According to your argument, that's irrelevant.
Notr according to MY argument. Maybe according to a miscommunication of my argument.
When you asked beofre about owning a gun, I repsonded that if it was a job requirement, it would be OK. This is like being a Policeman in soime places. My friend is a cop and he had to purhase his own sidearm. That is because the job requires him to have a handgun.
The Union is actually job dependent. It ceases to exist without the jobs. There is no occupation that dictates the KKK's existence.
One is related to the work, even if that relationship is contrived by the Union itself, the other group is totally unrelated to the job and thus it cannot be construed as a reasonable job requirement.
The comparison of saying that an employer requiring membership in the KKK (non-job related group) to an employer requiring memebrship in the Union (a job related group) is incorrect because the two groups are non-equivilant in terms of the discussion.
Now, as far as my actual opinion of the KKK thing goes, I'm inclined to say that the employer
should be allowed to require membership in the KKK for his employees if he wants to, so long as the rule applies to all employees and he doesn't discriminate in the hiring process based on race.
He should not be allowed to make the rule applicable to some but not others.
If a potential black employee decides not to work there because of that requiremetn, that is their choice. I'm sure that many white people would opt not to work there either and that due to the abundance of sub-par employees, the employer would either be forced to pay more wages to lure the employees in or he/she would need to get rid of the policy.
That's my thinking on the matter.
