Galt's Gulch

Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

    -
  • Posted by jrberts5 10 years, 9 months ago
    Legalized discrimination based on religious beliefs is just another step toward the christian dictatorship Leonard Peikoff discusses in his book The Dim Hypothesis. As an Objectivist, and therefore, an atheist for most of my life, I have been treated by others as a second class citizen. I hadn't anticipated that I might be legally defined as such in my lifetime. I thought the dictatorship would come somewhat later. It is later than we think.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Zenphamy 10 years, 9 months ago
      Yes, and that's frightening. I had always imagined that with advances in learning and science would lead society in the direction of more and more freedom, but it hasn't.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 9 months ago
      Yet you seem to propose the dictatorship of the worker. An employer has the right to decide what benefits they are going to provide to their employees. Those employees have the right to decide whether they want to work for that employer. Both are free to choose. What you seem to propose is that the employer be forced (notice the use of the term "force") to provide something that they would choose not to. That is antithetical to Objectivism.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by LetsShrug 10 years, 9 months ago
    Forced participation is NOT freedom and should not be legal. Regardless of religion or any other orientation.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by $ Maphesdus 10 years, 9 months ago
      Nope, sorry. Business which serve the public must serve everyone.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 9 months ago
        Not at all. They have the option of being served by someone else.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by $ Maphesdus 10 years, 9 months ago
          Maybe, maybe not. It depends on how widespread the prejudice is in that particular area and how many people want to engage in persecution. If only a small percentage of the population wants to engage in persecution, it may be possible to work around. But if a large percentage of the population wants to persecute, working around it becomes impossible.

          But regardless, engaging in persecution is a violation of an individual's rights, and therefore government is within its proper sphere of authority to protect individuals against persecution.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
          • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 9 months ago
            If they can't find service, then they have the ability to start their own business and serve those they see fit to serve. If there is a market, they should do very well.

            How is not serving someone persecution? Persecution requires an active participation. This was inactive. You can't persecute someone inactively.

            From Merriam-Webster:
            Persecute

            1: to harass or punish in a manner designed to injure, grieve, or afflict; specifically : to cause to suffer because of belief

            2: to annoy with persistent or urgent approaches (as attacks, pleas, or importunities)
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
            • Posted by $ Maphesdus 10 years, 9 months ago
              Persecution does not require active participation. That's only overt persecution. There are many different types, some of them are in fact impassive.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
              • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 9 months ago
                No, persecution can only be active. One must accept definitions. You cannot decide that words mean what you want them to mean.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                • Posted by $ Maphesdus 10 years, 9 months ago
                  Persecution can take many forms, some active and some inactive. Sometimes persecution can even be accidental.

                  And I am not worried about the definitions of words so much as I am about the ideas behind the words and the concepts which they are intended to represent. Sometimes, presenting a new concept requires inventing new words or tinkering with the definition of an old one.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 9 months ago
                    Persecution must be active. Bias or discrimination can be passive, of which this scenario is an example. And I see no problem with that. Again, if they want the service they can go somewhere else, or start their own business if they think that others also want the service.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                    • Posted by $ Maphesdus 10 years, 9 months ago
                      I suppose if you want to break it down into different categories, that's fine. Personally, I was kind of just lumping bias, discrimination, persecution and prejudice all together, as they really are just different manifestations of the same entity. And it is that entity to which I was referring.

                      But like I said, there may or may not be another place that provides the same service, and saying there always will be is a baseless assumption. Plus, that's still ignoring the fact that discriminating against someone is a violation of their basic human rights.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo