Hangdawg:
You make some interesting points here. Discrimination is indeed a massive topic, and as you point out it affects all areas of life. Often there is much confusion though, with regards to discrimination and prejudice.
quote:
discrimination definition — discrimination is defined as treating one person unfairly prejudice over another according to factors unrelated to their ability or potential, such as age, disability, sex, or national origin (italics mine)
quote:
Prejudice - To decide beforehand; to lean in favor of one side of a cause for some reason or other than its justice.
Prejudice is a component of anti-discrimination legislation. Which is also merely seperating, belief from logic and/or common sense. It is for that reason, I endorse most Government induced anti-discrimination, legislation. For the most part such legislation, is actually in relation to acts of prejudice which stem from discrimination. Until we have a world where by all men are treated equal by their counterparts such legislation will be necessary for the protection of others.
In relation to this example:
1)I don't think it is immoral for a small business owner to reject a new employee whom he will be working with because that employee has a conflicting personality or conflicting morals. 2)Though I think it is immoral for an employer to fail to hire an employee simply because that employee is black, 3)I think it is also wrong for the government to force that employer to hire that employee or anyone else simply because he is black.
With anti-discrimination legislation here, the first point you make, is not discrimination as it stands alone. The other points actually pertain to acts of prejudice, and are subsequently regarded as being discriminatory.
In regards to this:
...nor should we have our kids force-fed liberal sexual doctrines in school.
There are avenues of appeal with the UN, if this subject is being mandatory imposed by Government legislation. However such appeals can only be brought forth by those it personally affects. In accordance with legal guardianship though, it might be warranted to investigate if this issue could be investigated by the UN.
For example with homosexuality. Here in Australia, some years ago, there was no national rule against homosexuality being an illegal act. Each state adopted its own legislative mandate, all being similar, with the exception of Tasmania. Tasmania's legislation at the time, was that homosexuality between two consenting adults, in the privacy of their own home was illegal. Subsequently, a complaint was lodged with the United Nations, in regards to Tasmania's legislation. Upon investigation, the UN made ruling that Tasmania had to change their legislation. There is now National ruling in regards to consenting adults, having the freedom to determine and act upon their own sexuality, within the privacy of their own homes.
My personal opinion in regards to discrimination, is one I have professed elsewhere on the site. Minimise harm. Therefore any legislation that is introduced which has that as its intent, whilst maintaining individual rights has my endorsement. I do not see this as prejudicing against someone because of who they are, though it may discrimate against an act, i.e. murder. I also believe that a failure to do so, would result in anarchy. Anarchy is not something that I believe, God ever proposed for us.
Shaz
This message has been edited by Shaz, 03 January 2005 10:29 AM
™ Version 4.2
