 |
|
|
|
| All Discrimination Laws Should Be Abolished. |
| People should have a right to discriminate against whoever they want. Besides, they're impossible to enforce properly because discrimination is is the intent of the action, which is impossible to prove. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The argument seems to come down to how much freedom do we, as individuals, really have? Are we
"free enough" to think bad thoughts, think hateful thoughts, discriminate irrationally, etc.
Certainly, we are not free enough to yell "fire" in an auditorium when there isn't a fire. The
other side of the question is how much power do you want the government to have to tell you what to
think and what to do? The right balance is always a difficult one to achieve by our lawmakers.
When we think or do bad things, the effects of these choices are always much more consequential than
we realize, whether it is in public or private. Is racial discrimination bad? The answer is yes.
Is pornography bad? The answer is yes. Is sexual promiscuity bad? The answer is yes. These and
many more issues like them, do create bad consequences, much more than we realize. Many hold on
strongly to some of these freedoms to do bad things, because freedom means to be free to do some bad
things as well as to do good things. I tend to come down more libertarian on these issues, because
loss of freedoms is also a bad thing, with its own negative consequences that we don't fully realize
or appreciate. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
We should trust people to discriminate wisely, discrimination is a natural behaviour and is very
often necessary, obviously if you're down to two employees you have to use some form of
discrimination to pick one.
It is often the struggling businesses that have to discriminate in terms of cost effectiveness, and
they should definitely be allowed to do this. If they are choosing between a young man and a young
woman, it should be acceptable to choose the man as the woman might get pregnant and this would
cause the business a lot of money - maternity leave, training and paying somebody else while she is
gone. A woman is statistically more likely to need time of work for these type of things, so the
business is just being cost effective.
Big businesses would not need to discriminate as things like maternity leave are more than
affordable to them. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Consider this scenario:
A local store that has always done well suddenly loses several customers after hiring a new
employee. The store surveys several of the customers who left to find out what drove them away from
the store. The majority of those surveyed said the reason they quit going to the store was because
of the race of the new employee. The store then fires the employee to salvage the business and the
employee files a discrimination lawsuit.
Should the store be forced to accept an employee who would drive them to bankruptcy just because the
racism of the customers was the ultimate reason for the drop in sales?
Should the store be allowed to fire the employee but be forced to compensate them for wages they
would have earned, even if the store cant afford it?
Keep in mind that if the store goes bankrupt the employee doesn't have a job there anyway.
This is the stupidity of trying to regulate discrimination. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
If this was allowed, there would be a group of people that would try to re-enslave the blacks.
Since slavery is an extreme form of discrimination, it would have to be allowed. You would wind up
with a small elite who no one touches--blue eyed blonds. Everyone else would be everyone else's
target. Civil war would erupt.
We have not changed one bit. That is why we have laws. All of us are the same primitive haters we
have always been. We are all a law away from trying to enslave someone else. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
If this was to be enforced, there would be a great number of negative consequences.
I think racism would become more prevalent, as people who would discriminate on the basis of race
would do so.
Discrimination is very detrimental to a meritocratic economy. This is because the most capable
people will not be put into the right job rather the most acceptable according to the employers
prejudice.
Discrimination will also become prevalent in schools, government institutions, hospitals and other
such areas not forgetting recreational institutions.
This will be a cause of great social alienation, cultural strain and great resentment by those
discriminated against. As grenache says it would open a pandoras box. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
First of all it is intrinsic to human nature and necessary to daily life to discriminate. When you
chose bacon over sausage for breakfast you are discriminating. It is however in certain situations
for someone in authority whether as an employer or police officer or judge illegal to discriminate
based on certain factors. The truth is this is legally enforced very rarely but largely works as a
statement that a majority of society does not approve of this behavior. It represents an
infinitesimal fraction of the legal proceedings brought to court. It is most effective in the arena
of the social contract; i.e. Not in the fired employee who seeks legal retribution but in the wife
of a customer who tells her husband that she finds it unacceptable to stop frequenting the shop
because of his ridiculous beliefs, or the shop keeper who does not succumb to pressure and stands
firm in his or her belief that a person should be judged on their performance. So yes it is a law
and it has its uses as a law but it is ultimately up to you and I to enforce it. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
That's a bold and provocative statement and it does make a person think. My problem with openly
accepting your proposal is lack of laws against it means freedom to collect into groups to
systematically apply discrimination to social agendas - such as for another holocaust. It opens a
Pandora's box.
The alternative I propose is you keep the laws but ensure freedom of expression is allowed so even
those with prejudice and discrimination have an outlet for how they feel. They have every right to
vent their bile, they just don't have a right to refuse to feed someone in their restaurant just
because they're a different skin color. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 For and Against Recent Activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20 Oct 2008 00:15
Sign In
