appeal. The metaphor fails when it's applied equally and without distinction to mutants with benign powers as it is to mutants who really should be cured of their powers because they are genuinely dangerous and either cannot control their powers or they're villains and they're willing to abuse their powers just because they can (like Mystique in X3: Beast called the President out on having weaponized the cure, then in the climax he uses the cure on Magneto). Take Rogue, for instance. Suppose she were to develop and control her power overnight. Would you, as a person in the X-Universe (human or mutant), feel safe touching her hand, knowing it wasn't so long ago that doing so would send you into a coma and cause her to be privy to your innermost thoughts? What are the chances she loses control at some point while touching you? What if she wants to use her powers on you and you just don't know it? In this sense, Rogue would be normal but she'd still be cut off from the world out of fear of her powers, being almost a metaphor for HIV and people's fear of even the slightest contact with the infected. The metaphor can be perfectly maintained without demonizing the humans into villains or irrational, unsympathetic victims/rescuees but the way X-Men is written now is that if all the mutant gene did is turn your skin blue, humans would still be organizing genocidal hate groups and constructing mass armies of giant Sentinels to quarantine and exterminate the 'bluetants'.
 * It's actually quite reasonable for people to be worried about seemingly harmless mutants. How many secondary mutations have there been? How many might there be? Even the harmless kid who looks like a fish and can breathe underwater could suddenly end up with super-strength and durability and just flip out. Darwin is a mutant whose power is basically him adapting to any situation instantly. He went into outer space, and promptly grew a helmet. Not to mention the terrorist incidents, like Magneto's doppleganger destroying a good portion of New York and killing millions. Joss Whedon played around with this, natch, when Beast thinks he might want the cure, but Wolvie attacks him for even having it. The facility that announced they had it had lines around the block within hours. There's also the implications of people dictating other people's sexual identity. Mutants persecuting other mutants for not wanting to be mutants is basically the same thing is people being persecuted for being mutants. There are "friend of a friend" stories about gays who are hated by other gays if they realize that they're actually bi or straight. Why does no one ever use that metaphor?
 * Also, they tried something similar to that, and it was called Civil War. It probably could've worked, if the writers hadn't been firmly on the non-reg side, along with seventy years of Marvel history. It it were a new comic book universe it might've worked, but not 616.
 * The writers were firmly on the pro- reg side; if that confuses you, the answer is yes, the writers are more than a little Fascist. The had Iron Man and co. act like dicks purely because they thought it was obvious they were the good guys, and this was the only way they could think of to make both sides look fair and balanced.
 * Well, the "mutants as a metaphor" thing was done a lot better early on. Most of the mutants who weren't part of the X-Men or opposing teams weren't very powerful; people who could sneeze and destroy a city block were exceedingly rare. In fact, before Grant Morrison's run, most mutants looked like normal humans and thusly the paranoia for the "average person" was that anyone could be a mutant, even your next door neighbor or one of your child's teachers. (Does this sound familiar?) Secondary mutations were also fairly rare before Morrison's run. But once asylum running (and I don't mean Morrison, there are plenty of other people to blame for that) kicked in to full swing, these concepts were lost; probably because subtlety is for losers. So we went from a small group of people who looked like everyone else and weren't able to defend themselves to millions of mutants that looked scary and could blow up everything with the proper application of side-eye. (And this is why they had to have the Decimation.) The reason why the metaphor fails now is because everything had to be dialed Up to Eleven, and then dialed up to the mid-twenties.
 * Which is why I really really really really hate Omega level mutants. Back when Xavier and Magneto were among the most powerful mutants, their conflict represented a metaphor for how mutants responded to the prejudice; Xavier was the rational, collected, long-term thinker who argued for compassion and unity, whereas Magneto was the knee-jerk, emotional pent-up anger of the oppressed rising up and enacting righteous fury at the humans. But once Xavier went all Onslaught (basically proving that even the most mind-over-mannered benevolent mutant could become an insane Omnicidal Maniac purely from their powers outstripping their sanity), he ruined all credibility from his saintly example as a mutant with incredible power who refused to give into temptation and use his power for evil. Then, as more mutants with uncontrollable powers started causing major catastrophes and more evil mutants popped up who went from fighting Magneto's cause to just plain Screw the Rules, I Have Supernatural Powers, both men became irrelevant to the larger issue of how mutants were supposed to exactly coexist with humans. After all, why bother trying to make nice with mankind when Magneto's daughter can just snap her fingers and make mutants the ruling class? If anything, Decimation did the universe a favor by making mutants a limited group instead of a loaded gun pointed directly at mankind's collective grey matter.
 * The concept of Omega Level Mutants was fine, back when it was limited to Jean Grey, Nate Grey, Cable, Rachel Summers (damn, that is some potent DNA), Iceman, and Franklin Richards. It became problematic when the writers decided to have a Mutant Power Arms Race, suddenly Omega Level Mutants were popping up everywhere. It makes sense that at some point the younger generation will surpass the older generation, but Omega Mutants went from rare and special to shark jumping very quickly. The whole Onslaught thing annoyed me because it was truly out of character for both Professor Xavier AND Magneto, since the official story was that Xavier was "infected" by Magneto's "inner evil", it completely ignores all of that pesky Character Development that Claremont put into Magneto over the 80's. (Not to mention that the whole point of the character was just to move The Avengers into the Heroes Reborn universe, meaning that Onslaught was in all actuality the physical manifestation of Executive Meddling. But I digress.) Sadly, the Decimation was 100% necessary because the X-Men got caught up in Running the Asylum that they forgot all of the nuance that went into the history of the X-Men, the parallels between Martin Luther King and Malcolm X. Possibly the clearest sign of the asylum running, look at how quickly Professor Xavier went from "genuinely good person who keeps his evil locked deep inside because when it manifests it is very bad" to "Jerkass who sent his secret second group of students to die then mind-wiped everyone to forget and enslaved a sentient computer even though he knew it". The is no room for subtlety in the asylum.
 * (Not to digress too far) but what's wrong with Omegas is how it's always a designation that's about a mutant's potential and not their actual power. Omega-level mutants, even ones that are in the top-tiers have been bested by non-Omega mutants in fights (Emma Frost and Psylocke in particular have pwned Rachel Summers, aka the Phoenix) solely from being better-trained at their abilities, whereas other characters like Magneto and Scarlet Witch have used their powers to great effect far outstripping anything most of the Omega-mutants have ever done, and yet they're not considered Omegas because no one's ever bothered to call them Omegas. There's so much fan-arguing over the definition of whose an Omega and whose not, since it's an Informed Ability the writers have to spell out and not a definition of how powerful a mutant really is on panel. The only real justified example being Franklin Richards who is too young to use his power effectively except as a Deus Ex Machina.
 * I'd like to point out that one common thing is that it isn't what mutants can do that makes them hated, its what they are, and that is different, its supposed to be that Humans fear what they don't understand, which is why so many people are Xenophobic in real life, they just don't understand the difference, assume they're better, and hate the 'inferior' beings. The mutant hate is then fueled because some mutants can control all metal/blow themselves up/create earthquakes/Generate more energy then the sun/etc, which is comparable to Islam, some people hate muslims because they believe in a different faith, or because the faith is practiced mostly by people with different coloured skin, but it gets fueled by 9/11, Reverse it, Some muslims/terrorist sympathisers hate America because of they're a mostly Chirstian country and are mostly white, but its fueled by a lot of the crap the American Goverment has done and their war against Iraq/Afghanistan. If you compare it to homophobia, since it gets compared to that more so then racism, Homophobes hate gay people because they're different and subconsciously fear they themself may be gay (Since most Homophobes are doing it to compensate for their own sexual confusion), then compare it to Mutants: Mutant haters hate Mutants because they're different and subconsciously fear they themselves may be a mutant or that their children may become one, those crazy homophobic Christian fundamentalists who think Gays are the children of the devil? Well, in the Marvel Universe they also think mutants are too. The point is, it doesn't matter what/who they do, someone, somewhere will hate them for it because they don't understand how they can be different.
 * That was the original intention, yes, but now what they are is actively a threat. Osama Bin Laden, while dangerous, is not biologically classified as an entirely separate species from me. The anti-mutant bigotry in X-Men is more like if anyone of Arab descent could spontaneously generate powers that could kill or harm lots of people around them, and they might not be able to control it. Heck, anti-mutant weapons once destroyed an entire island nation, making it dangerous to even be around mutants. Not only do you have to worry about the mutant down the block who can talk to fish suddenly turning radioactive, but you have to worry about the giant robot sent to detain him destroying your neighbourhood by accident. And Homophobia tends to be a lot more complicated than overcompensating for one's own feelings, just like homosexuality is a lot more complicated than the parent of the appropriate gender not hugging someone enough. The entire point of this JBM is that Power Creep, Power Seep has mad a mess of the original metaphor.
 * Ironically, the metaphor has been restored somewhat by the Decimation event that depowered most of mutantkind. Instead of being seen as humans (they're fully human without the mutant gene even though they can get powers back via the Terrigen Mists) bigoted humans are even more empowered and motivated to murder mutants en masse since now the once-mutant humans cannot defend themselves. Rev. Stryker blew up a bus full of kids and X-Factor had to deal with a riot in France between mutants and humans who don't want them to integrate. So in many ways the anti-mutant bigots are showing their true colors by being willing to cross the Moral Event Horizon and kill people for no other reason than they used to be mutants.
 * ^^ The Power Creep, Power Seep isn't what invalidated the metaphor. It was faulty from the start. The whole "people fear what they don't understand" argument only works when there isn't any legitimate reason to be afraid. Even if we disregarded all Omega-level mutants and secondary mutations, mutants in general are still highly dangerous purely by virtue of their existence. Take Kitty Pryde, a mutant with the power to walk through walls. Seems benign on the surface, but consider what was said in the first X-Men movie: What's to stop her from walking into a bank vault? Or into the White House? Cyclops has Frickin' Laser Beams coming out his eyes that are only stopped by his glasses. Would you be comfortable living next door to him knowing he could trip on the coffee table, lose his shades, and accidentally blast your house to rubble? And good grief, just imagine the implications of even one real-life telepath! What's to stop Jean Grey or Xavier from peeking into your mind and stealing your PIN number? What's stopping them from reading the minds of the Generals in the Pentagon and selling US military secrets to terrorist states? Their good word? Yes, some mutants have entirely benign powers, but many more do not, and even the benign powers can become dangerous if the mutant in question is creative enough. So how do you maintain order in society when at any time an otherwise normal person could spontaneously develop deadly superpowers? How do you walk down the street knowing that any of the people passing by you could read your mind, blast you with laser-eyes, or punch your head off at a moment's notice? Would you feel safe? I wouldn't. So why shouldn't we segregate mutants from normal humans for the good of society? If we have a way to "cure" mutations, why shouldn't we force mutants to take the cure for the good of society? The law allows us to forcibly medicate people with certain dangerous mental disorders, how is this any different? Those seem like pretty interesting questions to me. Lots of potential for conflict and deep plots. How far do civil liberties go? Does a mutant's right to be secure in his person override my right to be safe from his dangerous superpowers? Are mutant powers analogous to, say, firearms? Oh wow, now there's a debate for you. Is mutant control analogous to gun control? If it is, can you support one while opposing the other? If mutant control goes too far, does that mean gun control goes too far as well?
 * The thing is that someone who hasn't done anything wrong is innocent, even if they have the ability to do something dangerous. Okay Cyclops could blow someone's head off. So could the owner of a shotgun. Beast could crush someone's skull. So could someone with a rock. The thing that is keeping the X-men from abusing their powers is the same thing that keeps most Gun Owners from going on killing sprees, or most people from caving in each others skulls with rocks to see if they can steal their victims wallet, their morals, and legal reprisal. In fact the lack of legal rights and inability to get a fair trial would be a major cause of mutants becoming criminals, whereas having legal protection, and due process, would probably encourage them to act more responsibly. The thing is that their powers are built it. That's why a big part of Xavier's original plan is to educate mutants how to control their powers, and make sure they became responsible members of society. Yeah, a mutant has potentially dangerous abilities, and is a new offshoot species, but is that really a good enough reason to segregate/exterminate all of them? And if you start eliminating mutants for being potentially dangerous then whose next? People with super powers? Maybe the smart guys with no actual powers like Tony Stark and Reed Richards? I mean look at how potentially dangerous the stuff they've invented is? Is it really okay to say their not human? Is the genetic code the only thing that determines if one should be considered human?
 * Another way of looking at it is the cost-benefit ratio of mutant powers. What do the X-Men spend most of their time doing other than enforcing the Superhero Paradox by fighting evil mutants? Sure, fitting in and acting normal should be an option but Reed Richards Is Useless seems to take on a greater weight for mutants than superheroes, considering that the rest of the world likes the latter but hates the former. Look at the TV show The 4400. The final season had a movement of superpowered people using their abilities to clean up Seattle, doing stuff like purifying polluted lakes. Just imagine how much smaller the Fantastic Racism would be if the world saw mutants using their powers to make the world genuinely better; guys with Healing Hands working in hospitals in 3rd world countries, Storm putting out forest fires and ending droughts, etc. Right now if the world got rid of all the good and bad mutants, it would just be Like Reality Unless Noted but if the X-Men or some other mutant group tried to actively make sweeping changes to the non-mutant problems of the world, they could counter all the examples of Person of Mass Destruction with examples of mutants being a genuine good to the world. Then all those Sentinel-building mutant haters would have to answer to all the people the mutants help and save.
 * The problem with this argument, as said by a number of people beforehand, is that only some mutants are evil/dangerous, but people hate them anyway. In the animated series, a mutant whose only power is (Wait for it), Hairy arms, yes, that's it, he's got more hair than normal, yet, the FOH mob still attack him anyway; Likewise, in Ultimate X-Men #1, A sentinel nearly falls onto a bunch of people, they're all saved by Bobby, using his powers for the first time, the people's response? Throw a bottle at his head and try to kill him because he's a mutant, not because what he can do, but because he's different. Compare it to the Fantastic Four, everybody loves them, yet, each one is just as dangerous as all of the normal X-Men, hell, Invisible Woman and Johnny Storm could, if they wanted to, beat the Phoenix individually. As said before, any normal human can kill, what stops you from hiding inside from every person in the world? Because you think they won't. Your neighbor has a car, what stops them from running you down on your way out? Their morals. What stops your pet dog from jumping and biting your neck and killing you? It's morals/training. What stops a person who plays Grand Theft Auto from buying a gun and killing you all? His/her Morals. What stops Tony Stark from using his armours and killing us all? His morals. Likewise, what stops Iceman from freezing you into a statue and then smashing you? His morals. What's the difference? Oh, that's right, Iceman is a mutant. See how it works? just because one individual can be dangerous, doesn't mean he is, forcing all mutants to take a Cure and taking away their powers is the same as taking away all car owners' licenses, all dogs their teeth, Tony Stark his armours, and all Video Gamers their violent video games, it isn't right. Compare them to other heroes, like Superman, The Sentry, The Mighty Thor, they don't get nearly as much flak as mutants, even though each one has more powers than them and is much more dangerous. Does the public want them to be forced to take a cure to remove their powers or create Anti-supes groups? No, because they're not mutants, you can't just say they need to be depowered/eradicated when much more dangerous people are out there without the X-Gene.
 * "hell, Invisible Woman and Johnny Storm could, if they wanted to, beat the Phoenix individually." And there goes all credibility in your argument. You clearly don't have the slightest idea of what you're trying to convey, do you?
 * Excuse me? How does that remove all credibility? What I was saying is that Johnny Storm and Susan Storm-Richards are both unimaginably powerful, much more so than all but the most powerful of mutants. Yet, the Marvel Universe as a whole only seems to abuse mutants openly and for the most of it only the X-Men have problems dealing with racism. Secondly, that was one of TWO arguments, the other being that only a small percentage of mutants have, before M-Day, been seen. When non-affiliated mutants are shown, they tend to have very benign powers, if they have any at all.
 * There are, in all likelihood, a number of groups who are in fact anti-super in general, not just anti-mutant. Most comics simply don't deal with that side of it. Other than that, bear in mind that the "right" side is whatever side the writers want to be "right", and in this case, they want the mutants to be "right" so their opponents head into racist extremism rather than rational arguments regarding the danger posed.
 * The problem with making it all about "training mutants to control their powers" is threefold. First, since most times a mutant power first activates it results in disaster, the solution only works if all mutants are sequestered beforehand from birth and trained in the art of controlling their powers before they can flare up and accidentally hurt or kill some innocent bystander and only allowed to integrate into normal society once they've passed a rigorous test certifying they can safely be around normal people. Second, morals and restraint mean jack when your power is beyond your control and its destructive at the same time. Mutants like Rogue, Cyclops, and Wither aren't bad people per se but their powers are. Third, you can be the most raised-by-Ma-and-Pa-Kent lily white boy scout nice guy/gal with ultra-destructive, yet perfectly-controllable superpowers who wouldn't hurt a fly; it doesn't mean jack if some telepath decides to Mind Control you or take your body for a ride and go off on a killing spree and you won't be able to do anything about it if they're strong enough to beat whatever Heroic Willpower or other psychic defenses you might have. So while you might be able to make a case for the guy whose mutation just gives him hairy arms getting to keep his X-Gene, the really powerful Alpha and Omega-level mutants are another story.
 * ^Exactly. Sure you have some mutants like Beast who have pretty benign powers, but then you have others like Rogue who can kill you by accident just by touching her bare skin against yours. Or guys like Cyclops who shoots uncontrollable death rays out of his eyes 24 hours a day. If he slips on the stairs and his ruby glasses fall off, his eye-beams will cut right through the walls and into the neighbor's house. When his powers first manifested in the 616 universe he nearly destroyed a construction yard he happened to be walking past. And in the Ultimate universe he killed his own parents when his powers flared up the first time.
 * "it doesn't mean jack if some telepath decides to Mind Control you or take your body for a ride and go off on a killing spree and you won't be able to do anything about it if they're strong enough to beat whatever Heroic Willpower or other psychic defenses you might have." This applies to everyone with superpowers though...
 * "Okay Cyclops could blow someone's head off. So could the owner of a shotgun." Ah, but you forget. Many people around the world believe that even law-abiding citizens cannot be trusted with a gun. So you might say (and for the record I would agree) that persecuting a guy like Cyclops is wrong for the same reason persecuting law-abiding gun owners is wrong, but what about people who strongly believe in gun control? If you believe it's necessary to ban or restrict guns to prevent gun crime, are you obligated to support banning or restricting mutants to prevent mutant crimes? Can you support gun control while opposing mutant control? That, to me, is a far more interesting debate and one I wish the X-Men books would address.
 * It's not just like that, there's a number of points you have to consider:
 * Scott instinctively closes his eyes if something happens that could cause his glasses to fall off, in fact, most people by reflex close their eyes when falling or tripping, his glasses just falling off over the least little bump only happens if certain writers want it to.
 * ^While this argument is sound, it requires meta-knowledge in order to convince. Readers can accept the idea that Scott instinctively closes his eyes if there's even the faintest risk of his shades falling off because we have meta-knowledge. We know that as a Good Guy, the writers will never allow Scott to cause massive property damage just by tripping over his own coffee table. But the people living in the 616 universe do not have this meta-knowledge. To them, Scott Summers is just a guy who has incredibly destructive uncontrollable laser beams coming out of his eyes. If some guy told you it's okay for him to constantly walk around with a gun in his hand because he "instinctively" takes his finger off the trigger whenever other people are around, would you believe him? Of course not. So why would the civilians of the 616 universe believe the notion that Scott Summers "instinctively" shuts his eyes to prevent an accident?
 * But knowing how Cyclops' power is also based on Meta-Knowledge, as far as most of the Marvel Universe knows, he can control his powers like everyone else.
 * As for mutant control vs Gun control, what stops mutants? Power dampeners or post-astonishing mutant cures. What stops guns? Gun control, and safety switches, in the Marvel Universe, they do have anti-mutant weaponry and special police task forces to stop mutant-caused crime. If Kitty Pryde tried to phase into a bank volt, the police mutant task force can use an anti-mutant weapon that cancels out her phasing abilities, not to mention the point of the X-Men was to stop mutant crimes in order to get co-existence, in other words, human police can deal with human crimes, mutant police can deal with mutant crime. And even there, isn't it enough to be able to trust them? As I said in a previous post, what stops someone from running you down? Their morals, what stops a mutant from using their powers wrongfully? Their morals, by saying that they still need control means you're not trusting them, why aren't you trusting them? Because they're mutants, so with the same logic that they should be prosecuted just to be sure, does that mean every dog, gun/car owner, and any other human being should be prosecuted just to be sure? What about Parkour/free runners or Contortionists? What stops them from using their natural skills from breaking into artists? The same as the X-Men, so should we hunt down every contortionist or free runner and take away their skill so they don't use it selfishly.
 * ^But even though we have gun control there are still people who demand we have more of it. There are even people who think guns should be banned entirely. So why shouldn't there be people who demand mutants be more controlled or even outright exterminated? In the real world we have things to counter guns just like the 616 universe has things to counter mutants, but that still doesn't stop people from campaigning for more gun control or gun bans. So why would it stop civilians in the 616 universe from campaigning for more mutant control? And you're still arguing based on your meta-knowledge as a reader. We can trust the X-Men to handle mutant crimes because we are the readers and know the X-Men are Good Guys. But civilians in the 616 universe do not have that meta-knowledge. They have no reason to trust the X-Men. They have no reason to believe the X-Men have any "morals" at all. Regarding the last part of your argument, I'm actually not saying people are right to persecute mutants. What I'm saying is that if mutants really existed it would be perfectly reasonable for the average person to be afraid of them. No matter how many times you tell the man on the street that the X-Men are good guys who would never do anything wrong, they're still incredibly powerful superhumans and society would demand that they be controlled. Just like many people today demand that guns be controlled. Is it possible to oppose mutant control while supporting gun control? I would say no, but others might say yes. I think that's a much more interesting debate than this frankly outdated "racism" allegory.
 * I oppose both mutant control and gun control, but I still acknowledge that its entirely possible to support the one and oppose the other -- for the very simple reason that people are not objects, and should not (and under the US and most other legal systems, cannot) be treated identically under the law.
 * Yes, but there's a difference between guns, and people. As they argued later, and a known fact, not all mutants are even remotely dangerous. Remember, in real life, ther is people born with super-ish strength thanks to a genetic defect, they can lift twice there own body weight before they can walk. Should we eradicate people with this gene just in case they use their strength for less than noble purpose. And They do have reason to trust the X-Men, because the X-Men have been saving lives for years, does proving that they can use their abilities for heroics not mean they should be trusted? You know, in a comic they even teamed up with the Fantastic Four to fight some giant monster, the public's response? Not care and ignore them on the grounds they're mutants. they SAVED LIVES and got ignored about it. So, I think that, to some of it, its unjustified since the ones that are dangerous are also the ones fighting to protect them.
 * As for the legitimate risks, some mutants could flip out and attack people (Such as the Brotherhood or one of the more volatile mutants) or accidentally use their powers (Such as Cyke, Rogue, or Wither), but Scott has been trained to live without his glasses and how to move around without accidentally letting them fall (Has he ever in the past tripped and shot out a beam of instant death in the past?), and Rogue and Wither stay away from people and cover up as much as possible to avoid contact, and as I said, they have super humans and other mutants, as well as anti-mutant weaponry, to stop the ones who use their powers violently. The only risk from them is for someone to keep actively trying to knock Cyke's glasses of/touch Rogue or Wither, in which case they deserve what happens, but that's the same as if someone keeps hitting a dog in the nose with a newspaper or pees on a police car/Tony Stark's car, the dog/police/Comicbook/IronMan did nothing wrong, it was the one who made them attack who should be blamed. So again, should we take away all dogs teeth/claws, all police equipment and training, or Iron Man's armour just to avoid the possibility someone might be stupid enough to antagonize them, Just because someone is a risk, whether they act like one or could be one accidentally, is it really right to force them into some machine or prison just in case?
 * ^Again, you're arguing based on meta-knowledge.
 * Meta-Knowledge is also how we know some of the non-mutant superhumans aren't going to hurt them. Your argument is mute because, non-mutants get trusted despite being more dangerous.
 * People with Mental illness, how do you deal with them? Do you send sentinels or force them into prisons? No, you put them into institutes where they're treated for their problem; What do you do with mutants? Send them to Xavier so they can learn how to use their powers safely.
 * ^No, you don't send Sentinels after mentally ill people. But you do send cops after them and you DO imprison them against their will if they are sufficiently dangerous. And you don't let them out until they can prove they are not dangerous. Xavier's school is, well, a school. Not a prison or a mental institute. Students are admitted of their own free will and can leave at any time, whether they've learned to control their powers or not. Not to mention there's only ONE Xavier School for Gifted Youngsters, whereas there are countless mutants all around the globe. There is no way the civilians of the 616 universe would be satisfied with this arrangement. They would demand that anti-mutant agents like the Sentinels be created to round up dangerous mutants and take them away until their powers can be controlled or permanently cured. And if their powers can't be controlled or cured, the people would demand that the mutant be locked up indefinitely (maybe even euthanized if the powers are dangerous enough). And again, try not to argue based on meta-knowledge. The readers trust Xavier because he's a Good Guy, but why would the rest of the world trust Xavier? They don't know he's a Good Guy. After all, he was a former friend and confidant of Magneto, the most infamous mutant terrorist in history. Why would they trust a private citizen like Xavier when he and his school are not accountable to anyone but themselves? It certainly doesn't help that he has his own paramilitary force at his beck and call to do whatever job he pleases without the approval or sanction of any state authority. I don't know if you're old enough to remember but during the 90s there was a lot of debate about "militia groups" and whether they posed a danger to the public, particularly after the Waco Siege and the Oklahoma City Bombing. A lot of people were very uncomfortable with the idea of private paramilitary groups operating inside the United States. That's why I say the public would not trust the X-Men.
 * Except for a few things. There isn't just one school, Emma Frost had her own, and there's possibly others. Two, The X-Men are NOT a paramilitary group, unless the writers decide to make them one, they mostly just stop the bad ones. Three, they do know Xavier's a good guy, he's been known to the public as a positive figure on mutation for years. Four, those millions of powerful mutants only exist because we assume they exist. The only mutants we see are the X-Men or their bad guys, look at the times when they show civilian mutants, who're mostly physically mutated and don't need help to control their dangerous power to turn sound into light or make a force field that only covers themself and has no offensive capabilities whatsoever. The Marvel Universe knows this, its why mutants get easily hunted down by the bigots. Not Meta-Knowledge.
 * Another argument is, try to see it from the Mutant's point of view: you're born with powers that you don't want, people, including own family members, shun you because of it, millions of people in very high places want to lock you up, kill you, force you to undergo horrific treatment, force you to wear power dampeners, or force you to become a living weapon, can you honestly live through that and agree that you are a risk to safety who needs to be put down? The fact is, it isn't about whether or not the government should do something to stop all mutants, its that whether or not its ok for people to band together to kill mutants on the street, even the ones with nothing but hairy arms or funny features, the ones who aren't a danger are still treated like the others, while the uber powerful ones are just a Minority that get more attention.
 * ^I do see it from the mutant's point of view. But I also see it from the general public's point of view. Regardless of when and how they got their powers, a mutant is still a Person of Mass Destruction and the public would demand that they be controlled just like many people demand that guns be controlled. Mutants have to wear power dampeners. In many jurisdictions guns have to have trigger locks. Some countries ban mutants entirely or even have them killed. Some countries also ban guns. I'm not saying mutant control or gun control are right or wrong. In fact as I said above I happen to believe both are entirely wrong. What I'm saying is that a) normal people do have rational reasons to fear mutants, and b) anti-mutant prejudice makes much more sense as an allegory for gun control than an allegory for racism.
 * But not all mutants are Person's of Mass destruction. Kitty Pryde can't destroy masses of people, neither could Darwin, or Beak, Or Angel, Or Angel 2, or Wolfsbane, or Nightcrawler, or Mystique, or Beast, or Changelin/Morph, or luck based mutants like Longshot or Domino, or Forge, or Cecilia Reyes, or Mirage, or Sage, or White Queen, or Stacy X, or lifeguard, or Slipstreme, or Husk (Depending on the writer's idea on her power), or Mastermind/Lady Mastermind, or Armor, or Pixie, or Sunspot, or Doctor Nemesis, or Cyther, or Fantomex, or Calliban, or Gateway, or many other mutants. Yeah, some have some Offensive capability, but The fear is unjustified because mutants aren't all superpowerful. The ones that are? Well, Cyclops, Iceman, Jean, Havok, Magneto, Xavier possibly, Xorn, and a few others. If the millions of unaccounted for mutants were all person's of Mass destruction, then we would have a problem, but they clearly are not because they never have to do something about them, when was the last time the X-Men had to go out and stop a really dangerous mutant who afterwords didn't get arrested or join any team? It doesn't take Meta-Knowledge to know that dangerous mutants aren't always around and not being taken care of, but when mutants who're harmless are getting beaten up for being nothing but different in a harmless way then the gun argument becomes redundant and the racism argument makes sense. Remember, most mutants, if not 99 percent of them, only have one power of varying strength. The Average super human has three. Which one is more likely to be dangerous? The super human, which one gets treated with racial prejudice? the Mutant. Gun owners don't get attacked on the streets for what they own, mutants do, even mutants who can't do squat.
 * Making guns/bombs is actually easier than you'd think, just because you have gun control or a way to monitor who buys one, doesn't mean you can stop everyone from getting one, with that sense, any person, no matter how well you know them, could very easily turn out to be a sociopath/terrorists, so what are you to do? Arrest EVERYONE for possibly possessing a weapon?
 * ^But yet again, despite all of that there are still thousands if not millions of people in the United States and around the world who still campaign for gun control. It doesn't matter how easy it is to make a gun or a bomb in your garage, they still think gun control is the way to prevent gun crime. Why wouldn't the same logic apply to mutant haters? If there are still people who think more gun control or even total gun bans would solve the gun problem, why wouldn't there be people who think more mutant control or even total bans on mutants would solve the mutant problem? Again, I'm not saying either of those arguments are right or wrong. I'm saying they are more realistic motivations for anti-mutant hysteria than simple racism.
 * No more than anti-islamic hysteria. Not every mutant can do amazingly destructive things, just like not every muslim wants to blow up a building. the racism metaphor works when you look at mutants like Choir and Cyther, who will be treated like everyone else despite being completely harmless. People seem to confuse Mutant for meaning super powered, when it just means unique genetic variation. While in the Marvel Universe mutants can develop amazingly destructive powers, most of them develop such weak powers they don't get recruited; Xavier didn't even bother to recruit Cyther when he discovered him, because outing him as a mutant was pointless since it was a harmless power but would be treated all the same.
 * Everyone is dangerous, especially in the Marvel Universe, where installing cybernetic implants and weapons into your own body are commonplace, as said previously, does that mean everyone should be prosecuted just in case they turn into cyborgs?
 * ^That's stretching the point quite a bit. First of all I doubt it's anywhere near as "commonplace" as you seem to think. Secondly, normal people have to choose to become cyborgs. The mutant gene is an accident of birth and it can pop up anywhere. Nobody is going to wake up one morning and discover their cyborg gene has spontaneously manifested itself.
 * Have you read a comic? Cyborgs in the Marvel universe are more than common, and the average citizen in the Marvel Universe knows it too.
 * Some mutants can choose to get cured/treated if their power is particularly harmful, the ones that don't are the harmless/easily controllable ones, the Big Goods who don't need to because they have fine control or other ways of dealing with it, or the Big Bads, in which case forcing them to get the cure/treatment isn't a problem, if they can be trusted, then they should be trusted, if they can't be trusted, then you can cure them, same with people who get banned from animal ownership/having children, if they can be trusted to own a dog/have a child, then they should, if they can't be trusted then they shouldn't be allowed to.
 * Again, compare it to non mutant heroes. Tony Stark has gotten drunk in his armour/had his armour hacked/lost control of his armour; does the public try to cut off his head or force him to give up his armour? No, for the same reason as before, he's human. The Fantastic Four are just as easy to mind control as any mutant, should they be forced to be cured just on the off chance a telepath might decide to control them? No. No matter what the argument, if you compare it to none-mutants, it becomes a Double Standard.
 * ^Just because it's a Double Standard doesn't mean people still wouldn't argue it. There are plenty of people out there who will immediately believe a woman who says she's been raped but always be skeptical of a man who says he has been raped. Double Standards are Truth in Television. And regarding Tony Stark and the Fantastic Four specifically, both of them are fantastically rich and can afford to put out glowing PR campaigns to convince people that they are pure as the driven snow.
 * That's the point of their argument! Double Standards are WRONG, even if it does happen in real life. That didn't dispute the argument, than made it stronger.
 * ^Civil War is what happened when they tried to extrapolate this attitude to the larger MU, and it simply. Didn't. Work. Like you said, you can't have "mutants are dangerous" and "superheroes are awesome" in the same universe. And in the second film, there's a hearing to determine if Stark should give up the armour. He's lost it entirely once or twice in the comics.
 * ^^Those were from buy outs, while the film it was clear the only people who thought he should give it up were depicted as wrong, or douches, and an overwhelming number of people thought he should get to keep it, since its implied a number of times in the opening that Tony has solved all the problems with Al-Quaeda. Back to Mutants, Yes, they shouldn't have both Mutants = bad/Supers = good in the same universe, but as shown a number of times, the people of the Marvel Universe are some of the biggest dicks in the multiverse. Civil War, as you said, is what happens when they try to whole of the MU and yes it didn't work, but it also shows you why its unfair to try and mutants into an anti-mutant system, because of escalation: If a Mutant Registration act happened, which it has in the past, the only way to enforce it is by force, obviously that would require anti-mutant tech, this would lead to sentinels, sentinels lead to Days of Future past, and we all know we don't want that, and then you have Magneto, if someone tries to force him to join the MRA he would react violently, they'd need stronger smarter sentinels, which leads to future wars in which the planet and peoples of it get killed. The solution isn't segregation or Fantastic Racism, its trust, if the government is willing to allow mutants freedom and rights, if they get treated right by everyone, there wouldn't be a problem, which is why you can compare it to gays and minorities in real life, race riots/wars start because one party doesn't like the other because of their race, they try to strip them of their freedom/rights, they fight back; treat them equally, racism ends.
 * ^^^"and an overwhelming number of people thought he should get to keep it, since its implied a number of times in the opening that Tony has solved all the problems with Al-Quaeda." That was from Tony himself, who is unreliable at best. Even if he was correct, and Iron Man is a nuke/terrorism deterrent, doesn't it make sense to have two of them, just in case? In fact, if there wasn't another suit, Tony would've been killed by Vanko. The entire point of the film is that Tony isn't really facing up to the fact that a)he's not indispensable, b)he's going to die, and c)he needs to open up more to the people close to him.

