Does rejecting a draw offer in equal position a sign of disrespect for opponents

A 'dead drawn position' (IMO), is a position you abslotely KNOW how to draw with your eyes closed. In such a position it's ok to offer, no matter what the ratings. Just dont mess it up, lol.

I don't think it is disrespectful to refuse a draw simply because the material is equal.  That just means that both sides have equal prospects of winning or losing -- not that a draw is inevitable.  I do think it is somewhat disrespectful to refuse a draw when it is clear that forced draw (e.g., by 3-fold repetition) is available to the person offering the draw.  That implies that you do not believe that your opponent is smart enough to recognize the forced draw.

What is extremely disrespectful is offering a draw in lost position.  I have experienced that several times in USCF tournaments with young kids as my opponents.  Typically, they are losing terribly (e.g., down a queen) and offer me a draw, as if I would be so stupid as not to realize that I am winning.  In one case, I had mate in 2, and the other player offered me a draw.  At first, I thought he was resigning.  When it became apparent that he was offering a draw, I actually laughed out loud!

Grandmasters are probably as egotistical as the next person.As far as the question raised by the OP is concerned,I completely disagree with the OP's position.I assume the OP is referring to well known endgame positions,in which case refusing a draw offer may be less of a sign of disrespect and more of a sign of ignorance or stupidity.

I disagree. Having an over-inflated ego is one of the prerequisites to becoming a grandmaster. Not the only one, of course, but it's nearly impossible to reach GM without it.

I actually think it's disrespectful to decline a draw if you've got your opponent in perp check (before three-fold repitition, happened to me yesterday) or if you're in a forced stalemate, which of course is very rare. Other than that, I guess it's not too disrespectful, depending on the situation.

A) I dont see the analogy you are making. It makes little or no sense. 

B) This might , in some part be due to the fact that your point, also, makes no sense. 

C) You do not play based on your rating, you are mixing up correlation with causation. Your RATING is caused by your play, not the other way around. If someone were to follow your advice they would never get a better rating because they would always give their higher rated opponents an advantage. 

D) Respect is earned. If a player deserves that kind of respect and doesnt get it, he or she can easily play the game out demonstrating that they deserve that kind of respect. 

How is that a sign of disrespect? I don't see how embarrassing it would be to offer a draw, then lose. When he offered the draw, the position was different.

How can you offend someone by offering a draw? Did he swear at him during the process?

According to that logic, if your opponent offers you a draw after an equal opening, it's disrespectful to decline the draw?

That's true, but when Naka offered a draw he had to have thought the position was a draw. When he loses it's like Aronian proved him wrong. True, the game may have been a draw with perfect play, but I can see how it can be embaressing.

Chess is like a battle field. During war, is it disrespectful to shoot your enemy?

I usually offer draws when I think I'm losing...total chancer...so 'no'

This is correct, chess is war. You dont ask your opponent to negotiate in war then complain that he or she is being unfair. No one would take that complaint seriously. If you offer some negotiation in war it because you believe you have a logistical advantage, which will be realized if your offer is refused. THEN everyone respects you. That's why they call it a Peacemaker

.22 isn't drawn. Sometimes a position is objectively drawn but harder to play for one side. Aronian said that he thought he was better so he played on. I don't know why you would think it's disrespectful.

Also since Nakamura ended up losing it's clear that position wasn't dead. Aronian was right to play on.

Chess is like a battlefield? In what alernative reality?

it isn't a sign of disrespect. play the board not the opponent.

if you think you may have a change of winning the position you should play on regardless who your opponent is.

he may have seen an opportunity or some advantage.

we should instead salute him for not taking an easy day at the office.

Exactly correct! I wouldn't dare offer a draw unless I was 100% confident in two things: first, that it was a drawn position, and second, that I wouldn't screw it up and lose the game. This last one precludes me from offering many draws. 

I guess this is the crowd that also hates Tampa Bay for blitzing Eli Manning in  a Victory formation, hates college football teams for running up scores and hates people who check with the nuts ... etc. 

I'm confused, what are you saying? that the posters here don't want people to win and want people to take the draw? if thats what you're saying it seems to me the opposite, everyone thinks its okay for him to play on.

if you're saying the opposite, that everyone here thinks that he should of taken the draw, how is that at all like college football teams running up the score? or like checking when you know you have the best cards (which is a really great strategy when you are playing against certain people)?

Yeah, an engine evaluation has nothing to do with how drawn or what kind of chances there are.  In insane Najdorfs or KID positions it can say 0.00.  In easily drawn endgames it can claim a few pawns of advantage and everything else in between.