It's not about driving an automatic per se, it's about only knowing how to drive an automatic. Someone who only knows how to drive automatics is an inferior driver because that person does not have the feel for modulating traction that you get from learning how to engage a clutch. Looking at it in a different way:
manual driver can drive {manual transmission vehicles, automatic transmission vehicles}
automatic driver can drive {automatic transmission vehicles}
{manual transmission vehicles, automatic transmission vehicles} > {automatic transmission vehicles}
therefore manual driver > automatic driver
When this is examined in *reality* (and not in "logical proof" format), you'll see that this is TOTALLY not true.
An example would be my town. We have lots of teenagers with manual shift vehicles, either -3 generation Honda Civic or a GM J-body of some sort. And ask anyone above the age of 25 who lives in my town, how do those teens drive?
"Absolutely HORRIBLE and a complete nuisance on the road" is what you'll get in response. Other than these 17 year old wannabe boy racers, we don't have too many manual shift drivers in my neighborhood... so I'll go out on a limb and say that the average manual driver around here is INCREDIBLY inferior to the average automatic driver, and thus I have completely disproven your "logical proof", Mr. PhD.
EDIT:
I apologize for posting this message. I was going through the thread sequentially and did not yet see the message from wing requesting that the auto/manual argument be stopped. Sorry!