Taking a quote from MAGNETO of all people isn't the best way to win an argument, they guy is an extremist, its the point of his character, that's why he's a bad guy. He wasn't treated equally because of his power, which is why he's so screwed up, that and the Holocaust, you essentially confirmed the argument with an example. While it was him who said the quote, no one disputed Stark's claim of world peace, and from all the cheers and celebration people gave him, he's became an icon, the only fear is from the government and possibly smaller cases that weren't shown/delved into. Essentially, the only mutants that should be feared are the ones who ask for fear: Apocalypse and the like. The ones who legitimately pose no risk or don't actively try to hurt people have done nothing wrong and as such aren't dangerous, or no more dangerous than a guy with a car, you can't pin all the blame on all of them when only a small group are actually dangerous. Which brings me to my original point; why can't the Marvel Universe invent a tier system to judge the threat level of each mutant based on their powers? If all your mutant power lets you do is see a few minutes into the future or something, you should have a classification that designates you an unlikely threat to other people. The tier could be based on a) the power's potential for harm, b) whether or not you have control over your power, c) whether or not you have a device/means to control your power artificially if you don't meet step b, and d) if you have a personal history of using your powers to commit crimes and/or hurt other people. From those 4, you can come up with a threat level 0 (Neutral) to 5 (Dangerous) and a registration card that lets people know they can be at ease around you.
 * Not all of them, that's the point. All groups have their odd balls or dangerous members, but praying on them all is wrong. The decimated mutants were all powerless, but were still attacked and killed. Vocal Minority is a trope all about one small group making it harder for the rest of them to be treated equally. Mutant's aren't generally feared because of what they can do, they're feared for being different, gay people aren't all psychotic rapists but some people treat them as if they all are.
 * 1. Speaking as an actual minority; I can't shapeshift, metal claws don't pop out of my wrists, and I can't fly. 2. "What they can do" is exactly what makes them "different". 3. It's not about "blame", it's not about "fear", it's about risk. Professor X, who is the leading advocate for mutant-human peace, once became Onslaught. In the films, he's manipulated into nearly killing every mutant on earth, then every human. And he's the good guy. The bad guys are even worse. 4. Cars require training and a license to operate, and they're very conspicuous, what with being cars and all. Cyclops once vaporized a sentinel. Not destroyed. Vaporized. That's a lot more power than one gets with the keys to a hatchback. It's closer to the gun-control debate, except if guns were written into someone's DNA. Or, alternately, mentally unstable people who could just randomly flip out and hurt someone, whether they want to or not.
 * Speaking as an actual mutant, in that I have a slightly curved thumb which is caused by mutation, I can't do those things either, yet I too was discriminated against for it when younger. Cyther can't grow claws or shape shift, he's a mutant, Choir can't shoot lasers, yet she's a mutant, Beak, Angel Salvador, and the long list above can't do half the stuff the bigger names can, but that's because mutation doesn't just mean super powers. While heart powers can be used creatively, they're still weak, but their 'owners' get discriminated against just as much as everyone else.
 * 1. But the point is exactly that, not all mutants are dangerous, one comic said that most mutations are harmless physical ones, but the bad guys still treat them like shit, blaming ALL mutants for what a small group can do is the same as blaming all Muslims for terrorism, so them being 'different' is what makes them hated. I remember reading a fanfiction where one mutant had the power to heal, which he used to bring someone who'd been hit by a car back to life, the response by the man he just saved? Call his friends to go a beat him up for being a mutant, the mutant was beaten to an inch of his life. The harmless ones will still be blamed for what the dangerous ones can do, that is the comparison. 2. The Film example was when Xavier was being mind controlled, and Onslaught, to quote one of those floating hand cartoons, 'We like to pretend that didn't happen.' And even there, many non-mutant supers are treated with nothing but trust despite being a lot more dangerous, hell, the sentry killed TWO gods in one day, yet everybody loved him, the only time they get mistrust is when a villain deliberately tries to make them look bad. 3. Most mutant powers can be controlled, and if they can't they can be cured or handled, People with mental problems can usually take medication or therapy to handle their problems, mutants both have the cure, power dampeners, or easy ways to handle them, which is comparable to mentally ill people getting medication. If this doesn't work, they can always go to the nice house on Graymalkin Lane/nice building/island off the coast of San Fransisco to learn how to control their powers. 4. To some up my points: Only a Vocal Minority of mutants pose any threat. Mutants who do pose a risk should be treated like the non-mutants who pose a risk. If they cannot control their power they can have it handled/cured or seek training. Locking them up/beating the harmless ones up because of Magneto ripoffs: Bad.
 * Also another point that needs to be stretched. The Fantastic Four spend a number of there screen time fighting something they caused, and in the film the only 'heroics' they do is saving people from things that they themselves are directly responsible for. X-Men spend most of their time fighting to save a world that hates and fears them, and because they have so many members they often die doing it. Combine this with other points. Only a minority of mutants are dangerous, and over half of those are running around protecting people from things they shouldn't have to. The Fantastic Four are just as Dangerous, in fact Susan could probably KILL the most powerful mutant if she wants to, yet they fight to protect a world that loves them from problems they caused, all the while encouraging kids to buy their action figures.
 * Also, one hilarious thing to point out is, we've been debating the very same thing that they debate in the comics. It's highly possible this is Marvel's intention, to make people debate whether or not a Mutant Registration Act is really needed or if Mutants are a danger. This proves that both sides have valid points, but again we must stretch that the 'Mutants are dangerous' argument when you realize that almost all of the x-Men's enemies were turned villainous by humans being such ass holes to them.
 * Mr. Sinister. The Hellfire Club. The Sentinels. Stryker. None of them were bullied. If you mean the mutant enemies, then that's pretty much just Magneto who was "bullied", if that's what you call being a Sonderkommando, which does not actually have anything to do with his powers. Sabretooth is just plain nuts. Mystique is...damaged. And mutants will have superpowers (which might be dangerous) by definition. This isn't "moderate Muslims" vs "extremist Muslims"; a proper analogy would be if any--not every--Muslim might just randomly flip out and kill people at any time, which we know isn't the case. Are the hate crimes justified? No. Are a certain amount of fear and caution justified? I think so.
 * They never said bullied, they said being a-holes, and that was just one thing. Magneto's biggest way of converting confused mutants to his cause is to point out their treatment. And again, Not. All. Mutants. Actually. Have. Dangerous. Powers.
 * To interject: most non-mutant villains in the Marvel Universe gain their villainy through some fault of their own; they're mad scientists who build a machine/serum/invention and that causes some Phlebotinum-based mutation. It makes perfect sense to judge superhuman heroes differently from superhuman villains because the villains clearly fall into villainy by choice. Some do get uncontrollably exposed to some toxin/accident or whatever but for the most part, they were bad people (or at least reckless in not considering the consequences of their experiments) before they became villains. Mutants, on the other hand, aren't responsible for the mutant gene. There's no choice in becoming a dangerous or harmless mutant so it makes sense to judge most mutants the same since there's no rhyme or reason behind why one mutant gets green skin and water-breathing, while another mutant kills people just by touching them.
 * ^I don't think the tier system you describe would work because how dangerous a power is depends on how creatively you use it. For instance, take your hypothetical about a person who can see a few minutes into the future. A person could do a surprising amount of damage in just "a few minutes". You could use that power to track the security guards at a secret government facility in order to steal a deadly biological weapon. You could use it to play the stock market, possibly upsetting entire industries and leaving hundreds of people destitute. You could use it to murder someone by knowing the exact moment when they were alone, distracted, and someplace no one would hear them scream. Wars are won and lost in "a few minutes".
 * I agree that a tier system would work, probably because that's exactly how they catagorize mutants in the comics. I forgot the actual lists, but this is where the Omega level mutant classification comes from, it just doesn't come up often that other classes exist. However, as said before, some of the less stable mutants would likely refuse to get registered, and then we get a Civil War esque arc. As for mutants turning to villainy because of prejudice, while Magneto is the one most notable, there's also the number of Brotherhood members. And what about the single most dangerous mutant villain in the X-Books? Apocalypse was driven to hate humans because of the activity of Kang/Rama Tut, combined with, If memory serves, the negative reaction people gave to his strength and unusual skin. Another point is, as said before several times, mutants who are actually dangerous either by power, control, or mental state, are all the minority of mutants. As shown in one of the last runs before House of M (Grant Morrison's run maybe?) they have an entire subculture of mutants, all who have either no or heart powers. So they're no more reasonably concerned than leaving the bar when a muslim shows up. At most they should deal with mutants the same way they deal with Islamic extremism or Mentally Ill: If the mutant is powerless or weak they should be treated like anyone else, if they're dangerous in some way, proceed with caution or proscribe them some way to deal with them (Like send them to Xavier's school) or monitor them, if they're evil, deal with them like they do with terrorism: Send those capable of dealing with them (The X-Men) and such. As such, Hate crime: Wrong. Mistrusting them for nothing: Wrong. Mistrusting the ones who are dangerous, not because they can't help it but because they choose to be villainous: Right.
 * I think it also needs to be taken into account that powers and personality aren't always separate things. There is a mutant subculture, and mutants define themselves and each other by their powers. Hence the evolution of their super names from "codenames" to "mutant names" in the Marvel Universe. For good or worse, growing up with that identity and then possibly having taken away has got to be shattering to one's idea of self. Look at most of the mutants who have been depowered (Storm, Jubilee, the Decimated) even if they didn't like their powers, having them taken away would be like you or I having our nose chopped off. Yeah, it technically wouldn't kill you, but you'd miss it because it's a part of who you are. You also have the problem of a lot of mutants probably relying on their powers for their livelihood. We don't see much of non-X-Men activity from mutants but from what we do see a lot of mutants spend their teenage years honing their powers and then relying on that for the rest of their lives, forgoing secondary education in favor of honing their mutant training (Dazzler, Multiple Man, Wolfsbane, and a bunch of minor one-note characters, especially physical laborers, investigators, mercenaries, and law enforcement) in which case taking away their powers would be like chopping off the arms of a construction worker. But really, the fact of the matter is that no matter how dangerous a mutant is a "regular" super or even a human with a little bit of black market alien or supertech can be just as if not more dangerous in the Marvel Universe, meaning the debate as it stands is kind of moot as long as the X-Men live in a shared universe where Tony Stark and Reed Richards get a fair pass for the shit they pull regularly.
 * "Okay Cyclops could blow someone's head off. So could the owner of a shotgun." A better argument would be, Cyclops could blow someone's head off. So could Iron Man. As said, the argument stands pointless while this is in the same universe as hundreds, if not thousands, of non mutant Super Humans, who're each more dangerous than 90 percent of the mutant population. That's not going in to the amount of Anti-Mutant weapons they have, or other ways to handle them. In the Marvel Universe, they're practically as dangerous as a dog owner. You forget that, they do have ways to deal with Mutant powers that essentially make them nothing more than your average citizen.
 * With regard to Iron Man, the government could simply confiscate his armor if they believed he was a danger to the average citizen. He would still be Tony Stark; the "power" is essentially separate from the person. With mutants, you can't just "confiscate" their power. The "gun control" metaphor fits in some ways but not in others, because Cyclops is "born" with a gun attached to his arm and has to train his whole life to safety it. The only way to remove it for sure is to cut his eyes out, which is horribly debilitating and cruel. Cyke is probably not the best example because his personality and absolute control of shutting his eyes compensates for his Power Incontinence but we can't expect that every mutant with uncontrollable powers is going to have Cyke's level of obsessive-compulsive discipline.
 * Also, the tier system isn't meant to be perfect; it's only to separate out the mutants with dangerous, uncontrollable powers that, as I described in the OP, break the mutant/racism metaphor, while at the same time giving credit to mutants like Cyclops that at least try to compensate for their Power Incontinence with discipline and practice.
 * A lot of the arguments above fail to address one basic problem; powers when they first appear are generally uncontrollable. Sure, you can teach the kids later, but it takes at least hours and probably days before any experts can arrive. In that time the most horrible things could happen. A kid could suddenly develop laser eyes in the middle of a classroom because his grade was too low. A kid being teased by his older brother could suddenly develop poisonous skin, killing the brother instantly. A kid could be scared by the launch of an airplane and become a human rocket, explode, rip the plane apart with magnetic powers, or just phase through the bottom of that plane and fall to his death. Thanks to secondary mutations, this can actually still happen to mutants who fully mastered their powers. The most disturbing example is the kid from ultimate marvel with toxicity powers, killing the entire population of his hometown. Imagine if something like that happened in a major city. And, while large-scale deaths are rare, single deaths, wounds or just massive damage does not seem to be extraordinary. And with the numbers of mutants growing, the frequency of this sort of thing happening would only go up. As an added bonus: here are some common situations that could trigger powers and pre-established powers that could wound or even kill people in those situations:
 * getting in a fight: propelling yourself like a rocket, laser eyes, creating fire, creating electricity, super-strength, claws, poisonous skin, phasing if you get your hand stuck in his head by accident,
 * first kiss: fire-chin, poisonous skin, phasing if you get stuck in the other, creating electricity, creating fire and laser eyes.
 * First lay: all of the above, plus super-weight, growing bigger (if on top), growing smaller (if on bottom), super-strength, propelling yourself like a rocket and any physical changes that are too significant.
 * plane launches/landings (for people who are scared of them): super-weight, phasing, propelling yourself like a rocket, magnetism, weather control, fireworks, laser eyes, disrupting electronics, creating fire, growing bigger and creating electricity. Not as common as the others, but have more casualties per accident.
 * Which highlights the difference between if the X-Men were taking place in the real world versus a fictional 'verse. The writers are careful not to overdo the casualties of first-time flare ups but at the same time, the horror stories about manifesting powers are a trope in and of themselves in the X-books. That kind of goes into the OP; the X-Men do a good job of training mutants on how not to hurt people after their powers flare up but don't put much thought into how to proactively put a lid on mutant powers to prevent collateral damage. The technology does exist; there have been power-suppressing collars used in both the comics and the animated series. Unfortunately this is one of those ideas that has a strawman attached to it: since the people who design this kind of technology are always racist muggles out to enslave, kill or otherwise oppress mutants, the X-Men would be very hesitant to embrace it.
 * Which is part of the problem people have with the free-mutation argument. By all logic, there should be dozens of deaths or injured every year due to mutants gaining their powers and with a simple and fairly humane solution in the power-suppressing collars. However, the universe doesn't seem to follow its set-up, just to make everyone who wants to limit or control mutation in any way look like a bigot.
 * Thought: most comic book writers are liberals. Suppose the metaphor for the Mutant Registration Act was a national gun registration act (rather than the Nuremberg Laws). Most likely, all those evil right-wingers would be written as opposing the MRA. Another thought: suppose Professor X got his funding from the federal government, and the Xavier Institute was instead the Xavier Agency. By the rules of comic books, the X-Men would almost certainly be evil dangerous villains, and all fear of them would be justified. (Because somehow being afraid of the CIA is never a case of "fearing people because they're different".)
 * But, once again as has been said many times by a few people, the gun control idea doesn't work because not all powers are dangerous. Look at X2, when the mansion's roster is highlighted. We have a girl who can scream loud, a kid who can freeze beers, another who controls fire, a guy with metal skin, a girl who walks through walls, a kid who has a blue tongue, one who can change a TV channel and doesn't sleep, and, a few random kids who we don't see much of. Look at District X in the comics, most of them are only scaled covered or blue haired. Mutants with lame powers are more common than mutants with 'oh crap' powers. Forcing an Omega Level mutant to register makes sense, forcing a kid who can change his skin colour by will to is wrong. There's been many mutants who become X-Men with really bad powers, yet there's supposed to be, before M-Day messed it up, a million different mutants in the world. Theres at most 200 named X-Men and an equal number of mutant villains. Many of which, are lame. If mutants were so destructive that every mutant who's reaction to their first use is mass collateral damage, the X-Men would spend all of their time flying around and finding them. But they don't, only once every so often are they shown flying to Utah to deal with an Omega level mutant or one with similar level abilities, most of their time is used fighting whichever extremist the current story is dealing with. It can't be logically possible for the majority of mutants to be dangerous. If they never mentioned the exact number of mutants we could assume that most are powerful, but there's multi-millions of them, with less than a thousand of which have even been seen, never mind named, that only a percentage of are dangerous.
 * What about the simple ethical argument that it is wrong to use violence against someone for something that is not within their control?
 * It is debunked by a simple practical argument that, callous as it may sound, it doesn't really matter to people who got hurt, if the offender meant it or not.
 * A "simple practical argument" that unfortunately fails the simplest of legal tests, because in any legal system based on the Common Law and most others, intent matters. Indeed, under some circumstances the exact same action can qualify either as premeditated homicide, as manslaughter, or as an entirely legal accident, depending solely on the intent of the actor.
 * But what a lot of people seem to be missing is that, pre-M-Day, Mutants being powerful was an in-universe Vocal Minority. We see Cyclops blasting buildings and Magneto tearing apart bridges, and yes, that would be scary as hell to the common man. But does being grey skinned and able to detect other mutants seem all that dangerous, as with the mutant Caliban? Or being slightly bigger than average or have animal like abilities? Or even, my personal favourite, having butterfly wings? There was a canological slum for useless mutants with lame powers called District X. Mutants as a people aren't dangerous, high level mutants are, of which only builds/built up a tiny percentage of mutants. Yes, after House of M that doesn't work considering most mutants lost their powers, but look at what's left: Less than a hundred mutants spread across two-three factions, and a hell lot of depowered mutants who can't hurt a fly (except for the former students, who due to training will now be Badass Normal guys, but that's beside the point). So, to alliterate my points once more since some people seem to keep ignoring them, The mutant=Black/Gay metaphor is held up by the fact that Mutants as a whole aren't dangerous, just as black people as a whole don't carry guns or do drugs and gay people as a whole don't molest children or 'convert' others, and while each group does have members who do fit the stereotype of all powerful and dangerous/gun-totting drug dealers/child molesting converters, you shouldn't assume each member does so.
 * It still doesn't really work. Black people do not have a, say, 1 in 1000 chance(which seems pretty accurate considering the mutants we've seen) to have a deadly weapon they don't have any control over. Most people on the page seem to agree that its not the evil mutants who are the problem. Its the random mutants who simply don't have full control over their abilities. Chamber once destroyed a chunk of a building when someone tried to kiss him (somewhere in early Generation X). Imagine that happening if he lived in a flat apartment next to you. Remember that Storm, a very high-level mutant with excellent training still doesn't have full control over her powers, influencing the weather with her mood. The problem isn't the average mutant. The problem is that the exception can do a lot of damage and there may be nothing the exception can do about it. Omega-level mutants are rare, but there are more of them than one in a million. Imagine if the entire world became mutants, as is the current trend in the Marvel Universe. One single omega-level mutant without control of powers could kill thousands, maybe even millions. Gun control or racism really don't work as a metaphor. It's like you send every person in the world a random gift. These gifts can contain a wide variety of objects. They can be small toys, household machines, personal jetpacks, nice-looking shades, etc. . However, these gifts may also contain weather control machines, earthquake generators, dead-man-switched nuclear bombs, giant laser cannons, or miniguns. However, one can not open the gift without activating its contents, and it can be used infinitely afterwards. Everyone in the world receives these gifts, with equal chances of it being dangerous, no matter their state of mind. Does that honestly sound like a good idea to you?
 * No, it doesn't, but you seem to be overestimating the chances of Omega Level mutants. You claim that there's more than a one in a million chance of getting one, but while that is a very high statistic, there's only been about two hundred mutants shown in detail, with only five or six of them being Omega level (Most of whom got to that point with outside enhancement from a machine or cosmic entity). It's been stated a few times that there are millions or even billions of mutants (Pre-Decimation). The mutants we see are the mutants who Xavier or Magneto approach. Why do they approach them? Because these are the mutants who could actually hurt someone with their abilities. The other mutants are left alone because they don't want or need assistance and don't pose any risk to anyone, otherwise Xavier wouldn't just leave them to their own devices. Your random gift metephor only works if you assume that the 'good' stuff is just as likely to be given out as the 'other' stuff. How many mutants can control the weather? 1 (Storm). How many can control an entire force of nature? 2 (Storm in part, Bobby) How many can shape planets? 3 (Apocalypse, Jean, and Magneto). How many without assistance from a cosmic force of nature? 0. The most powerful of mutants is only such because he altered his DNA and biology with alien machinery, the only mutants who can shape a planet needed to alter themselves to do it with machines, drugs, or bonding with an alien force of nature. The only two 'true' Omega level mutants ever shown is the poster child of a Team Mom (and was once depowered) and a guy who has no idea how to use his god like power for anything more than making slides and bridges or performing Deus Ex Machina moves, and the powers in between 'useless and harmless' and 'god like' not only vary, but in their world that takes up less than two hundred, and ranges from healing factors and bag lady fingernails to concussive beams of varying usefulness. The only powers you really have a chance to get is being able to heal fast or having funky hair (or bigger than average boobs). So, when all these gifts get given out, when everyone has green/blue/silver/multi-coloured hair/skin with varying levels of density or being able to heal fast or whatever else you have, the ones who get 'good stuff' will need to learn how to use it for anything more than making quick getaways or developing new powers for the sake of plot, and the ones who are strong enough to do any damage? They'll be such a little amount of them that it would be outright discrimatory to assume that anyone, just because they're a mutant, is potentially that powerful. Yes, this isn't helped by the fact that the mutants shown tend to have cool powers, but we have a trope to describe that: Vocal Minority. My point is, we only see a small percentage of the mutant population, and these are the ones who are (possibly) dangerous. The ones we don't see are the ones who get attacked on the street by lynch mobs or slung abuse because they don't look normal and don't have any useful power to defend themself with.
 * How exactly do you 'regulate' mutants without setting the legal precedent that the civil rights of a given subset of the population can be taken away not because of what they've done, but because of what they might possibly do? And to specifically address the country where the majority of X-Men stories take place, the United States, the US Constitution specifically forbids depriving any citizen of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.  'Due process of law', in this context, means being found guilty of a violation of the law by a jury trial or equivalent legal procedure. It specifically does not mean 'Congress passed a law saying you have to be locked up or put on probation or whatever', because that is called a "bill of attainder", and its something else the Constitution explicitly forbids ever doing in that many words.
 * Furthermore, there is also a law saying that access to public places or equivalent treatment under the law cannot be denied on the basis of your race -- the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
 * For that matter, treating different groups of people with a different level of suspicion solely because of their race is called "racial profiling", and its something else nobody ever wants to set a precedent for making any more legal than it already is. In fact, most people think that its not illegal enough yet.
 * Furthermore, laws already exist on the books allowing for individual people to be confined for their own safety or the safety of the people around them, on a case-by-case basis and only to the minimum extent necessary. If a particular mutant had the power of farting nerve gas accidentally, for example, then it would be legal to require him to live in an airtight facility, or at least to wear some kind of anti-nerve-gas underwear. (Paging Reed Richards...) But that still would not make it right, or legal, to demand that all mutants be locked up in such facilities (or science underpants) because of the possibility one of them might end up farting nerve gas accidentally. It's the difference between "that guy shot that other guy, lock him up" and "I don't know which one of you might shoot that other guy later, so I'm locking you all up".  One of them is clearly justice, the other one is clearly totalitarian.
 * In conclusion, allowing mutants to have the same civil rights as ordinary people whenever possible can be very stressful and occasionally lead to tragedy, but it is the price of living in a free country.

