Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Philosopher who wrote (76509)	10/5/2003 9:26:57 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

You and the usual suspects have not been able to get past one thing. The mojo scenario isn't about not liking a type of person or seeing a type of person as a lesser or anything. It is about having respect for the situation that could become sexualized unnecessarily. Repeatedly bringing up race discrimination and incinerating jews, which is an issue where people do see the other type as lesser or bad is missing the point. At this point it appears purposely. But easy to rhetorisize around. ... very shallow attitude. Not wanting black medical service people in the room is soooo different from the issue of prefering a female doctor if you are female that I am awed by your inability to differentiate.

To: The Philosopher who wrote (76509)	10/6/2003 5:40:18 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

So I don't see that it is possible for any significant length of time to operate under the radar to the extent that no targeted person will ever face actual exclusion. <<An issue of conscience should be founded upon some genuine grounds of not wanting to cause harm to self or others. >> That is what Jewel said about conscience. What if he operated under the radar but, at the first instance of having to turn away a client, he did the principled thing and shut down his business rather than harm the client by turning him or her away based on group identity, would that be enough to enable you to tolerate his business practices? If it turns out that there's no way for this guy to operate the way he wants to, then so be it, but I want to make sure first that every option is considered. That's why I'm asking.