4 ms·

There’s ways to convolute any of those scenarios, but let me just explain why I think there are notable differences: 1. Protected classes are defined by a hist

There’s ways to convolute any of those scenarios, but let me just explain why I think there are notable differences: 1. Protected classes are defined by a history of prejudicial treatment and blocked access to essential services, and they exist as a class of people defined by biological markers. So you can control being black or being gay, and you can’t access any bus service or use the same water fountain anywhere. This is very different than holding an opinion, and not being serviced by an add-on provider. 2. There are great differences between being denied a voice and being denied an amplification platform for that voice. We never mandated that newspapers print every letter to the editor, or even provide equal time to classes of opinions (although that did happen in a natural way). If you tried to get a cake plastered with swastikas, that would not be protected free speech and could be denied service. You have to go find a Nazi baker or append the speech yourself. This is very different from being black and you can not get any cake from any baker, and they’ll know too, because you can’t exactly hide the fact that you’re black.

Chaebixi 9y ago
> and they exist as a class of people defined by biological markers No, that's totally wrong. Religion is a protected class in many cases. http://www.hr-guide.com/data/G714.htm http://www.hr-guide.com/data/G714.htm
mantas 9y ago
"Protected classes" as currently defined is an insult to freedom of speech. Once "protected classes" collide, we got oppression olympics. Christians have enough of hard time for their believes in quite a few places. Why are they less protected than gays? Why is their freedom of speech is worth less than gays? One could argue that gay cake is not biologically defined marker. For example, by christian believe, marriage is to make babies. Gays can't make babies. Thus gay marriage is not biologically even possible. Then we step into another issue. Frequently "protected class" is taken as free pass to do anything rather than being protected for their specific attribute. For example, people being called racists for rightfully calling out black person for his bad behaviour.

Chaebixi 9y ago

> and they exist as a class of people defined by biological markers No, that's totally wrong. Religion is a protected class in many cases. http://www.hr-guide.com/data/G714.htm http://www.hr-guide.com/data/G714.htm

mantas 9y ago

"Protected classes" as currently defined is an insult to freedom of speech. Once "protected classes" collide, we got oppression olympics. Christians have enough of hard time for their believes in quite a few places. Why are they less protected than gays? Why is their freedom of speech is worth less than gays? One could argue that gay cake is not biologically defined marker. For example, by christian believe, marriage is to make babies. Gays can't make babies. Thus gay marriage is not biologically even possible. Then we step into another issue. Frequently "protected class" is taken as free pass to do anything rather than being protected for their specific attribute. For example, people being called racists for rightfully calling out black person for his bad behaviour.