The Roots of Anti-Mutant Racism
But your question wasn't just about anti-mutant racists, it was about all of the Marvel U being filled with reindeer. The most commonly given reasons (Pre-M-day) are thus
 * Question: Why are people so aggressive against mutants in general in the Marvel Universe? It seems suicidal. At least being aggressive against Muslims, Gays, or black people provides an easy target; making a mutant or superhero angry could result in your head getting blown off. It's like attacking a firearms convention. I don't read comics, but I thought of this after seeing the new X-Men movie, where the US and Russian governments decide to fire on Xavier's team. When dealing with people with unknown, extremely deadly powers, wouldn't a sensible person try not to make enemies?
 * Well, most mutants, pre M-Day, were easy targets, as beforehand there was millions of mutants with benign powers, as I and another person mentioned previously. The ones that are dangerous that get attacked are just idiots. Over in England, its common for Chavs to try and start fights with people they likely can't win against (including Cops or people way stronger than them) because, simply, they're idiots who think getting beaten up by a cop is a great way to look tough. As for the First Class moment, I guess it was a "OMG look at those people they break all laws of physics or logic that I have come to believe as fact! Kill them! Burn them to death with fiery explosions!"-type reaction. At the same time, its also meant to be portrayed as negative behavior, and as such is portrayed as logic breaking as possible to show you that what they do is wrong.
 * In addition, anti-mutant racists tend to be very Dangerously Genre Savvy about whether or not they're Bullying a Dragon. They're either equipped with Power Nullifiers or cybernetic enhancements to suppress mutant powers or their targets are easy ones as mentioned above. Also, I don't know if this was the case in the comics but in the animated series, they attacked humans who sympathized with mutants too. Obviously if they were genuinely concerned about dangerous and evil mutants, the Friends of Humanity and the Brotherhood of Mutants would duke it out in an epic Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny, wipe each other out and leave only the X-Men as the positive examples of mutants, or at least try to do something about evil ones.
 * 1) The fear that mutants will enslave or replace humans because they're genetically superior.
 * 2) Rev. Stryker and some other religiously-motivated enemies think mutants are demons or demon spawned.
 * 3) The overall anger/discontent with the collateral damage that mutant-on-mutant battles cause.
 * 4) Fears that mutancy can "spread", so if a mutant is in your neighborhood, he has to be killed before he irradiates you or your family, turning them into mutants.
 * This one actually seems to be true in the Marvel Universe.

