[nullbytesmatter]

It's a tough position to be in. I think the CoC is fair in that you shouldn't discriminate the ex-felon. You can't refuse to work with someone because of something they have done in the past and paid for (with jail, presumably).

You are a part of something and have a job to do. That job entails working with people (even if you don't like them due to something they have done, their race, gender, sexuality, or whatever). Do your job, or quit. He quit.

[_carbyau_]

The thing here is "paid for (with jail, presumably)".

In this case, society has effectively said the crime will not ever be "paid for" because the person is on a Public List for Life. Few crimes in society have this result.

[quantified]

"Society" is malleable. These registries are recent, and may be discarded. And "society" is different from place to place. Homosexual behavior, and consuming cannabis, were likewise barred from society too. The scarlet letter was for adultery but society has downgraded the penalty for that.

The subject matter here involves the sharpest reactions most people are prone to, I think, so most people involved here may agree with "society" on this one.

[_carbyau_]

True that laws/customs/view of society may change but people live in the now.

I am not sure I agree with the premise of simply blocking people out of your life. It isn't a sustainable way for society to function. Adults have to interact with other adults, even ones you hate.

But I don't know how else to resolve it except for one or the other quitting.

[londgine]

you may consider an ex-felon to have paid their debt to society, but I don't. I don't think that someone being forced to sit in a cell for a few years, and receiving abuse from guards and inmates. Maybe even abusing other inmates. Makes him deserving of forgiveness from society. Sure, that is not ideal. In an idea world someone leaving prison would be deserving of forgiveness, but that is not the case in the US.

[nullbytesmatter]

What's the alternative then?

From the looks of it, this individual offended in 2011 and did his time (120 days in prison). Hasn't offended since (nearly 11 years). It seems to me like he made a mistake, did his time and did something useful with his life since. If he can't "re-enter" society, then who can?

For the record, I never said society needs to forgive this guy. You don't even need to like him. But if you work in the same company or committee, you need to do your job and let him do his (or quit).

Everyone is so quick to cancel people these days. Everyone needs to grow up.

[earleybird]

His debt will be paid in full when the victim has been "made whole". The nature of the crime means the victim will likely never be whole again. Also, forgiveness is not absolution.

[londgine]

I'm not sure what the alternative should be. Unfortunately I am much better at recognising a bad system than providing the framework for a good system. Maybe this specific offender is now fit for society. However, my point is that by virtue of having served a sentence does not make him fir for society.

[olliej]

It is reasonable for a victim of a crime to request that they not be forced to work with someone who committed that crime.

Discrimination is a problem when it is not proportional to what is being subject to scrutiny, and when it is outside the realms of something that can be controlled by the person.

In this case the discrimination is minor - not working with the person - and it was the specific actions of that person that lead to the situation.

What you’re effectively doing is trawling the tolerance paradox. It’s often used by people who are extremely intolerant to prevent anyone from shutting them down, and it is important to be aware of when you are allowing one party to say that any response to them other than wholesale acceptance is discrimination.