SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Neocon who wrote (77427)10/12/2003 4:15:35 PM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (1) of 82486
 
You seem to be using public policy as a trump card, so long as its announced rational is protecting some group. I would say that it is important to ask whether the exemption would vitiate the purpose of non- discrimination laws, not what the purpose of the law is,

I think I see the confusion. My point wasn't about discrimination laws. When I talked about laws protecting others I meant laws against killing and stealing and the like, the usual basis of laws, which in the main protect people from damage done by other people.

Perhaps one of the reasons we're not communicating is that you are looking at damage narrowly, just the direct and immediate impact of discrimination, which you interpret as something on the order of people getting their feelings hurt. I am not quite so dismissive of that, but I can understand how, in the back of your mind, you have Mojo's deep conviction about chastity vs. some oversensitive jerk getting his feelings hurt on behalf of his group.

I'm looking at damages more broadly. It is at least theoretically possible for some big time damages to result from Mojo's business practices. While that's not likely to happen every day, it could happen and I'm trying to test Mojo's freedom of conscience against that.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext