In another thread Jar preaches that all forms of discrimination are B.S., anti-Christ, and anti-loving-one's-neighbor.
I believe Jar sees an issue as black/white that is not black/white.
Discrimination is essentially the acceptance or rejection of a person based on some quality or characteristic that person possesses. Now obviously all discrimination cannot be bad. A prestigious college would not allow someone who scores an 800 on his SAT to enroll. A mother looking for someone to babysit her little girl would likely turn down a convicted sex-offender.
The real issue is when does a particular characteristic used to discriminate between individuals become immoral and when should the government take steps to discourage such discrimination.
I don't think it is immoral discrimination for an airport security officer to be a little more scrutinizing of a muslim or arab than a five-year old blue-eyed Texan girl. And if I were of mid-eastern descent I would gladly undergo a little profiling to have the knowledge that security is being extra-careful with those who are more likely to bear anti-American sentiment.
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.
Though I think it is immoral for an employer to fail to hire an employee simply because that employee is black, 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.
Now, if the majority of citizens of a nation or state or city or school district believe a certain thing to be immoral for whatever reason, what is to stop them from making that thing illegal or the teaching of that thing as moral illegal? The ever-broadening interpretation of the separation between Church-and-State clause has been stretched far thinner than it was ever meant to be.
I believe government should play a minimal role. I don't think the government should provide quotas or have anything to do with marriage: het or homo, and I don't believe it should dictate the curricula of our schools. I think individuals in a community must decide what is moral or immoral and what they wish to pass on to their children as such.
Though Jar believes homosexuality to be perfectly moral and harmless, I do not. Therefore those of my persuasion should not be forced to accept his nor should we have our kids force-fed liberal sexual doctrines in school. Neither do I think my conservative views should make those private activities I view to be immoral illegal.
It seems to me that this would bring greater assurance of freedom to people of all moral persuasions and encourage a greater diversity across our nation.
™ Version 4.2