• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discrimination?

What's More Important - the "Right" to Discriminate, or Freedom From Discrimination?


  • Total voters
    93
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

No. The state is not enforcing the hate speech of the WBC. Protecting someone's freedom of speech is not an endorcement (nor enforcement) of anything they might be saying. It's an enforcement of their natural right to speak their mind.

I agree that the primary task and goal is the defense and enforcement of the discriminating individual's rights, which causes as a natural result the defense and enforcement of actions and speech that are socially improper. These are actions and speech that should never be illegal because to do so would indeed violate freedoms and rights. Endorsement and enforcement are not the same. Thus we can enforce the right to something (discrimination, albeit indirectly) without endorsing it.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati


Discrimination is what I do when I choose to date someone who's smart instead of dumb, attractive instead of ugly. I'm also discriminating when I refuse service to someone who's being an asshole. The company I work for is discriminating when they choose to hire (or fire) someone based on their personality. Not all discrimination is wrong, or illegal.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Discrimination is what I do when I choose to date someone who's smart instead of dumb, attractive instead of ugly. I'm also discriminating when I refuse service to someone who's being an asshole. The company I work for is discriminating when they choose to hire (or fire) someone based on their personality. Not all discrimination is wrong, or illegal.

No discrimination or any action for that matter is illegal until it is written into law as such. To use the existence of something in law as the support of it being law is simply circular reasoning. There are only two types of discrimination that I can think of that should be allowed the government; citizen vs non-citizen; and ability to consent (usually accomplished by arbitrary age laws). Otherwise the government should have NO laws rules or anything else that even references age, gender. orientation, race, etc. Maybe census numbers but that's about it. Individual citizens, however, are not of the people, by the people and for the people. This is why they have rights that the government is required to protect, even if the actions performed under those rights are disgusting and repulsive on a social level.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Discrimination is what I do when I choose to date someone who's smart instead of dumb, attractive instead of ugly. I'm also discriminating when I refuse service to someone who's being an asshole. The company I work for is discriminating when they choose to hire (or fire) someone based on their personality. Not all discrimination is wrong, or illegal.

But your comparison fails in that in your examples above, you're discriminating against individuals due to something about that particular individual...and that's a far cry from discriminating against someone because of the color of the skin that they were born with.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

But your comparison fails in that in your examples above, you're discriminating against individuals due to something about that particular individual...and that's a far cry from discriminating against someone because of the color of the skin that they were born with.

That was really my point in post #2274. They are different, and should not be treated as the same. The term "discrimination" also describes many perfectly acceptable acts.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

That was really my point in post #2274. They are different, and should not be treated as the same. The term "discrimination" also describes many perfectly acceptable acts.

That's why we have to worry about context. Almost all of the time in this forum, when we speak of discrimination, we're speaking of discrimination against groups and not individuals, and I expected that you understand that.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

That's why we have to worry about context. Almost all of the time in this forum, when we speak of discrimination, we're speaking of discrimination against groups and not individuals, and I expected that you understand that.

I did. Discrimination against stupid people is still discrimination against a group of people. Ugly people, assholes, and antisocial people are all groups of people whom I believe can justifiably be discriminated against, in many circumstances. I would be against most any attempt by government to provide those groups of people (among others) with some kind of special status that protected them from discrimination from employment, for example.

I stand by my position that not all discrimination is bad. The thread title and opening post were poorly phrased.
 
Last edited:
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

No discrimination or any action for that matter is illegal until it is written into law as such. To use the existence of something in law as the support of it being law is simply circular reasoning.

In that case, not all discrimination should be illegal. I have already said not all discrimination is wrong.

There are only two types of discrimination that I can think of that should be allowed the government; citizen vs non-citizen; and ability to consent (usually accomplished by arbitrary age laws). Otherwise the government should have NO laws rules or anything else that even references age, gender. orientation, race, etc. Maybe census numbers but that's about it.

In the event of war, the government would draft men but not women. Also, those men would be of certain age and physical capability. Do you believe that is wrong?
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

In that case, not all discrimination should be illegal. I have already said not all discrimination is wrong.

The post I responded to seemed by its wording to indicate that you believed that since certain types of discrimination were against the laws those where the ones that were wrong and thus should not be allowed.



[QUOTEIn the event of war, the government would draft men but not women. Also, those men would be of certain age and physical capability. Do you believe that is wrong?[/QUOTE]

Unless we were short on women (one man can impregnate multiple women) yes it is wrong. I don't mind age being used as a rule of thumb as long as there can be waivers for those exceptional few who function outside the bell curve. Capability is key in who we draft and where they function. I see no reason not to draft older people or physically disabled people expressly for the purpose of the more administrative tasks needed assuming that they are capable of performing the tasks. As to physical capability, that is not a discrimination factor in the context that we are talking about. When you have a task you "hire" on ability to complete the task. To do otherwise is idiocy. If the job is going to require that someone lift 200 lbs repeatedly you don't use someone who tops out at 150lbs. Neither do you artificially set the requirement higher to attempt to weed out a certain factor, or automatically exclude a certain group because they statistically will have few who will qualify.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

I did. Discrimination against stupid people is still discrimination against a group of people. Ugly people, assholes, and antisocial people are all groups of people whom I believe can justifiably be discriminated against, in many circumstances. I would be against most any attempt by government to provide those groups of people (among others) with some kind of special status that protected them from discrimination from employment, for example.

I stand by my position that not all discrimination is bad. The thread title and opening post were poorly phrased.

That's your opinion. Having grown up where discrimination was the rule and not the exception, I'm very glad that most people don't think like you do.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Let's see what this argument looks like in the real world.

 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

In relation to the topic of the thread, what specific rights are being violated? Besides private property rights and freedom of association? What is beginning to end those two rights?



Um....guys....just a suggestion.....you're starting to move a little too much off the topic. I mean I'm not a mod or anything, but that doesn't mean I can't give a nudge or two, eh? ;)


The right of equal treatment.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

The right of equal treatment.

What is equal treatment? Under what context?

WB. Hadn't seen you on in a while. Hope everything is alright.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

What is equal treatment? Under what context?

WB. Hadn't seen you on in a while. Hope everything is alright.

Thanks, been busy.

Equal treatment as in treating people the same regardless of race etc.....For example, you have a line of people waiting to make a purchase. You don't say, all black people must leave.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Thanks, been busy.

Equal treatment as in treating people the same regardless of race etc.....For example, you have a line of people waiting to make a purchase. You don't say, all black people must leave.

So then you are only for equal treatment under certain circumstances.
 
Back
Top Bottom