Did CP raise a good point?

[Sparko]

And I am ALL FOR helping minorities PREPARE to be competitive in the world. Tonight, I'm teaching lesson 9 of the "Jobs for Life" program. My class contains 11 blacks, 4 hispanics, 2 orientals and 1 white guy. Tonight's lesson is "Emotional Roadblocks", and talks about letting go of past wrongs, hurt feelings, and barriers to success. When they graduate from this course, they each will receive a $500 scholarship to any additional job training they would like, and there are "captains of industry" here willing to give them a shot at a decent paying job.

I think that works WAY better than "OK, you're really not qualified for this job, but we're gonna make somebody hire you anyway, cause you'll never make it on your own".

There are 16 classes in this course, and we're about half way through. There are about a dozen VOLUNTEER "mentors" who attend (mostly white folk) who help in "small group" times, help fill out job apps, help write resumes, and act as encouragers.

I have always been impressed by (legal) immigrants who come to this country. They usually excel in school and in business and make the best of the opportunities available. They don't complain about being discriminated against. They see the "american dream" and make it happen. I remember after the vietnam war when we got a lot of Vietnamese immigrants. I can't think of a single one I knew that didn't out perform Americans in school, especially math. They dug in and made something of themselves. The families started their own businesses and made opportunities for themselves, they didn't wait for someone to give them a job.

[HMS_Beagle]

You keep saying that. Can you list them for me?

Anyone that experienced discrimination back in the 60's and before are now retired or dead. How does affirmative action help them?

It seems that to make an EQUAL OPPORTUNITY for everyone is a good goal, but AA is not about that, it is holding down someone qualified in order to let someone less qualified step over them. If the person (whether white or black or any other color) is qualified for the position, they should get the position, not have to let someone LESS qualified have it because of some past discrimination against their grandparents. That just breeds laziness.

LOL! Sparko I haven't been championing AA, just giving the historical background as to why it was implemented. Given the conditions at the time it seemed like a reasonable approach to undo some of the past wrongs. Wrongs like the institutionalized discrimination that led to an almost all white male power structure. Politicians of the time voted it in, not me. I was just pointing out that at the time it was the least bad plan, a helping hand to jump start overall equality.

Whether AA has outlived its usefulness is certainly debatable. The same sort of argument could be used for labor unions. When they first organized in the early 1900s they were sorely need as working conditions were horrible. Today in the US at least things aren't nearly so bad.

You don't need to come into every discussion with a chip on your shoulder.

I will admit I find it hilarious that you and CP, a couple of guys who have been demanding the right to discriminate against minorities as you see fit are now bitching and moaning because in the cause of overall fairness a small bit of it was done to you.

[HMS_Beagle]

212 posts in and still no one from the Certain Christian camp has offered any sort of workable solution or compromise to the OP issue.

I guess it really is easier to cry "victim!" and throw mud than it is to actually work to solve problems.

[Sparko]

LOL! Sparko I haven't been championing AA, just giving the historical background as to why it was implemented. Given the conditions at the time it seemed like a reasonable approach to undo some of the past wrongs. Wrongs like the institutionalized discrimination that led to an almost all white male power structure. Politicians of the time voted it in, not me. I was just pointing out that at the time it was the least bad plan, a helping hand to jump start overall equality.

Whether AA has outlived its usefulness is certainly debatable. The same sort of argument could be used for labor unions. When they first organized in the early 1900s they were sorely need as working conditions were horrible. Today in the US at least things aren't nearly so bad.

You don't need to come into every discussion with a chip on your shoulder.

I will admit I find it hilarious that you and CP, a couple of guys who have been demanding the right to discriminate against minorities as you see fit are now bitching and moaning because in the cause of overall fairness a small bit of it was done to you.

You don't see it as the same thing? That forcing a business to hire someone unqualified for a job just because of their color is just as bad as forcing someone to provide a service to someone who they religiously disagree with?