Mr Sinister is an idiot

 * Cyclops spent his childhood in Sinister's orphanage, so it would be no problem for him to get Scott's DNA sample. He also had a DNA sample of Jean, as evidenced by Madelyn's creation. So the thing is: why wait till Scott & Jean make their babies and then send him a clone when she dies before it's accomplished? Wouldn't it be much easier to just clone Scott and Jean both several times, and closely observe their little super-powerful mutant kids in safety of his lab without anyone knowing about them? Besides, Conservation of Ninjitsu notwithstanding, a horde o them would have more chances to take out Apocalypse for good.
 * This is actually what he did in the Age of Apocalypse, which is where X-Man came from and which makes it even weirder.
 * But didn't X-Man rebel against him an refuse to work for him? Mister Sinister is supposed to know about the AoA universe which is why he ordered the Morlock Massacre since they were formed by Dark Beast, who escaped the AoA universe.
 * He knew the alternate time line existed, and that someone had obtained access to that timeline's version of his technology. That doesn't mean he knew any details. We also don't know when he became aware of it, just that it was some time before the massacre, so it could have been long after he'd set his 616 breeding experiments in place.

Omega Sentinels. Or rather the tech behind them
So how are mutants scary to normal humans anymore when there is technology out there that can make a normal human more powerful than 99% of the mutant population?
 * Because, Mutants are different to them, while Omega Sentinels are just a bunch of Machines.
 * Because if people weren't scared of mutants, Marvel couldn't keep hammering the "racism is bad, mmmkay?" Aesop.
 * Actually, that is why they don't use Omegas anymore. They got too destructive and then SHIELD shut down Operation: Zero Tolerance.
 * Omega Sentinels weren't created by humans for human benefit. They were made by a couple of robots programmed to kill mutants who just thought it was a good idea.

Considering that the X-Men are all about peace/coexistence with humans, why don't the X-Men reach out to more humans?

 * Most of their human allies are people like Moira McTaggert who conveniently help mutants but why do they ignore non-mutant superhumans like in Runaways? They'd have more credibility if the X-Mansion was explicitly open to all non-mutant superhumans who need help/training with their powers. I point this out because in Ultimate X-Men, Emma Frost's mutant academy allows all talented/gifted persons without regard to their origins.
 * They did once, it caused a riot and killed at least two students.
 * Keep in mind that most of them don't want to associate themselves with mutants and vice versa. Superpowered humans didn't want to get involved in the Mutant Registration Act and most mutants, specifically the X-Men, stayed the hell out of the Civil War. There were times in the comics where they tried to recruit the help of characters like Spider-Man (who is also an outcast) but they didn't want to get mixed up in mutant affairs.
 * They do, but Muggle Power kicks in and human supporting characters are the first to be killed off whenever a writer needs a Tonight Someone Dies issue. No codename and powers = no marketability = no reason to keep them alive.
 * Imho the problem is that the X-Men's intentions of peaceful coexistence and understanding do not match their actions. Yes they regularly save the lives of those who hate and fear them and provide a safe place for mutants to learn about their powers. But they also actively segregate themselves from the very society they want to coexist peacefully with and their main method for training new mutants in how to use their powers is through extensive combat training which only serves to make them fighters rather than peaceful neighbours. Anti-mutant prejudice, like all forms of prejudice, stems largely from fear and lack of understanding and by hiding themselves away and isolating themselves from society the x-men are only encouraging that fear and lack of understanding. After all from the general publics perspective the X-Men and their students spend their time hiding out at some privately owned mansion/island undergoing combat training and usually only show their faces in public when giant robots, space aliens, rogue mutants or something else that cause lots of property damage and civilian casualties occurs. As for the x-students the isolation can't be good for them. Yes their safe from the anti-mutant persecution but since the only people they have to interact with are other mutants all with similar experiences of being discriminated against both physically and verbally by ordinary humans it just encourages the idea that ordinary humans are a bunch of bigots who will never understand or accept them. Also getting the idea drummed into them that that they should only use their powers for good to protect mankind whilst well intentioned has strong potential to backfire by making them believe that humans are lesser beings for always needing mutants to rescue them and never being gracious enough to say thank you. Its a wonder the x-students don't all grow up to become mini Magnetos.
 * Not true, at all. It's not as if Xavier or Cyclops is building a slum or forcing mutants to use certain bathrooms. Yes, he opened up a home for mutants, but unlike Segregation, its completely voluntary. The Xavier Institute is a school and Utopia is more along the lines of an island retreat; nobody is forced to go. Secondly, the whole 'fighting' thing is for the same reason rape victims tend to take similar training: To defend themselves. A large number of X-Men show up after being attacked for their mutations, and they interact with other mutants (and by becoming superheroes get to meet friendly non-mutant faces or meet Moira/Nurse Anne/Dr Rao/the current pro-mutant human of the decade in order to show them not all mutants hate them), along with classes in ethics and such (taught by a former villain, but that's beside the point) which teach them how they should trust humans once they get to know them. There is plenty of mutants who attend Xavier's and believe humans are all bigots, and do become mini-Magnetos, but that's specifically treated as a negative thing. Its been shown a few times that when a student expresses similar opinions one of the other X-Men will encourage them to think differently.

