Message from @wacka
Discord ID: 635452313091309578
they need to be around men to realise #NotAllMen or whatever
Besides the point though, both those examples would be considered reasonable by todays standards
Tbf, when people are in a mental unstable place, pandering (I.E. hiring only women at womens shelters) might not be awful
So if those are considered reasonable, it proves there isn't a black and white standard
When someone is so broken, you might need to nurture them a bit before you can bring them back to standard society
And if there isn't a black and white standard, the question then becomes "Who are you to decide what justifies unreasonable discrimination?"
By what metric are we deciding?
its not black or white... its a basic foundation of protecting individual rights
Except it's not
In it's current form
You don't have a right to work at someone else's business or organisation
These rights are in opposition to each other
No you dont
Im not saying... as you suggested... to start building mosques.... Im just saying you dont have to discriminate... that has nothing to do with accomodating anything more
But the person doesnt have the right to discriminate on the base of protected characteristics
But you have to define what discrimination means
of course you dont have a right to work at someones business.. no-one suggested that..
I think DC has the right idea with politics being protected too
DC?
Washington
Sound suspiciously like bollocks, wladfa
For certain values of "discrimination", wacka
@wacka Why not, Why should someone be forced to hire you even if they don't want to based on your race?
Now you're arguing in the abstract
nobodys forcing anyone to hire anyone ... ?!?!
Wacka, you're one step away from "if you don't date a trans woman, you're discriminating"
I'm not
Which part of my statement was that
not really
not even close
So here's where I come down:
If you are banning discrimination based on race then if the owner of a business that doesn't want to hire white people for instance could be forced to anyway due to discrimination laws
I'm saying people shouldnt use these classifications as judgement materials when hiring
businesses dont date people
Shouldnt*
that is absurd
I'm no where near who gets to date whom
The -state- and it's institutions should not be able to -unfairly- discriminate based on what has til now been called 'arbtirary characteristics' - the state and it's institutions should always as a matter of course treat every person as an individual
They shouldn't hire based on those characteristics but they should be allowed to if they wish
Well that's a social contract, not a legal one, lizard