It is the government trying to enforce niceness and equality on everyone, but only the equality THEY think should be enforced, even if it means discriminating against another group to get it. The only way to really get people to treat everyone equally is for everyone to WANT to treat everyone equally. Otherwise, the enforcing just causes more hatred and discrimination. Do you think that forcing someone to photograph a gay wedding makes them automagically like or accept homosexual marriage? Or does it just cause resentment? Does seeing a company being forced to hire an unqualified minority instead of the person who is the best qualified make that person or company automagically like or accept that minority? Or would it cause resentment?


What would happen today if there was a restaurant who did not serve blacks? Let's say the government did not get involved at all. Public pressure alone (boycotting, protesting) would have that place shut down in no time. Free enterprise works. If nobody supports a business, it will have to close. Wouldn't that be a better solution for the SS marriage thing too? If the public really was against a business that refused to provide services to a gay wedding, then that business would not remain open for long.

[Paprika]

212 posts in and still no one from the Certain Christian camp has offered any sort of workable solution or compromise to the OP issue.

I guess it really is easier to cry "victim!" and throw mud than it is to actually work to solve problems.

The law doesn't and can't prevent all discrimination. Combined with the fact that the OP references a very limited discrimination that does no harm to the discriminated, the conclusion seems obvious to me: there is no need to prevent such discrimination.

[HMS_Beagle]

Combined with the fact that the OP references a very limited discrimination that does no harm to the discriminated,

That is a demonstrably false statement. The overall negative effects of society caused by discrimination are well documented. You can't get around the issue by saying it was "limited" discrimination against minorities. That's like demanding to be exempt from no littering laws because you only throw a limited amount of trash from your car.

[Paprika]

That is a demonstrably false statement. The overall negative effects of society caused by discrimination are well documented. You can't get around the issue by saying it was "limited" discrimination against minorities.

The OP references very specific instances of discrimination. Pointing to harm by discrimination in general as an argument to outlaw those instances is invalid, especially since, as I pointed out, not all forms of discrimnations can and are outlawed.

That's like demanding to be exempt from no littering laws because you only throw a limited amount of trash from your car.

Throwing litter does cause some amount of harm. What about the instances in the OP - what harm do they cause? Again, quit trying to lump those specific cases of discrimination with whatever vaguely defined discrimination in general you use.

[HMS_Beagle]

You don't see it as the same thing? That forcing a business to hire someone unqualified for a job just because of their color is just as bad as forcing someone to provide a service to someone who they religiously disagree with?

Who was ever forced to provide a service to someone who they religiously disagree with?

Was Elaine Huguenin FORCED to take photos of the gay commitment ceremony? Where can I see the pictures?

If your religious convictions are so strong you can't bring yourself to treat your fellow citizens equally in your public service then you find another line of work. You're just parroting back the same false argument that CP has been pushing, one that's already been rejected by the courts.

[Zymologist]

LOL! Sparko I haven't been championing AA, just giving the historical background as to why it was implemented. Given the conditions at the time it seemed like a reasonable approach to undo some of the past wrongs. Wrongs like the institutionalized discrimination that led to an almost all white male power structure. Politicians of the time voted it in, not me. I was just pointing out that at the time it was the least bad plan, a helping hand to jump start overall equality.

Whether AA has outlived its usefulness is certainly debatable. The same sort of argument could be used for labor unions. When they first organized in the early 1900s they were sorely need as working conditions were horrible. Today in the US at least things aren't nearly so bad.

You don't need to come into every discussion with a chip on your shoulder.

I will admit I find it hilarious that you and CP, a couple of guys who have been demanding the right to discriminate against minorities as you see fit are now bitching and moaning because in the cause of overall fairness a small bit of it was done to you.

So institutionalized discrimination is an acceptable solution to the problem of institutionalized discrimination?

I know you said you're not championing AA, I just couldn't resist.

[HMS_Beagle]

The OP references very specific instances of discrimination. Pointing to harm by discrimination in general as an argument to outlaw those instances is invalid, especially since, as I pointed out, not all forms of discrimnations can and are outlawed.

According to the law those cases are perfectly valid. In fact they're the specific types of discrimination the law was written for. There's no requirement for someone being denied service to demonstrate individual monetary or psychological harm. The overall negative effect to society is harm enough.