How was Xavier's dream ever going to have worked? (Part 1)
Compare how things are now; mutants have suffered a Humiliation Conga: herded into concentration camps (Weapon-X), reduced to 198 and counting down, had even the depowered mutants get assassinated by anti-mutant activists, had their worst enemies come back from the grave to try and eradicate mutants once and for all. For the first time ever, things are no worse off for present-day mutants than in any of the dystopian alternate futures that they seemed to be heading to. Also, that was your thread, 'Warrior93', it says so in the history of this page that it was you who posted the link, and your exact name that wrote that particular post in the forum. No need to lie, but it was your thread.// And lastly, to basically answer all your questions: His dream will work the same way any dream of world peace will, by the discovery of self replicating gold and fainbows that you can actually walk on and all lead to Ireland, IE: Not ghonna happen. Again, those 40 years are only a decade to them, and they have made progress, they just prefer to show the X-Men whail on some robots. The 'point' of the X-Men was to essentially police mutants and keep peaceful negotiations with both sides. And lastly, they have gotten peace between them: Cyclops and the X-Men are now living peacefully on Utopia and America is no longer trying to kill them. 'Peace' is essentially when no one is fighting, Mutants and Humans are no longer trying to overthrow the other, are they? Behold the Heroic Age, the age in comics where they revert to being idealistic.
 * How was Xavier's dream ever going to have worked?
 * ...Do you really expect an answer for that? You might as well ask "How will world peace work?"
 * I kinda of do because Xavier has been talking about peace between humans and mutants for forty years now.
 * It's still kind of a loaded question. I don't think there's a "plan" for it, even in Xavier's head, because it's something with so many variables that have to be considered. Plus, those 40 years have consisted entirely of the "stop the lunatics on both sides from trying to wipe each other out," and if you can't get past that bit, the rest is going to be much more complicated.
 * I don't think it's ever supposed to work. Just think about all the Alternate Universes where mutants are enslaved, exterminated or ruling over the humans with an iron fist. There's no AU's out there where humans and mutants are just getting along . Think about that; with the unlimited possibilities in alternate universes, we don't have one single AU where humans and mutants get along. My thinking is that it goes back to the top point; as long as there's no realistic solution for keeping dangerous mutants from hurting innocent humans, Status Quo Is God will be in full effect. Of course, this doesn't apply to the movieverse which doesn't have to worry about chugging out additional films; X3 seems to suggest mutants have made great strides in human-mutant relations since they've got a big hairy beast working for The White House.
 * I think there has been at least one or two au's that shows humans and mutants living together in peace more or less otherwise what's the point of the X-Men?
 * Exiles presents a couple of Universes where regular humans and mutants get along.
 * That's the bottom line, really: It's an ongoing comic book, the story of which depends on the conflict between humans and mutants. As long as the comic book is ongoing, there isn't a chance in hell that there's going to be peace between humans and mutants. It's only the movies and AU's that do it because they have a finite end. Humanity will never truly accept mutants because then you don't have a story to sell.
 * That's why I don't really like the X-Men comics.
 * The point of it is the same as any civil right campaign, to protest for human-mutant peace. The reason they exist in their world is to show mutants they can use their powers for peace, and show humans that mutants are to be respected as heroes and not monsters. While the comics may never truly get a total peace thing, its the same for real life. How is Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's dream of civil rights ever going to work if you have racism coming from both sides? How is any civil rights movement going to work? The thing is, both the MU verse and this verse will always have racists and bigots, but we have to at least try. Plus, those '40 years' are only 40 years to us, to them, its more like 6.
 * That's what I dislike about the X-Men cause they've never shown in progress with mutants rights which one thread talked about and it's most likely 10-15 years they've been at it.
 * And it took African American's nearly two centuries to make the progress they have now and its still not there. And a lot of the time it comes down to the writers rather than the actual comics. Some writers who focus more on the Civil Rights movement of Mutants tend to do give them some development, they have had openly mutant musicians, models, and celebrities. In five to fifteen years of the Civil Rights movement if a black man wanted to become a model he'd be laughed at or even lynched. It took them years before they recruited black army soldiers or police officers yet they have just that with Mutants. Also, Mutants have the disability of Magneto, one of the most dangerous mutants, actually being against civil rights and for superiority. As for that thread, you mean the problems with the X-Men YOU said you have with it? You got a few ideas for the series, go apply for Marvel and work yourself up to head writer of the X-Men, no one's stopping you. I'm not saying you try to write better, I'm saying if you think you're ideas are good go and try writing, who knows, you may be seen as the best idea man for a while.
 * I agree with everything you've said but that wasn't my thread and has Magneto been that big of a threat to mutants? However I do wish they focused on the civil rights aspect even more in the comics especially because they have shown very little to no progress in that regard and the stuff that governments and people do to mutants and can get away with it is mindblowing. Because no matter how strained the metaphor gets the X-Men will always be discriminated against to the point that an elected official can openly proclaim he's going to "get rid of" a gazillion mutant children with nobody batting an eye. Imagine if a politician said "I want * insert ethnicity* to be destroyed" in real life that's what I don't like about it.
 * "And it took African American's nearly two centuries to make the progress they have now and its still not there." Except African Americans weren't actively campaigning for their rights for the entirety of those almost-200 years. Once the Civil Rights movement started, it picked up speed fairly quickly (if not as quickly as its supporters would have liked) and started making real tangible progress. But what real tangible progress has the Mutant Rights movement made? None, so far as I can tell. If anything things have gone backward.
 * Its gone backwards because African Americans didn't start blowing up bridges or hearding people into concentration camps and then suffer massive losses. Even there, not all mutants are campaigning for equal rights, which is why its so slow. And as said before, Many, many times, is that, in comic book time, their campaigns have only been going on for a few years, in which they've faced many things african americans didn't.
 * Strictly speaking, in terms of human-mutant relations, Charles Xavier used to be a really big deal, testifying before Congress and doing his part to be the "voice" for mutant rights to the world. Earlier in the series when they started bringing this metaphor out for the first time, you could compare how mutants were doing to how worse off they'd be if "Days of Future Past" came to be or in the X-Men Cartoon series 2-part ep "One Man's Worth", they showed that without Charles Xavier, the status quo would be an all-out war between humans and mutants. In that respect, you could appreciate Xavier's relevance in the human-mutant struggle.
 * That sucks so does that means humans and mutants will finally go to war?
 * Of course, the Humiliation Conga they're going through has ended, and The President has awarded Cyclops a medal or two for his leadership. Mutant's are on their way back up, and it looks like the hate they get is reducing, San Francisco, Canada, and Enland are all being depicted as having positive opinions on mutants (San Francisco because they're cool, Canada for the Super Human agents they can be used as, and England because they have such little super heroes they want what they can get). So like real Civil Rights movements, they go through hard times, but make their way up. Again, the only reason we don't see progress is because then they loose their main gimmick. Mutants and humans can only live as peacefully as human and other humans can, thats the only real problem, Humans Are Bastards. We honestly can't live peacefully with ourselves, and mutants and humans are, currently in the comics, living the same way two groups of humans would, attempting to live peacefully but are moderately concerned while members of both sides want a war. Xavier's 'dream' is just as likely to come into place as Martin Luther King's or any civil rights leader. X-Men: The End if I remember correctly shows the natural progression of the canon universe, and that in a few years, we'll have a Mutant President, so they will at least progress somewhat.//
 * So basically Magneto was right more or less because until now mutants were living in a world where they could get killed for just existing with almost next to no progress being made for mutant rights and the only reason why they're existing in somewhat peace because of M-Day which I really really really hated but none the less but basically Magneto was right and that mutants should've gone to war with the humans correct me if I'm wrong.
 * Er, no. How did, how did you get that from what I said? All House of M did was nearly start a war between machinemen and mutants. Had they still had high numbers, Civil War, Secret Invasion, and Dark Reign, would still of happened, which would still lead to moving to San Francisco and fighting Bastion, and the American President would still of given Cyclops a Medal and give mutants a better rep. In a sense you could say that had it not been for House of M Cyclops wouldn't of formed X-Force and as such they would probably stand less of a chance, but at the same time, they would have had a larger cast to fight Bastion. In actuality, before House of M, they had made some progress to Mutants, they had their own subculture. Magneto was wrong, they didn't need to go to war, since they still haven't gone to war with humans and they're doing great. At no point would war be beneficial to either side, it never is.

How was Xavier's dream ever going to have worked? (Part 2)

 * Somewhat I doubt that if M-day didn't happen that things would've happened the sameway entirely I think things would've gone a different course and who knows how the war would've ended.
 * Actually yes, even if House of M Civil War would still of happened, and so would Secret Invasion and Dark Reign, those are the things that lead to their move to Utopia, which is what led to Bastion's final attack. The only logical things that would be different would be X-Force being non-existent (As it was the low number of mutants which made Cyclops form them).
 * I agree that Secret Invasion might've still happened so would've Dark Reign but it would've happened in a very different way but with Civil War I believe it would've turned to a human-mutant war that would've nuke America. Also the reason why they went to San Fran and created Uptoia is because of M-Day case closed.
 * No it wouldn't, it was still a war between Tony and Steve. There was mutants on both sides, all that would be different would be different is the amount involved. And no, they wouldn't of 'Nuked America', because the leader of the anti-reg side IS F**K'N CAPTAIN AMERICA! Why would he even willingly nuke the country on his chest? And yes, they would still of moved to Utopia, they moved because of Norman Osborn. Dark Reign would still of happened and as such Cyclops would of decided to form his own country to sustain the Mutant population away from it. All House of M did was decrease their numbers, the Mutant Messiah may not have happened and they wouldn't of had the X-Mansion destroyed, but that was only one reason they moved. They also moved because the Super Registration Act would of forced them to move following the Fifty State Initiative. Not much would be different other than the number of mutants. Not everything has to result in a human-mutant war. Wars don't break out so easily. Remember, Civil War was a war between super humans and other superhumans. Regular humans weren't involved unless they had a reason to be. Mutants, as said, were involved on both sides, and, if M-Day didn't happen, the only difference would be bigger numbers involved on either side, the outcome would still be pretty much the same, one final battle which ends with Steve surrendering and getting shot for not being a nazi. That would lead to the 50 State init. which would lead to the X-Men finding a new home in San Fran, and lead to Secret Invasion, which would lead to Dark Reign, which would lead to Utopia. The only real difference would be Cyclops wouldn't have to lead them like an army and instead like a group of heroes.
 * The only reason the X-Men moved to Asteroid M was because of Proposition X and the mutant race low numbers which all happened because of m-day and the mutant messiah. Also when I said about America being nuked that was more of a metaphor of how destructive the war would've gotten than a literal example of nukes being used. Also I don't think it would've stayed a Steve and Tony war it would've quickly evolve into something much more dangerous and M-Day had a bigger impact than you would think. Also wars do happen that easily with Civil War being the perfect example you are right about it not being a human-mutant war. At first it would be like superhuman-mutant war then it would change into something else and the outcome would probably be very different.
 * No, it would still of been a matter of Tony being a Nazi and Steve fighting for his ideals. Both Cyclops, and Xavier know that a war is the last thing Mutants need, and would of avoided it. Like I said, Mutants were involved on both sides of Civil War. And No, Proposition X was just one reason for them moving, Norman and Dark Reign was the real reason, Cyclops says so on the news when he actually announces their move. Dark Reign was the reason they moved, Case Closed. House of M was a big deal, but all it meant was they were weak and needed a Messiah, if not for House Of M and M-Day they would still have to deal with some of the problems they faced, but without the Mutant Messiah storyline and Bastion would have lost a lot more quickly. House Of M was a bad thing, it did nothing Beneficial for Mutants but allow for story lines to focus on. The only difference it would have to civil war would be the amount, it would never be Mutants versus non mutants, since half the mutants were For the Act and the others were against it. I don't know how to say it more clearer than that. M-Day did nothing to effect the Civil War but decrease the number of mutants involved. They moved to Utopia because Norman was in charge and was a dick, not because they needed to. While It left them weaker, all it did was motivate Cyclops to take a more determined stand against Anti-Mutant sentiment and form X-Force to fight Bastion. Had it not have happened, the following would: Mutants would live normally, Civil War would start, mutants would take both sides, Steve would surrender after fighting for a long time, get shot, world would be depressing, Mutants would move to San Fran after being invited to after the 50 State Initiative, Skrulls would invade, Mutants would fight them off using Biological Warfare, Osborn would publicly kill the queen and look redeemed and heroic, Dark Reign would happen, an act similar to Proposition X would start since it was connected to Norman and his dark X-Men, Cyclops would move to Utopia, Bastion would strike, and be defeated because of the larger number of mutants, Vampires would attack, Cyke would outsmart them, and then we get to where we are now, only with bigger numbers. Civil War, other than them being involved, had nothing to do with mutants, but super humans in general, and both sides were led by Steve Rogers and Tony Stark. MUTANTS WOULD NOT EFFECT IT IN A SIGNIFICANT WAY. THEY WOULD ONLY PROVIDE MORE NUMBERS. HOUSE OF M ONLY MADE THEM SMALLER, MOST STORYLINES WOULD BE THE SAME, MINUS X-FORCE AND MESSIAH SAGA. Is that clearer now? Or do you want me to repeat the exact same thing a few more times?
 * Dude if M-Day never happened alot of things would've been very different ever heard of the butterfly effect or want for a nail so things would've been very different right from the get go and when were half of the mutants were for the registration act? So at the end of the day it appears that Magneto was right cause protecting the humans who for most part wanted them all dead or enslaved for a person's dream which may or may not come to pass is a bad idea. Cause if humans can't live together with one another in peace how can they with mutants. Also why is peace between them such a big deal if the mutants are going to replace them anyways?
 * Ahuh, do you realize how much you sound like Magneto, thought with less grammar? Not all humans wanted them dead, the point of protecting them is to show that Mutants shouldn't be feared And as Evolution goes, they're not guaranteed to replace humans. Humans evolved from monkeys, did they get replaced? No, they're still around. The point of the X-Men was to avoid both sides from being dicks to the other, since Peace would be needed for the same reason peace is needed between any two races: Because wars are bad. No, alright, M-Day would only change the plot of the X-Books, not the entire MU. Yes, there would be differences, but Utopia, Curse of the Mutants, and others would still be the same, but with a larger number. Remember, not all of those mutants were members of either team, most mutants were just civilians with weak to almost nonexistent powers. Take them away and, all you have left is the X-Men and other teams. Yes, lots of students lost their powers too, but so what? Most of the student body was interchangeable anyway. Most of the bigger names were still the same. The biggest difference, as said, was X-Force's existence, but for the most part, the stories would be the same.
 * When did I say that all humans wanted them dead and despite the X-Men protecting them they for most part still hate and fear them. Also a good amount of wars are a necessary evil they needs to be fought and in regards to the monkeys thing even though they are still are around humans are more or less rule over them after all it's a human's world. You never answered my question about what half of the mutants supports the act and I have to disagree with you on the M-Day if it didn't it would've affect more than just the X-titles and I don't think it would be the same but with larger numbers. Also what do you use to support the idea that most mutants were just civilians with weak to almost nonexistent powers. I do agree that a good amount or mutants have suckey but not to the degree you suggest and which teams are you talking about? Also the students would still be affected by the act regardless.
 * Here: "Magneto was right cause protecting the humans who for most part wanted them all dead or enslaved..." You said exactly that. Yes, a good amount of wars is against to most of it black and white, but a war between humans and mutants isn't needed, as neither side is evil, you have evils on both side, but collectively they're not that bad. And while it is a human world, We didn't make them become extinct, and we didn't necessarily replace them as just out grow them, they still do as they do peacefully, its just we do our own things. The half the mutants support them? Well from the top of my head Bishop, and that was Pre-Character Derailment, and others but I forget their names, I don't remember the exact number of people involved in the war or on either side, but yes, other than the mutants uninvolved they were split, just like every other hero. It would only effect the X-Books, because if you look, only the X-Books dealt with it. Spider-Man didn't do much about M-Day, neither did the Fantastic Four, only the X-Men really focused on it. Use to support the idea? Well, Grant's run on the series showed District X, a place filled with mutants who live like everyone else. The fact every time they mention how many mutants exist, thats considerably more than the X-Men or Magneto have on their teams and don't appear to try and recruit them. Cyther was originally ignored by Xavier because his power was so harmless it didn't matter. And the fact that, also shown in Grant's run, is that mutants have their own subculture, their own bands, places to live, dress sense, etc. Those mutants only have physical mutations or useless powers, which is why they weren't recruited by either side. Plus, common Sense. If a mutant with the power of Choir can be recruited, you have to imagine how weak you must be not to be recruited to any team. Other teams? X-Factor, Generation X, Brotherhood, Acolytes, Hellions, Young X-Men, New X-Men, Astonishing X-Men, any other team composed of mutants, etc. What I'm saying about how much will be effected is how much was effected. Any storyline based around the Event, namely Messiah Complex/War, second coming, etc. The other storylines, like Curse of the Mutants, Utopia, Dark Reign, Civil War, etc, would still focus on what they were focusing on.
 * I said most humans not all wanted to kill or enslave them and the war would be more light gray vs darker gary and when has Magneto ever wanted to genocide humanity Xorn doesn't count. As for the monkey example humans and monkeys don't exactly coexist in peace last time I checked and the only mutants that supported the act were Bishop, Deadpool, and the Lake Avengers all the others mutants hated the Act but they were busy with the whole sentinel thing so the mutants weren't really split on it. The X-Men really focused on M-Day but it affected the whole Marvel Universe as well X-Men only got most of the load because super heroes don't really help out mutants. Beside mutant town and a few cases here and there I would say that most mutants have non lame powers or at least half of them especially since there was 16 million mutants worldwide so not all of them would be on a team. Also I still say that if M-Day didn't happen things would've been different.
 * Uh, 1, Most wars are light grey/dark grey. World War One, neither side, allies or Axis, were exactly all that great, and it only broke out because one guy, on the allie's side, assassinated the wrong guy. World War Two, while the Nazis were a very dark shade of black, the American's and Soviets were both pretty bad and The British, while the lighrst, were still grey, one motivated by financial gain, one motivated by revenge, while the British were still an Empire and as such not that great either. Remember the Nukes? Mutants and humans would be the same, but as I said isn't at all needed as they're living in relative peace. As for monkeys, how are we not living in peace? Do monkeys ever attack us unprovoked? Do normal humans go out hunting primates? With the exception for Poachers and amoral suits who want to destroy jungles, we live pretty peacefully. Compare to humans and mutants, with the exception of groups like the Purifiers and Brotherhood, they live in peace, both doing their own things. And No, only some mutants expressed hate for it, Cyclops didn't want to get involved because, well, it was a humans' problem and they were, as you said, dealing with their own things. M-Day wasn't the only reason they didn't get involved, Genosha was only recently destroyed, the X-Men had unrelated problems as well, and Jean just died. Mutants were busy. If they hadn't been decimated, they, like everyone else, would have been split. Remember, not all mutants opposed the mutant registration act, some agreed to it and even enforced it (Freedom Force anyone?) You actually made no sense in the comment about 'The X-Men really focused on M-Day but it affected the whole marvel universe as well x-men only got most of the load because super heroes don't really help out mutants'. That is basically what I said, Only the X-Men focused on it because the others weren't involved, because, as you put it, super heroes don't help out mutants, and do you know why? Because IT DIDN'T FUCKING EFFECT THEM! As I have been telling you. Sorry for the F strike, but I've been repeating the same god damn things over and over and you still don't seem to get it. And Yes, The existence of Mutant town does suggest mutants with actually dangerous powers are limited. In the original stories, mutants usually had quite limited powers, which is why the metaphor for racism worked. If all these millions of people could all do dangerous things, then the metaphor breaks, its why its assumed that mutants with Omega level Powers are rare. The majority would have lame powers since the concept of mutants is random powers, and out of the list of possible super powers, actual useful ones, or at least ones that could actually be used offensively to the point of being a danger, are slim. I'm not saying all those mutants are weaker than Beak, but most likely, they wouldn't have dangerous powers, because then the X-Men would be spending all their time stopping the over 8 million dangerous mutants. Have they ever shown that most mutants are dangerous? No, in fact the majority of the X-Men's vast numbers are relatively weak by themselves (Namely, Nightcrawler and Shadowcat, two of the most well known characters, are actually mutants with Heart powers, its just they're awesome at using them in their own way). And, to finish it off: No, I'm not saying it wouldn't be different without M-Day, it would, but not to the level you suggest. The only things that would be different would be the things somehow connected to it. Civil War, Secret Invasion, Dark Reign, the biggest crossovers afterwords, were not directly connected to M-Day, and as such would still happen the way they did. After all, the 15 million mutants are world wide, and as such only the American ones would be even remotely affected by Civil War. Secret Invasion and Dark Reign had nothing to do with M-Day, and Utopia was because of Dark Reign. Even if the Mutant population was still in the billions, Norman Osborn was still planning to get rid of them during Dark Reign, and Cyclops would have moved to Utopia, and made the open invitation to all mutants. Now, please actually think about what I've just said, because I'm getting really tired of constantly going over the same stuff with you. I try to be nice, cynical, but a nice guy, however you're hard to talk to.
 * Humans and monkeys don't peacefully coexist as EQUALS when did most humans wanted to live in peace with mutants and only some mutants said they hated or liked it and those were only the main characters that said something either way I'm pretty sure that most mutants weren't for the act. Also the only reason Cyclops was neutral was because he felt that the mutants had already been through too much during the Decimation to take a stand either way and survive. Also the Freedom Force was the Brotherhood just working for the government so not the best example and what I meant was that the other superheroes never helped out mutants before regardless of M-Day or no M- Day. Also there is a difference between limited and lame and of course Omega's are rare they're supposed to be rare and define dangerous powers do you mean alpha and omega levels or what? Also a large amount mutants whose powers are above lame in any shape can still do a fair amount of damage regardless and even though it was 16 million worldwide there was probably a large amount in America. Also Civil War, Secret Invasion, Dark Reign, World War Hulk were remotely connected to M-Day even in a small way and way would Norman want to get rid of the mutants he never pegged me as the anti-mutant kind and Utopia isn't the best example of Xavier's dream of peaceful co-existence as equals it's more of the morlocks way?
 * No, but they live and let live, which is what's meant by coexisting peacefully. Even then, that's only if you believe mutants will replace humanity, which is repeatedly said as not the case. Only the extremists on either side think that, its specifically said by Xavier that mutants are just a new group of humanity trying to find their place in the world, namely, as heroes who should be treated equally. Freedom Force is a good example as they're mutants who supported registration, they're former villains, but as Freedom Force they were like the Pro side would be later. I know that's what you meant, but that's exactly the reason why they don't get involved is because regardless of when, mutants don't effect them, and after M-Day the only ones truly effected by it were mutants, some heroes who retained memories of it were a little messed up, but not nearly as badly as the mutants. Civil War and the resulting storylines had, and I will repeat this again and I hope you actually get this, NOTHING to do with M-Day and wouldn't of been effected, at least significantly to the point of influencing storylines. Without M-Day, CIVIL WAR AND FOLLOWING STORYLINES WOULD BE ALMOST EXACTLY THE SAME! Because, while by your logic it would have changed to mutants vs humans, the storyline wasn't focused on the mutants, and the writers wouldn't feature them, since they wanted the Pro side to be correct, despite the Mutant equivalent being presented as wrong. At any rate, the only evidence you can actually say is that you personally are sure most were against it. That doesn't mean they were, just you think they were. Considering heroes like Iron Man and Spidey were for the act (At least originally) despite it being clearly wrong, its not a stretch to assume mutants, like other heroes, would have been split. And M-Day was not the ONLY reason they were neutral, that was ONE of the reasons, some mutants regarded it as a humans' problem, and not there's. Just because you think most mutants were against it, does not mean they would be, it was a split between every superhero. Even if by logic they should be against it, they would have been Derailed to be for it because that's what the writers wanted. Yes, by simple logic the majority of mutants wouldn't be significantly dangerous, whenever it showed mutants who aren't members of any team they're usually just blue haired or green skinned, mutants usually only have one ability or change, unless they're lucky, and as such are more likely harmless. Remember, most of the actual X-Men and their villains have simple powers. Wings, big feet, at the time weak telekinesis and eye beams, jump high, power over luck, speed, extra fat, and teleportation. Those were the powers of most of the mutants that were shown in the early comics. Look at the list of super powers on the wiki, pick one at random, now imagine only having that one power. What is the chance its something good? A weak power is more likely to develop than either a strong or even remotely useful power, and as such a mutant is more likely to have a weak power. Plus, even then, thats if they even GET a super power and not a physical change which is more likely to happen. Mutants are more likely to be weak. Also, another way to think about that, if only 16 million mutants existed before M-Day, that means less than a million of them had something good, since there's less than a thousand useful powers. Two mutants having the same power is rare, so that doesn't effect it. It doesn't take a genius to realize that simple probability means most mutants will be relatively normal with only a small difference, such as horns or wings or different hair colours. Astonishing X-Men had a page which showed a long list of mutants with different powers, find one mutant with a power you think would be useful as a super hero. That is the kind your average mutant would have. And even if most mutants could do serious damage if they wanted to, were any of these mutants involved in anything big before M-Day? No, so why would they get involved in anything afterwords. WWH wasn't connected to M-Day, it was just the reason Hulk didn't beat Xavier to a pulp, the only difference it would have had was Hulk would have had to smash a few heads and would have taken Xavier, it wouldn't of effected the storyline that much to change its ending, which is what I'm trying to say. M-Day was its own storyline, and most of the ones it effected, literally 90 percent of those effected, had never been featured beforehand in a comic as they were just civilian mutants, not heroes, and as such not effected by the storylines since they FOCUSED ON THE HEROES. Lastly, yes, Norman is a bad guy, of course he'd be anti mutant, it wouldn't be surprising if he called Luke Cage the N-word and made insulting remarks about Northstar's sexuality. Its a rule about Complete Monsters to be anti-everything. Norman is a Sociopath, as such he's egotistical, which means he sees everything about himself as better than everyone else, so those with different features, he would see as inferior. Thats why some serial killers without any real reason to kill other than a sociopathic want to kill will target people of a certain type, because they decided they dislike people of those kind. Lastly, No, Utopia isn't the best attempt at Xavier's dream, but its a start, if M-Day had never happened, it wouldn't of been a big deal, just another foreign base they'd stay in until they decide to move back to the mansion, but in the Post M-Day world it is in, its a big step as he's united every mutant in the world, until they decide to move back to the mansion. So, to conclude, Equality is the same as live and let live, which is what mutants need. Mutants are not necessarily going to replace humanity. Decimation was but one of the reasons for mutants to stay out of it, and the biggest reason was so people wouldn't notice the similarities between this and the Mutant Registration act. Had they been involved, nothing would be different because Joey Que wanted the Pro side to win and the focus was on Steve and Tony having a divorce. And if they did, characters would have been written to be split Freedom Force were former villains, and were still an example of not all mutants being against the acts. The point about super heroes not being involved in mutants problems was my point all along, just looking at it from the opposite side. As powers are randomly selected, most mutants would be relatively normal in comparison to the X-Men. If not, they were still never involved in anything beforehand and as such wouldn't be noteworthy in the storylines. M-Day may be at least somewhat connected to those storylines, but not enough to significantly change the plot or outcome. Norman is a villain and as such racist. Utopia is just another base for them to stay in until they go back to the mansion, but is a step from M-Day since they're now united, but wouldn't need to be united had it not happen in the first place. And Yes, you may not mean to be annoying, but the fact every time I explain a point you don't seem to get it or you disagree with it, and you can't stop asking questions, to the point its getting annoying to keep answering them. Yes, I get you don't mean to, but it would help if you used more grammar instead of long sentences. Now, can someone take over because I'm getting tired of constantly answering every question.
 * The whole monkey thing is still not an example of PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE AS EQUALS live and let live is more of segregation or the Malcolm X or Morlocks way of thinking than Xavier/Martin Luther King dream. Cause even in the House of M the mutants let humans live and let live even though the humans were second class citizens but then again the monkeys do live in jungles. Also Magneto or his brotherhood have never advocated genociding the human race and Xavier and his X-Men were the ones who said that mutants will replace humans in a couple of generations if I'm not mistaken. Also Freedom Force were working for the government before Registration and they weren't with the government to advance peaceful coexistence or mutant rights they were just bad guys with government paychecks. Also I keep telling you that Civil War, Secret Invasion, World War Hulk, Dark Reign did have something to do with M-Day even if it was in a small way. I also think that the whole superheroes not really caring about mutants is more of an example of human-mutant segregation than human-mutant peaceful coexistence as equals. Also if M-Day didn't happen Civil War would've been very different and so would storylines following that. I said it would be mutant vs superhumans before it would evolved into something else and the only reason the storyline wasn't focused on mutants was because there wasn't that many left and how do you know the writers wouldn't have focused on them? Also only Mark Miller wanted the Pro side to look right the writers clearly had other ideas and why would mutants be split on the act I'm sure most of them would hate it. What other reasons the mutants would stay neutral cause why would they only regard it as a human problem and not there's and mutants aren't superheroes. Also can you give any reason why they would be for it and even if most mutants powers won't that dangerous a good amount of them can still do a good amount of damage and I've remembered a good amount of mutants that weren't on a team that still had a useful power. Also even if the mutants were split mutants fighting mutants will still cause a crap load of damage but most likely most of the mutants would hate the act and if the derailed them into likely I and many other fans would hate the writers of marvel even more so then we do now. I also would say that at least a couple thousand- 100 thousand would have something useful and the only reason mutants never got involved in something big was because something big never affected them. I think the Hulk would most likely would've killed most of the X-Men and their if Xavier voted yes if Xavier voted no hulk would've left them alone. Also the act doesn't affect just superheroes but everyone with powers depending on what day of the week it was. Also I didn't know that Norman did the things honestly I kinda of stop reading marvel since the skrulls and I have to agree with you on Norman. Also that's why I hate joey even more he illogical hates logic and good storytelling but that's my own personal axe to grind. I have to more or less agree with everything else you typed but what are the mutants going to do after they're numbers go up and it still looks like I'm right. Cause no matter what Xavier dream's would never really have worked in the less bit and people shouldn't be wasting their lives for something that is never going to work so at the end of the day no matter what the X-Men do mutants will still be treated like the lowest piece of crap. Sorry to cause you any headaches but how is my grammar that bad and be careful about what you say before you start a flame war and if m-day never happened why would the X-Men move to san fran?
 * I'm not saying its peaceful coexistence as equals, but it is peaceful coexistence. The reason its not equal is because intellectually we're not equal with apes, we're smarter. No, Magneto hasn't, I never said that, but other villains who're mutants have. No, Xavier has never said Mutants WILL replace humans, that's what the extremists think, Xavier merely thinks its an example of evolution. Yes, Freedom Force did advocate the Mutant Registration Act, its why they signed, so that they would be seen as heroes. Yes, its not the best example of mutants agreeing, but other than them there was, likely, mutants voting for it as well. Remember, not all mutants are 'proud' of their gifts, some want to be just like everyone else, and as such, would have the same opinion of humans.

