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: Lane3 who wrote (76618)	10/6/2003 3:52:13 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

"Mostly I'm trying to find alternatives to make the point to Jewel that, despite best efforts, there really aren't any good options for Mojo, our fish out of water." Look, Karen ... I thought this was clear at the start since it was stated very clearly... mojo is pretend... The challenge is to determine whether or not he has a right to operate according to his conscience ... not find a way to change him, to be more like everybody else you know ...

To: Lane3 who wrote (76618)	10/6/2003 3:54:32 PM
From: Solon	Respond to of 82486

"Mostly I'm trying to find alternatives to make the point to Jewel that, despite best efforts, there really aren't any good options" I understand that. My reference to the receptionist was to show how impractical such discrimination is. Even the most skilled and experienced people (not that a 19 year old receptionist cannot boast of some experience) would likely send the majority of homosexuals to MOHO. What do you learn by asking someone wearing his public persona to have a seat? Who knew that Rock Hudson was Gay? Or these 700 people in the public eye: famousandgay.com Also, it is customary in a clinic offering service in both genders to ASK if there is a preference which the clint has. This would be respectful of consumer choice and would ensure that people who have sexual hang-ups are not given a Hobson's choice. Now if the clinic has both a male and a female therapist and the female client states she would prefer a male therapist (the reason is unimportant: it might be stronger hands for more relief from the kneading process; it might be her desire to think sexual thoughts while her muscles are being relaxed and her circulation improved...or infinite other possibilities), then to deny her a public service on the basis of her gender is again discrimination and is actionable. I know you are trying to be helpful but that crow won't fly.