Throwing litter does cause some amount of harm. What about the instances in the OP - what harm do they cause?

Among other things they propagate the negative stereotype that gays are second class citizens not worthy of equal treatment. That's harm enough to make the discrimination illegal.

[Cow Poke]

I have always been impressed by (legal) immigrants who come to this country. They usually excel in school and in business and make the best of the opportunities available. They don't complain about being discriminated against. They see the "american dream" and make it happen. I remember after the vietnam war when we got a lot of Vietnamese immigrants. I can't think of a single one I knew that didn't out perform Americans in school, especially math. They dug in and made something of themselves. The families started their own businesses and made opportunities for themselves, they didn't wait for someone to give them a job.

The amazing thing about the Orientals that my wife knows at Texas A&M is that they come here and enroll in college NOT EVEN SPEAKING ENGLISH, so they're learning English at the same time they're taking classes. (Well, that was in the old days... I think most of them now learn at least some English in their home countries, then come here and study like crazy)

[HMS_Beagle]

So institutionalized discrimination is an acceptable solution to the problem of institutionalized discrimination?

I know you said you're not championing AA, I just couldn't resist.

Taking a flu shot with a little bit of active flu virus is an acceptable solution to preventing a flu epidemic. Smart people realize that sometimes a little pain can lead to a much larger gain.

[Cow Poke]

So institutionalized discrimination is an acceptable solution to the problem of institutionalized discrimination?

Funny how the liberal mind works. (or doesn't)

[Paprika]

According to the law those cases are perfectly valid. In fact they're the specific types of discrimination the law was written for. There's no requirement for someone being denied service to demonstrate individual monetary or psychological harm. The overall negative effect to society is harm enough.

So you will not demonstrate harm, merely assert it. Unsurprising.

Among other things they propagate the negative stereotype that gays are second class citizens not worthy of equal treatment. That's harm enough to make the discrimination illegal.

What did Phank write in the OP? Oh, yes:

The problem with that, in the cases of our poster child baker, florist, and photographer, is that none of these people was refusing to serve gays! In fact, in the case of the florist, the gay man had been a long-time steady customer whose sexual orientation was known and not a problem. As far as I can tell, none of the discrimination in these cases was against any people at all. Instead, these merchants refused to serve the event of same-sex marriage, on the grounds of religious expression.

(bolding mine)

[HMS_Beagle]

So you will not demonstrate harm, merely assert it. Unsurprising.

Here you go

THE HARM CAUSED BY DISCRIMINATION AGAINST LGBT PEOPLE:

KEY FINDINGS ON HARMFUL IMPACTS OF DISCRIMINATION:
-LGBT people are roughly 4 times as more likely to attempt suicide (JH, 18)
-LGBT people suffer Gay Related Stress/Minority Stress, post-traumatic stress disorder (JH, 22)
-Prejudice, Discrimination and victimization is a major mental health concern (HP, 218) causes much higher rates of Major Depression, General Anxiety, Conduct Disorder, and Alcohol/Substance Disorder (HP; JH)
-LGBT are 6 times more likely to have multiple disorders (JH,22)
-30% of LGBT people have alcohol abuse, compared to 9% of general population. (Center for Am. Progress).
-LGBT are 20-40% of 2 million homeless youth (73% parental rejection) (JH, 22)
-LGBT youth experiencing parental rejection are 8 times more likely to commit suicde (JH, 22)
-33% of all teen suicides are LGBT (YI) (solutions: family connectedness, caring from other adults, school safety, GL community, positive sexual identity) (JH, 26)
-Transgendered: 41% suicide attempt rate (TransStudy); 60% attacked in violent assaults (CA report?) (All Trans numbers need updated from the new study just released, but the 41% suicide rate is from that doc)

ACTIVE INSTITUTIONAL DISCRIMINATIONACTIVE SOCIETAL DISCRIMINATION

Every bit of discrimination is part of the problem. You don't get a pass by claiming your discrimination was just a tiny bit and couldn't be harmful.