Yes, you keep telling me they had something to do with it, but I keep telling you it didn't. Civil War would be the same because that's what the writers wanted, yes, some disagreed about who was right, but from the beginning, the childhood raping Quesada still said 'Pro side are right, anti are wrong, and keep the mutants out of it, X-Men have been having recycled versions of this story for years saying the opposite. M-Day was a reason, but the biggest reason was that Mutant Registration has for years been depicted as wrong, when they wanted SRA to be right. That is the reason the writers didn't want the X-Men involved, and used M-Day as an excuse plotwise. Yes, It was seen by Cyclops as a humans problem, because, if I remember, he referred to Genosha and how humanity didn't do shit about that being destroyed, despite more people dying then than the Incident to spark Civil War. There was multiple reasons. As for derailment, yeah, they would have, same as everyone else who supported the act were derailed into, what makes you think mutants would be different? As such, it would still be a split. Even if they were involved and all for one side, there was superheroes on both sides as well, so it would still be an even split. Marvel wanted an even number on each side, and they wouldn't let a thing like too many mutants get in the way. Secret Invasion was focusing on the heroes fighting the skrulls, not the civilians, and as such, if M-Day didn't happen only the super hero mutants like the X-Men would be involved, the civilian ones would stay out of the way. WWH Was about Hulk's revenge, if M-Day didn't happen, the only difference it would have had storywise would be more mutants to fight and he wouldn't of had a reason to spare Xavier. Yes, plotwise that would be different, but not to the point it would shift. Dark Reign, again, was about Norman taking control and everything going to hell.

Even with a higher number of mutants it would still be the same. As for mutants and powers, There's less than a thousand possible powers that would be good or dangerous. Mutants aren't meant to be uberly powerful or at all dangerous, just different, with some being dangerous. As I said, its been shown that most mutants are lame, just because you don't think so, doesn't mean so. As I said, probability dictates that mutants who are even remotely walking death machines are slim. Most mutants are physical mutations, and as such only as powerful as possible. Yeah, if they're lucky its enough to kill one guy before being stopped and/or killed. The only ones that really deserve to be feared are Omega level mutants, everyone else is usually tame. Name one time it showed a group of mutants not part of any team, side, or importance that was dangerous to the point of being feared. Also, the Racism metaphor would collapse if most mutants were dangerous. The point of the metaphor is that fearing all mutants is silly, because only some of them are powerful.

Hell, the original five when originally presented weren't exactly the cream of the crop. Cyclops could barely break a thing with his beams, Iceman could throw snowballs, Angel could fly, Beast could knock a few heads together but that was it, and Jean could barely lift a brick. The second group, only two at the time were fear worthy (Storm and Sunfire), and collectively, only 10 percent of the X-Men are actually dangerous to a large degree. Remember, their powers are designed with survival in mind, what's more likely to develop, green skin that provides minor protection, or the ability to control fire? The more powerful or dangerous the power, the more complex it would need to be, and getting a complex mutation is unlikely. As I've said now for at least four times, PROBABILITY LAWS DICTATE MUTANTS ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE LAME AND OR RELATIVELY NORMAL, AND AS SUCH SHOULDN'T BE FEARED TO THE EXTENT THEY ARE! There, I've explained why mutants are more likely to be weak, can you please just think it through? Yeah, even if their power is useful, it doesn't mean they're dangerous. Six arms is useful, but in most situations they're not exactly dangerous to the extent they're treated. I thank you for agreeing with some points, but you need to understand that even if Mutants hadn't been decimated, the following unconnected storylines wouldn't of been effected because, as i said, they weren't connected to it, and as such unaffected to the degree you seem to think. Civil War would have stayed the way it did because that's how it was intended, same with the other big crossovers. Yes, with the logic you're using it should have been different, but Civil War WASN'T THE MUTANTS WAR, IT WAS STEVE'S AND TONY'S.

As for a reason why mutants would be for it? The same other superheroes would, Because Quesada wanted them to- I mean, because they think its a way to get people to see them positive and make sure they don't get grouped with the ones breaking the law, or, to avoid being persecuted by the other members of the Pro side. I understand you stopping reading after the skrulls, since Grant Morrison ended his run (Actually, about the time he derailed Scott, Jean, Emma, and Magneto) the Marvel Universe as a whole has been shit. But What I'm trying to say as my main point is, no, M-Day didn't make it better for the Mutants, in fact things are still worse than ever. If you remember this is how this argument started. When their numbers go up, hopefully things will go back to the way it was before M-Day, and that way they can stat to progress. Why fight for the rights of mutants? Why bother if it will never work?

Well, the same reason why fight racism when it will always exist? Why try to cure cancer when it looks like they'll never be a single cure for all forms of cancer? Why try to perfect Space travel when it's not like going to work? Because, if you don't try then it will never work. Remember, since the beginning, Mutants have came a long way. At one point they were allowed to just be exterminated without a second thought, now, at least half of the general public have at least some positive opinion of them. Countries like Canada and England have been said to like mutants, mostly because they don't have many non-mutant supers and could use all they get. America will come around to mutants eventually, even if it takes a hundred of our years to do so. Sorry if I sounded insulting about the complaint about your grammar, but you don't use ',' symbols or capital letters half the time, so its hard to read. I apologize if it offends you, but the fact we've been debating for days, which has reduced my free time, makes it annoying. Its both not your fault or your direct cause, but the fact you keep ignoring my points by just saying things like 'I still don't think[whatever argument.] I apologize again if saying that offended you, and I do not wish to start a flame war, I just think you should work on your sentencing and use of capital letters as its hard to read. Now, Please can we just agree that if M-Day hadn't happened Civil War would still be about the reasons it was intended to, since that's what the writers wanted it for, Mutants, by law of probability, are more likely to be relatively normal as being remotely dangerous is less likely to happen, and the other resulting storylines after Civil War were not directly effected by M-Day to the extent the story would be different had it not happened.

Please lets just stop arguing so I don't have to keep saying the exact same things? Also, didn't notice this, the reason they would move to San Fran? 50 State Initiative, where every city was to have one super hero and every state has to have at least one team. One way or another the mansion would get blown up eventually, and New York in the Marvel Universe is filled with superheroes, while San Francisco has none. The X-Men were invited to live there by the mayor, since San Fran was actually pro mutant unlike everywhere else.
 * I didn't read your whole reply but at this point let's more or less agree to disagree and your spelling wasn't that good no offense and it was Emma that talked about Genosha for the record.
 * Humans didn't evolve from Monkeys, especially the not the modern monkeys you know today. Saying we branched off from a common ancestor is about as close to accurate as that analogy could hope to be, or maybe that we used to be more monkey like. Either way, if the "X-gene" is hereditary and provides a makes living easier, then you'd better believe mutants could replace humans. The whole separate species thing is crap anyway. Homo Superior is a term Magneto coined that happened to catch on in universe because it sounded nice. Humans and mutants can still produce fertile offspring and still regularly do.

How come Franklin Richards has never suffered because of being a mutant?

