>as long as they do not discriminate using the following criteria (which are enshrined in law) And how long did it take for this to get enshrined into law, and

>as long as they do not discriminate using the following criteria (which are enshrined in law) And how long did it take for this to get enshrined into law, and how many people suffered unjustly in the mean time? Far better would have been for any discrimination of this sort to be illegal across the board, to avoid the need to build up enough political capital to create laws protecting vulnerable classes. That there is a specific set of classes that it is illegal to discriminate against is the problem: the next class that we currently don't recognize has to suffer until they're capable of building up enough political capital to change laws. Until then they're subject to the tyranny of the majority. > But political ideology is not, and should not be, a protected class This the substantive part of this discussion. Why do you think political ideology shouldn't be a protected class?