|
|
|
|
|
|
by memetomancer
2515 days ago
|
|
|
as for "content of character", you have been presented with the mechanism of the oppression and still argue vehemently against remediation or protections. Juust so you are aware, this all extends far beyond questions of race, not sure why you are so focused on that, but it's probably pretty telling. Also, I'm not at all sure what you see as a distinction between these protections and "founding fathers already gave us ways to protect the minority's rights via the judicial system...". We are discussing implementation of that Founding Father Judicial system stuff in this thread, please expand on why you think it serves as an argument against modfying or creating laws to protect abused classes? |
|
|
Just so you are aware, everything is racist in the news today. If you go to any major news site I promise you will find some article about Trump or his supporters being racist. Trump says things about Baltimore, media calls him racist, why is that? Is that telling? Is calling out this guy for having the worst district really that bad? https://i.redd.it/wlf72xth8gd31.jpg
In your version of the US, the Civil Rights Act should be forever expanded to include more and more oppressed groups, whereas in my version of the US the Civil Rights Act should be a universal truth. I don't think it's fair that clubs in Vegas can charge men and women different prices, but is there a movement for that? Does that ever make the news? Of course not. I'm being discriminated against based on my gender but since I don't have protected status that's ok. Instead, I think any discrimination based on physical features should not be allowed unless it somehow impacted their ability to perform a job. (IE ok to say no to person in wheelchair for UPS job)
> "founding fathers already gave us ways to protect the minority's rights via the judicial system...".
If you feel oppressed, you can sue and have your case adjudicated in court. In your system, only those who have protected status have grounds for a lawsuit, therefore people are no longer equal in the eyes of the law. In my system, valid claims of discrimination can be herd regardless of protected status. I would also impose a fine for losing to discourage frivolous lawsuits. If that's too burdensome then that's why we have the ACLU.
I want to get rid of classes. I want people to associate because of common interests not out of mutual dislike. I want to eliminate all differences between citizens under the eyes of the law. I just think it's deeply flawed to think that if you pass enough protection laws suddenly the people that inflict the so-called "oppression" will have a change of heart. You can only hope to do that by highlighting peoples similaries instead of their differences. Conversely, if your goal is to get people to hate each other, you should constantly point out there differences, something the modern media does a fantastic job at.