 * Because he's the son of Susan Storm. Would you mess with the son of one of the most powerful superhumans? Not just Susan, the entire FF go to battle with GALACTUS and come out perfectly fine. Its like asking why don't they try to take away Cyclops' visor or kill Aunt May, the one who does it is in for a serious world of hurt if they did.
 * Because in the comics mutants are feared and hated upon because of how powerful they are and here we have Franklin here he is one of the most powerful mutants in existence he's the odd mutant out I find that weird.
 * Because, as far as most know, he isn't a mutant, he's the son of two non mutant superheroes who also inherited powers. And, as I said, whose to say they don't fear him? Like I said, he's the son of two people who regularly punch out Cthulhus like they're common thugs. Its nothing to do with him personally, but they leave him alone because his parents are possibly the most powerful non-mutant super-couple in the Marvel Universe.
 * He is a mutant an omega level one at that and I find it weird that they never shown any fantastic racism ever directed at him in shape or form.
 * Are you reading what I'm saying? They don't do it because his parents are part of one of the most dangerous super hero groups. He doesn't get Fantastic Racism because you don't try to bully the child of a Badass like Susan, a genius like Reed, or the nephew of a Hot Head like Johnny or a big guy like Ben. Would you mess with someone like that? He doesn't get picked on because of who his family is.
 * I wasn't saying how come the Friends of Humanity haven't ever tried to kidnap or kill him but like how come none of the humans ever bash him in the press or when he's out in public how come humans never said bad things about or treat him differently for being a mutie. For example how come they've never shown Franklin getting service refused to him when he's in public for being a mutant. Or shown how Franklin relates and interacts with the mutant community and mutant plight. Also I'm still a little surprised that no anti-mutant hate group has still tried anything against him cause people have done stupider things in the Marvel Universe. Also it doesn't really matter who your family is fantastic racism should still affect you in someway after all mutants live in a world where they have next to no rights what so ever. They live in a world where they were enslaved for many years in an African island and when the humans found out there seemed to be no major reaction from them they live in a world where an elected official can openly proclaim he's going to "get rid of" a gazillion mutant children with nobody batting an eye.
 * And I know that, that's what I've been saying. No one, in the Marvel Universe, would want to even think of treating someone like Franklin differently if his non-mutant parents can kick the crap out of Galactus. I cannot say it any more clearer, his parents are powerful, his uncles are powerful, all are non-mutants and as far as the public knows, he's a non-mutant superhuman who is incredibly powerful himself. Family does matter, if said family have saved the universe many times, and if your dad can make a way to heaven and even Demands God bring back his friend and succeeds. Also, one other point, there's also a difference in public acceptance. If a violent mutant hater saw Squid Boy on the street, he wouldn't think twice before attacking him. But if he saw Cyclops or Beast, the former the known leader of every single mutant in the world and the latter a mutant icon with literal celebrity status, he wouldn't consider attacking them, unless he's stupid beyond Marvel Universe stupid. Same in real life, the Ku Klux Klan would never think of attacking Will Smith or Samuel L. Jackson as they're both celebrities and actually quite badass celebrities. Its a matter of knowing who he is, not knowing if he's actually a mutant or not, and knowing he's both famous and powerful by himself.
 * So most of the world doesn't know that Franklin is a mutant I wonder if his parents keep that knowledge secret to protect him?
 * That's the only answer you took? So it not being public knowledge that he's a mutant is believable, but not wanting to mess with the child of a man who can talk to god and a woman whose more powerful than the Hulk and is a known Mama Bear you can't wrap your head around.
 * It people don't know he is a mutant people would have no problem with him and some supervillains will still try to attack him after all idiots exist in great numbers in the Marvel Universe.
 * Villains have attacked Franklin, but his mother is a Mama Bear who would kill them.
 * True but if the public knew he was a mutant they might not attack but they would slander and do other non physical things to hurt him.
 * Why? While he's a mutant he's also known as the son of the Fantastic Four, and as such is a celebrity. Beast doesn't get slander on the streets due to being a celebrity as well as a super hero. Depending on the Writer sometimes the X-Men aren't treated nearly as badly as street mutants.
 * I thought Beast has been treated badly as well other celebrity mutants and they could slander him in the media and internet too.
 * Why? He may be a mutant but he's also the son of two popular non-mutant heroes with a great PR campaign. If they did, they would get flamed. Its possible that some do flame him, similarly to how Franky Boyle Made fun of Katie Price's disabled son. But it would be no more than jokes at his expense.
 * Oh okay thanks for explaining.
 * Also, he's never been shown hanging around with the X-Men or other dangerous mutants so the public probably figures if his powers were dangerous enough to fear, they'd know about it. Plus he has a genius-level daddy so if his powers ever got out of whack, he could fix them. Anti-mutant prejudice isn't totally universal; some mutants are well-known celebrities. The media focuses mostly on the X-Men and their rogue's gallery so if Franklin doesn't appear, no one bothers to ask about him.
 * I'm still surprised no anti-mutant hate groups have tried anything to him yet and does the public know he is a mutant?
 * Does anyone outside of the superhuman community know Franklin has powers. I don't think he has been outed as a superhuman let alone mutant.
 * How come no Pro-Mutant people have "outed" him as a mutant? It was one of the basics of the gay-rights campaigns of the eighties and nineties, find someone with gold-plated PR Value and "out" them as gay. Sure it sucked for the individual, but what it did for the cause was incredible, and The FF have the best PR and public perception in the Marvel-verse, having their son be publicly known as a mutant and them standing by him would be publicity and progress you just couldn't buy. Yeah, it would piss off Reed and Sue, but what have they done for the cause recently? The X-Men and pro-mutant factions have conceded the entire PR and press battlefield to their enemies and are letting dictate terminology and image, no wonder mutants are getting shafted. Get a PR firm guys, jeez does Hill & Knowlton, Max Clifford, or Saatchi and Saatchi not exist in the Marvel-verse?

What was the point of Operation Zero Tolerance and how was it legal?

 * To eradicate mutants when they were legally deemed a threat, and Anti-Mutants sentiment lead to it. You're the one with so much knowledge about mutant-human prejudice, how come you don't know?
 * Because most info that I read about it seemed to be very contradictory about what the operation does just like the SHRA in Civil War. So could the Operation go around killing or capturing any kind of mutants or just certain ones if it's the first how in GOD'S name is that legal.
 * Again, Marvel Universe, how is forcing people with super powers, no matter how powerful or even useful they are, to register to the government because of a law that hasn't even been passed yet.
 * Also whatever happened to the mutant registration act?
 * Still in place, but they ignore it because its not really enforced.
 * Oh okay, cause I always wondered what happened to it.

Why did Magneto try to take over the missile base and the country and many other things during the Silver Age?

 * Because, that's just what villains did during The Silver Age of Comic Books, they all wanted power, this was before they fleshed out who Magneto is. Stan Lee was a great writer, but X-Men wasn't his title, it was Spider-Man and the Fantastic Four.
 * Yeah your right I just find it a little bit jarring reading old Magneto stories when I'm thinking about how he has evolve no pun intended I just wish they would do some kind retcon regarding his earlier appearances.
 * Why? They don't need to, it won't effect current stories so their isn't really reason to.
 * I'm talking about when ever they do another prequel/flashback series they should just do that whenever they get around to it.
 * The only Prequel Flashback series I know about is First Class, and that didn't focus too much on him. As said, their isn't a reason to. I think Claremont might of had an explanation when he was writing, so look it up.
 * Well I did hear they were going to do a sequel to Magneto Testament and they could do it then.
 * But why? It doesn't really need explaining.
 * I still find it a little bit weird and contradictory to have current stories that have magneto as a fighter of mutant rights and older stories of Magneto as a crazed supervillain I definitely find it as an out of character moment.
 * Dude, Characterization Marches On. Apocalypse was once a crime lord and Norman once loved his son. You don't need any in-universe explanation, they have one out of universe: Its a Retcon.

Has anyone ever explained how Magneto failed to recognize Wanda and Pietro as his kids back when?
I know the meta-explanation is "It didn't occur to the writers yet" but canon-wise it seems a little odd, especially given how authors or artists like playing Generation Xerox with Erik/Magda and Pietro/Wanda, but physically-speaking. The art of young, post-Holocaust Erik and Magda in Testament bears a very strong resemblance to Pietro and Wanda; how did Magneto happen upon the twins and not go "Hey, these gypsy kids with mutant powers remind me of my gypsy wife who disappeared into this area of the world while pregnant, who looked a lot like the girl, and also her brother looks a lot like me in my younger years! And they're mutants, like my hypothetical kids might have been, because I am also a mutant!"
 * Because, they weren't originally his children, that was a Retcon. But canon-wise, he didn't know Magda was pregnant with his children and had no way to find out. When he came across them, he may have thought they looked like him and Magda, but they also had different last names to both him and Magda. Magneto didn't really have reason to think they were his beyond "They look like me and Magda, huh, interesting."

How come other superheroes never helped out with mutant rights?
Answered already with that message I sent you. They're all busy.
 * Superman Stays Out of Gotham

When and how were mutants existence revealed to the public?
So in the main Marvel Universe aka Earth 616 did Scott Summers reveal the existence of mutants to the public?
 * Does that even matter? It varies from universe to universe. In AoA it was Xavier's death. In films it was them stopping the Cuban Missile Crisis. In Evolution Magneto released the Sentinel prototype, forcing the X-Men to reveal themselves to stop it. In the main Marvel universe, I'm not too sure.
 * I was mainly curious and I was talking about the main marvel universe because for long periods of time people in the main Marvel Universe didn't know that mutants existed then all a sudden they do and we all know what happen when that cat got out of the bag.
 * I'm not sure if the Cuban Missile Crisis did it in the movie 'verse: the U.S. and Soviet militaries at least know for sure, but I have a feeling they may be holding the public unveiling back for the sequel. My favorite version, though, was the X-Men Evolution season 2 finale, with the X-Men forced into fighting a Sentinel in downtown New York while news helicopters gather and media pundits frantically debate what's going on. The newscasts and shots of people glued to their TV's felt very true to life.
 * No...

What are the mutants power rankings?

 * I don't think they ever actually explained the tier system in full. I guess you just have to make your own up.
 * System's been explained numerous times. If I remember correctly, there are Double Epsilon Mutations (Latent or physical mutations such as scales, excessive fur, etc), Alpha Mutations (Capable of physical damage, harming others), and Omega Mutations (Capable of world destruction; possibly limitless powers). I think there's one more between Alpha and Double Epsilon that I'm forgetting, though.
 * I think there are two that you forgot.

How did the public know the X-Men were called the X-Men before Xavier outed himself as a mutant?

 * Er, is there a possible answer for that? Well, I guess they overheard them call themselves the X-Men and it caught on.
 * I bit far-fetched but I'll go with it and why did Xavier call them the X-Men isn't that a bit prideful and weren't the X-Men a vigilante group?
 * No, he didn't name them the X-Men because of him, he named them that for, originally, because they were Xtraodinary. Later, it was retconned that all mutants have a mysterious X-Gene, which unlocks super powers. Technically, no, I'm actually pointing this out in a Spider-Man fanfic I'm writing, but a Vigilante is someone who deals out justice, as in Execute criminals. The X-Men don't do that unless they have to, such as when X-Force was formed, or when killing someone would avoid whatever bad future was going on. The X-Men mostly just punch faces and fire Optic beams to stop whatever mad plot the villains are planning. At most, that could be citizen's arrest, which is completely legal. If I dressed up as a wolf with spandex I could go out and punch a few mobsters in the face, tie them up, call the cops, and leave, it would be completely legal. Stupid and likely suicidal, but legal.
 * Um...no. "Vigilante" is defined as "a member of a self-appointed group of citizens who undertake law enforcement in their community without legal authority, typically because the legal agencies are thought to be inadequate." That's what the X-Men and all other non-government-sanctioned superheroes are.
 * Technically, yes, but that's general vigilantism. Its not like all vigilantes operate the same way and different forms vary in how they're treated. The kind of Vigilante that the general population treat them as is a Vigilante killer, who kill criminals. The type that non-government-sanctioned superheroes are, is actually not illegal. As I said, if someone performed a citizen's arrest, they don't get arrested themselves for Vigilantism. When a super hero fights crime, they thwart their plans and restrain them until the police show up, which, is a fantastical form of citizen's arrest. If they all did what The Punisher did, then yes, they would be committing crime and be an illegal vigilante, but most heroes just knock out the muggers or leave them tied up.
 * So why did Xavier create a vigilante group then?
 * As said, the X-Men aren't actually a vigilante group, they, at most, fight the crazies from both sides and defend the innocents. They don't usually fight street crime like the others. At most, they could be seen as a slightly militant civil rights movement who try to keep peace between the two sides. As for the reason on why he formed a slightly militant civil rights movement who try to keep peace between the two sides, is because, well, they need peace between both sides before anything can be done. Imagine in a school, there's these two people who always get into fights, and then there's this one kid who, when they fight, will pull one off of the other. Now apply that to the world. The second reason was, well, to give mutants a purpose in society. While the weaker ones, like Doug Ramsey or one of the other characters who seem like a joke, they could get a normal job in society, that wouldn't be too hard. Doug for example could get work in computers. But ones like Iceman, Cyclops, the really destructive ones, they need something to do that will prove they don't need to be feared. And what better use of destructive ice beams than blasting killer robots?
 * This all does raise some interesting points about the line between citizen's arrest, which is recognized in one form or another in most western countries, and vigilantism. In the U.S., at least, the person has to have witnessed the commission of a felony and use minimal force to detain the suspect until the police arrive, while a vigilante bypasses the police and takes the law into his own hands. The X-Men could argue that they're within their legal rights because they're using the "minimal force" necessary to detain suspects who can otherwise steamroll conventional police and military forces. Depending on the storyline and characters, though, they do cross back and forth across that line (Wolverine pretty much lives in "vigilante" country, Xavier and Emma have crossed it by meting out psychic damage as punishment, and so on). The Marvel superhero who could most fairly claim that his actions are just citizen's arrests is probably Spider-Man.
 * That's one of the reason's I don't tend to see the Super heroes as Vigilantes but rather just citizens doing what they can. How I see it, the only reason Spidey gets all this bad press is because others are likely to make fake Spidey costumes and commit crimes dressed like that (I mean, how many times has someone stole his identity and gone on crime sprees).
 * As for the X in "X-Men", X is often used to signify something new and unknown, like X-rays, an X factor and Planet X (both of which also got used by Marvel for X-titles - they really didn't let a single X pun get past them!), or to symbolize disenfranchisement, like Malcolm X. That was a widespread enough trend in The Sixties that people reading the first few issues could make the connection that the name "X-Men" suggests they're a mysterious group that's outside the system.
 * Additionally, Stan Lee's original name for the team was simply "The Mutants", which would have been Exactly What It Says on the Tin. He did try to show everyone exactly what they were about.

Why is Franklin Richards an omega level mutant?

 * Because he was born with omega level mutant powers, maybe? What's the question here?
 * Let me rephrase the question would Franklin be an omega level mutant or a mutant at all if his parents didn't get superpowers?
 * Probably not. You sure do ask a lot of questions. How I see it, the Fantastic Four's cosmic radiation caused them to develop a mutant X-Gene. Which explains how they all follow the same rules as mutants (All have one single power each, two if lucky, able to use it however they need, but can't truly turn it off, Genetic cause). Franklin likely inherited the same mutant gene from his parents, and by chance its an omega level power (Likely gets it from his mother, who is now established as one of the most powerful super beings in the world, as another troper mentioned above, and is likely, going by the logic that they got X-Gene's from the cosmic rays, an Omega level 'mutate' herself).
 * Though the full story's probably pretty convoluted at this point (Franklin has to be one of the most continually retconned characters out there, at least when it comes to his powers), The Other Wiki says that he is indeed a mutant in the X-gene sense, but his parents' powers caused his mutant abilities to start manifesting earlier than puberty. The implication seems to be that Franklin being a mutant and Reed and Sue having superpowers is just a coincidence, though there might be no in-universe way to really be sure (the above idea that the cosmic radiation unlocked the X-gene in his parents does make sense - it's a theory I've had for a lot of the Marvel radiation-based metahumans).
 * Because his parents both had dormant/latent/recessive x-genes. Most supers in the Marvel Universe actually have the x-gene, which is a result of Celestials tampering with the genetic code of early humans. Some times it activates on its own, which is where mutants come from. Sometimes it requires a trigger. This is why cosmic rays didn't give the Fantastic Four horrible, horrible cancer instead of super powers; they had the gene. It's also why Bruce Banner became the Hulk instead of dying from a gamma bomb, and why Peter Parker didn't just get a bad case of radiation poisoning. It's also established, largely through Franklin but also through some of Peter's hypothetical children in what if stories, that supers have considerably increased odds of producing mutant children compared to baseline humans.
 * One of the common explanations for mutant births in the Silver Age was that one or more of the mutant's parents had been exposed to radiation, which mutated their genes. For example, Charles Xavier's father worked at some kind of nuclear facility. The Fantastic Four were exposed to gamma rays as part of their origin story. Presumably, this caused a small-scale genetic mutation in Mr. Fantastic or the Invisible Woman, which either resulted in their son being born with an active x-gene, unlike other heroes who require a trigger.
 * Based on the House of M reality warp Franklin was born before his parents had the accident yet he was still a mutant (one of Emma Frost's students). Maybe the cosmic radiation gave him a secondary mutation that increased his innate abilities. In otherwords, he was already a mutant (maybe Alpha or Beta level) with normal human parents but his "mutate" parents made him Omega level.
 * Either that or he retained his powers as a residual effect from the previous reality.

Would the X-Men still exist if a war between humans and mutants break out?

 * Yes. That's a given. Maybe their numbers would be decimated but that's it.
 * So even if humans or mutants won the war the X-Men would still exist?
 * They kept fighting in Age of Apocalypse and Days of Future Past, so yes. It's not like a referee blows a whistle and the game's over the moment a war starts or one side defeats the other: as long as they're still alive they can keep fighting to make the world better. They'd just do it as fugitives.
 * When last I checked in neither of those timelines was the war ever officially over.
 * Apocalypse ruled North America. The Sentinels ruled North America. By what other definition do you consider a war to be "officially over"? What, do you think if it'd been "the world" instead "the U.S.", that would somehow convince the X-Men (who are based in the U.S. as it is) to lay down their arms? You seem to have a very weird idea about how time and history work: it's like you imagine there's some "game over" screen when a war's won or lost, and that's it, nobody gets another turn. People can keep fighting even when the war's been lost, which is how most of them got killed in DoFP and why they were wanted criminals in AoA. So yes, barring their actual deaths, most of the X-Men would keep fighting. They would not just say "oh, we failed, that's it, let's all go home" like you seem to think.
 * My definition of the mutant human war being over is when mutants or humans not robots rule the world and I think after the war has ended I see kinda of hard for the X-Men to advocate for peaceful coexist between mutants and humans. Also how do I have a weird idea of how time and history work and even people can keep fighting when a war is over it's usually over that why there has never been a second American civil war. I also find it hard to believe there would be another human-mutant war cause that war is practically WW 3 so once WW 3 happens you would hope it would be a good while before WW 4 happens. In the DOFP they were trying to send a x-man or woman back in time to prevent it from happening and in that timeline human weren't control the sentinels were and was there even a war? I just thought the humans unleashed the sentinels on the mutants and the sentinels took over America. As for the AOA Apocalypse only ruled America and his rule sucked for both humans and mutants cause of the whole survival of the fittest thing and I don't think there was a human-mutant war or if it was it was far from over until Blue Lips bites the dust as well in that timeline. The best example of mutants ruling the world after winning the mutant-human war would be the House of M by in either case regardless if humans or mutants won the war would the x-men still be fighting for peaceful coexistence?
 * Did toppling Saddam Hussein's government end the fighting in Iraq? Did overthrowing the Taliban government bring peace to Afghanistan? How about Israel and the Palestinians, did Israel winning the 6-Day War in 1967 put an end to their fighting over the West Bank? If you answer with "well those wars are still going on," then you're speaking in tautologies - if your definition of a war is that it only ends when all the fighting stops, then of course the X-Men would "stop fighting" when "the war ends," because by that definition, the war would only end once they're dead. Magneto and the X-Men fought to protect normal humans in the Age of Apocalypse. The X-Men mostly died fighting in Days of Future Past, and the handful who were still left alive kept fighting on their own. As for House of M, Wanda apparently couldn't make it work without having Xavier die before he could form the X-Men, so there you go. This isn't even a hypothetical question - it's been straight-up answered by the story.
 * Well thanks for your answer and so basically no matter which side won the war the x-men would still fight for peaceful coexistence how noble and how stupid.
 * No, did you read their comments? No one really wins a war, they just wait for everyone to either die, or surrender. In a war between humans and mutants, no one would win, because there's too many civilians on both sides. Compare this to the Autobot-Decepticon war. Both sides are equally powerful, and throughout the universes, both sides have been decimated to small resistance movements only to come back and do a lot of damage. When Optimus dies, the Autobots didn't surrender all at once, they kept fighting until a new prime was elected, and then wait until Optimus comes back. When Megatron got executed in the films, the Decepticons kept fighting until the Fallen's plan could be executed. In most versions, they only end when everyone on one side is completely killed or defects. War' do not, repeat, DO NOT just end because one side achieves its goal. As for the American Civil War never happening again, you realize that when the confederates were 'defeated', they branched out into groups to try and eradicate the blacks, in groups known as the Ku Klux Klan? When Germany was first defeated, they elected Adolf as their new leader and came back again, and could have killed ever non Aryan. When The Nazis were 'defeated', they branched out into white supremacist groups like the Neo Nazis. When a side 'loses', they just keep fighting until they 'win' again. The only war that was truly won, was the cold war, and that was because the Soviet Union collapsed, in other words, all died. Even there, America wasn't completely out of the clear, as most of the world then and to this day still do dislike them. The only way a mutant/whoever war would end if it started would be either peace negotiations (Such as how Matrix's war ended), death to the whole of one side (Such as how the Autobot/Decepticon war usually ends), or one side surrenders/backs down after the other uses enough intimidation to scare them down (The war that ended after a few minutes, the Indian Wars, and how Cyclops and the X-Men defeated the Vampires during Curse of the Mutants by revealing he's developed a way to instantly kill Dracula should he attack them). And no, it isn't stupid to keep fighting for peace, Its the same as any resistance movement. I have to say, I may be cynical, but you seem to be so black and white in your vision of wars, it comes off as pessimistic to the point of depressing.
 * To the OP: are you referring to a human-mutant war in the present day or if humans and mutants fought a war before the X-Men were formed?
 * The nazi's or the KKK were never big enough to start another so yes there would be small resistance groups but nothing that would be serious of a threat to the winning side. Also the reason I find them still fighting for peace after the war is over a little foolish is because if the humans win. The humans will basically try to wipe out most of the mutants and enslave the rest so at that point the x-men should go all brotherhood of mutants on the humans. If the mutants win the x-men and mutants all over the world will have full mutant rights and live in a mutant paradise. So beside trying to introduce laws to help humans why would it be a good idea for the X-Men to fight against the mutant regime unless it's Apocalypse who is calling the shots?
 * I was talking about a war in the present day something like that would be a great storyline for X-Men.
 * No, a war wouldn't be good, no matter how you look at it. The nazis and KKK not being big enough? Do you know how big they were? Do you have any idea how many White power groups exist? No, you don't, otherwise you'd know that, had they wanted to, they could start a war. But, as stupid as they are, they know a war is a bad idea. As for fighting for peace being foolish, I'm sorry, but that was the most dick-headish thing I've ever read. Fighting for peace is NEVER a foolish thing to do. Fighting for peace is the only non-foolish thing to fight for. Its not a matter of humans vs mutants, it would be a matter of bad humans vs bad mutants vs good humans and good mutants. Humanity doesn't all want to kill the mutants, and not all mutants want to fight. Its not so black and white. The reason it would be wrong to just sit back and let a mutant regime fight is because the X-Men are the ones who fight for rights, Magneto fights for supremacy. That isn't what they want. How do you not get this? Secondly, if a war did break out in the present, it would ruin the entire franchise. A war can only be used in a future and AU setting, if it happened in the main universe, we'd have something like Civil War: A terribly written story that ruined the comics for a lot of people. A small scale war, such as a single nation enslaving mutants and others fighting for liberation, that could work, but a world scale war between the two races would be a terrible idea.

What is a mutant, exactly?
What makes a mutant a "mutant"? While it would make sense if all "mutants" were freaky looking like Beast and Mystique or dangerous like Cyclops and the Scarlet Witch, but some "mutants" are kinda vague, like, for instance, Cypher, who can translate languages. If an omniglot is a mutant, why not people with heterochromia? Or red-heads? Where does the line stop?
 * Cerebro can tell the difference between humans and mutants.
 * A mutant, as in Homo Sapien Superior, is a person born with a mutated 'X-Gene' which causes unique developments. How I chose to think of it, as like a key to their genes. Say, someone is born with a gene that allows them to grow a tail, but, its inactive/'turned off', and unlike most genes, it doesn't become active at a certain age. This 'X-Gene' makes a hormone that activates this gene, causing them to develop powers. Similarly, people could be born with an X-Gene, but lack any special genes in need of activating. So, an X-Gene holder and a 'power gene' holder will have to share their CD collections, and create a baby with both, causing them to be a mutant with powers. Similarly, if someone is born with an X-Gene but no powers, if they come across a genetic mishap, such as say, a bite from a spider or being near a Gamma radiation wave, then they'll develop a 'power gene'. The X-Gene may also provide other benefits. As described once in the comics, all mutants are immune to HIV/AIDS, but its also possible they're immune to the effects of radiation (As First Class claimed, thought note that despite being in a nuclear reactor for a great amount of time, Erik has no negative side effects). Its also possible that the same gene comes in small variations, such as one that lacks the ability to control the amount of this power unlocking hormone, causing Power Incontinence. Bare in mind, that's my personal take on it, there's nothing in Cannon to say this, but its how I like to explain it. Take it how you will.
 * Speaking of the name "Homo Superior" what PR Genius came up with that name? If I were in the pro-mutant camp that'd be the first piece of terminology I'd be working on changing. Seriously, a name more likely to cause fractures between mutants and Homo-Sap would be hard to imagine. The Pro-Mutant factions have sucky PR guys working for them.
 * The guy who coined the term was Magneto. Why PR hasn't come up with an alternative is the question.
 * Funny, currently, or last I checked, they HAVE hired a PR specialist. However, Homo Superiour was coined by Magneto, and some writers tend to use it as the official term, leading to Xavier saying it despite previously disdaining it.
 * IIRC 'homo superior' has become the official genus designator for mutants in-setting, just as 'homo sapiens' is for human beings IRL. At this point Xavier is sorta stuck; he's a scientist, the scientific community has named it X, he calls it X.
 * I don't understand the whole mutant/human mutate distinction. Okay, I know mutants are born with their powers or they come out during puberty and human mutates received powers from an outside source but why are the offspring of both of these groups considered "mutants"?
 * The scientific definition of a mutant is 'a life form that possesses a genetic trait that was not inherited from either of its parents'. This was actually Lampshaded in the X-Men comics once when it was pointed out that Rachel Grey is technically not a mutant because her powers of telepathy and telekinesis were inherited from her mother. (It was then subverted when it was revealed that she also had the ability to project her astral self forward or backwards in time, a power her mother does not possess.)

One Man's Worth

 * Why did the timeline become so crappy after Fitz killed Xavier?
 * Same reason other comics have messed up timelines: Different writers combined with Comic book time causes problems, and as such cause the continuity to become messed up. As a friend explained, its why they stick to manga and series with only one writer, such as Bleach and Ultimate Spider-Man, since it leads to less problems.
 * Presumably, without a team of X-Men to stop them, all the bad mutants like Sabretooth and Avalanche ruined things for mutants everywhere. They even showed The Avengers fighting against mutants, so the humans still consider superhumans to be alright if they're not mutants. Also, Xavier has testified before Congress and presumably done other behind-the-scenes stuff to fight for mutant rights.

The Mutant Menance International

 * How did other nations treated mutants?
 * Well, differently. In Afganistan, I believe they were treated quite bad. England used them as super heroes and agents, since they don't get a lot of superheroes so they rely on mutants. Canada uses them as agents, and has them register with the government, thought without the supervillain mercenaries hunting them or the interdimensional prisons, just give them the option to. Mutants being hated and feared is mostly limited to America, but since the stories are almost all set in America, people usually assume its the same everywhere.
 * The Canadian government largely used mutants to make weapons and used Alpha and Omega Flight for the pretense of good intentions.
 * So have they ever shown how all the different continents like Africa, Australia, and etc treated their mutants?
 * Storm was worshiped as a Goddess in her native tribe, it'd be fair to assume others were/are as well.
 * Not that I know of.
 * Russia developed Sentinels and had a super-soldier program similar to Weapon-X that made Omega Red.
 * Genosha, the fake African country, went the South African route and created an Apartheid-like system of full mutant enslavement.
 * Well Genosha did become a mutant paradise for a little while but how do other African, Asian, and European countries treat their mutants?
 * Look, your questions are getting too general. This is for fridge logic, not your own curiosities.

Bishop's Life

 * How can Bishop's past or future be connected to M-Day?
 * Because it was meant to happen, or alternatively, Hope was always going to be a mutant messiah, whether or not M-Day would happen. Its possible she was always meant to be born, and the future was dependant on her life (IE, if she saved all mutants, Cable's timeline would come to pass, if she did whatever bad possibility, Bishop's would happen).

first superhero team

 * Was the X-Men the first superhero team to appear in the public if not who was?
 * No, a simple google search could tell you that. In Marvel, the first team was the Invaders, and after them the Fantastic Four.

Apocalypse
Apocalypse is easily one of the most powerful mutants in the world. In the Age of Apocalypse future where Xavier died before he could form the X-Men, Apoc took over most of the world. He could very easily be a Hero-Killer, so why is he so obsessed with working through his horsemen or the Clan Akkaba, i.e. people far less powerful than he and prone to defeat. With his powers, he could march onto the X-Mansion and Curb Stomp Battle the X-Men on their very best day. Plus he has shapeshifting powers, meaning he could sneak in as someone else or even just a new mutant like Xorn and then take them by surprise. Yet every time he's using his incredible powers, he's using them defensively. He seems to suffer from "Dark Lord Syndrome" where he has to sit back and operate through other agents when he could do whatever he wanted 10 times faster by doing it himself. This was particularly blatant in the cartoon series when just defeating his horesemen was enough to "demoralize" Apoc in his first appearance, convincing him to run when he could have taken on the X-Men. Then in "Time Fugitives Part 1", the X-Men stop his plan and he gets so pissed that he grows to 800 feet tall and kills them off, then in Part 2, they stop his plan again just like before but instead of killing them, he flees. So why does he feel the need to hold back in every battle to keep from killing the X-Men off?
 * All Apocalypse wanted to do is strengthen the population, which he viewed as being too weak. He just had some weird methods of doing so that lead him into conflict with everyone else. That was his original intention anyway, taking over the world is some kind of Character Exaggeration or derailment, he had ruled a country before and left it behind. The Horsemen, Dark Riders or other group of the week were named for symbolism and used to make his plans go more efficiently. The first time the horsemen were defeated in the comics he wasn't that upset because there was a schism in their ranks he thought would make the horsemen stronger.

How on Earth do the X-Men have secret identities?

 * They have code-names, but their costumes, with the exception of Cyclops, don't even cover their faces. How exactly are they trying to stay secret?
 * All mutants look the same to civilians?
 * Plus they all chill in the X-Mansion and don't really seem to have lives outside of it. Professor X's wealth covers all their expenses and they only go out in civilian clothes to shop or eat. Your point does make more sense when you think about how in the early days they used to be wanted fugitives and the press didn't know if they were heroes or villains; wouldn't it make sense that if they were on the news so much that a random shopkeeper would recognize them?

Schism's entire plot

 * Not complaining, but the way they did it was wrong. After years of finally learning to respect each other, Wolverine and Cyclops split apart the X-Men in order to boost sales, but the reason they broke apart was poorly picked. The event that makes Logan want to break apart? That Cyclops is willing to use teenagers. Now, the way he acts is as if Cyclops is sending groups of poorly trained 12 year olds out onto a Suicide mission. He isn't, he was doing the EXACT SAME THING THEY'VE BEEN DOING FOR YEARS! Since its conception, the X-Men has always been built of primarily teenagers forced into life threatening situations. The way Logan acts is as if Cyclops has been recruiting them for a private army, but each one was willing to join and all offered. He's angry at Cyclops for accepting help from teenagers in a situation where it was completely reasonable. Of all the reasons they could have chosen, why something no one has had a problem with for years? What about Logan reforming X-Force in secret? That would be something to start an argument. But no, Logan can't be wrong about a subject. Or, what about a more logical approach about Cyclops actually doing something wrong? Yeah, the students are a little young, but Cyclops was only a teenager when he was dodging sentinels. All of them were. Then the little bit with 'Jean was always afraid of you-Who do you think she'd be afraid of now?' seemed like they wanted to make it look like they still had issues, but their entire rapport since her death was both learning to accept the other. I can understand if he was doing something wrong, but it made Logan look like he was just looking for a reason to fall out with him.
 * They way I see it is that it wasn't just that, but rather the accumulation of a whole bunch of things Scott has done that Logan disagreed with. Like putting X-23 on a team of assassins right as she was starting to improve at not being a killing machine, deciding to lie to Steve Rogers, and protect Kid Omega, who to be honest just made Utopia unpopular with pretty much every other country in the world. And as to why Logan is so upset about letting the kids fight, This Tropers interpretation is that Logan is afraid that all mutants are going to become nothing more than soldiers, and feel even more distanced from normal humans. And a Schism may have happened even earlier if Nightcrawler hadn't died. He was about ready to call Scott out before his death.
 * Actually, not likely, since then everyone else found out shortly after, and once X-Force were done he disbanded them. There was still Wolverine, right when Scott was trying to organize a defense strategy against the Sentinel, he got into a fistfight with him, possibly endangering the very students he wanted to protect. As for protecting Kid Omega, wasn't that the same deal as Xavier taking in Rogue? They took in a mutant in need of protecting, even if at the time they didn't deserve it. Wasn't the entire point of Utopia to take in any and all mutants who needed protection? And, the X-23 thing, this I still don't get, Cyclops didn't force her to do it, and he even made it clear to Wolverine that they had the choice to do so or not. Logan actually called X-23 out on joining it as well, but decided that its her life and her choice. I can see why he'd be upset with him over it, but the exact level of what he went through to do it (Forming his own X-Men, reopening Xavier's school, and acting as if Cyclops was becoming a super villain or something and making a big deal how Jean would be disgusted in him) seemed like a little too extreme. And, as for them all becoming soldiers, when did he ever say that? That's an interpretation, not an explanation. There was nothing to suggest they were all becoming soldiers (Training them to defend themselves and protect their home, yes, but not the same as soldiers) or that Logan was afraid of this happening.

Wolverine's amnesia

 * How is it that Wolverine gets amnesia by bullet to the brain in Origins, but in 2 nothing happens?
 * Because that was a specially made Adamantium bullet which could penetrate the metal laced into his skull. In X2 the bullet he gets hit with just flattens against his skull and gets pushed out without ever reaching his brain.