4 ms·
I wonder is it really necessary to explicitly ban every sort of discrimination? Shouldn't it be simple 'discrimination is not allowed'? Otherwise we will be lis
by Zvez 4y ago
I wonder is it really necessary to explicitly ban every sort of discrimination? Shouldn't it be simple 'discrimination is not allowed'? Otherwise we will be listing every type of discrimination and revisiting this list every now and then. And it leads to questions like 'is it acceptable to discriminate by boldness if it is not in the list?'
While I agree that such not-so-well-known discriminations should be publically discussed, I feel like 'banning' them one by one is the wrong direction to take.
- webmobdev 4y agoBanning is the way to discourage it, and make people aware of the discrimination. How else do you propose we educate, spread awareness and discourage the act? Would you take something seriously if it wasn't banned and had consequences if you indulged in it? I don't think banning is wrong. But the punishment for it should be ideally mediation and education (with something like 3 or 4 strike rules because unfortunately some people are shit).
- naniwaduni 4y agoCue the ambulance-chasers bringing discrimination lawsuits on behalf of paraplegics alleging discrimination in the field of carrying boxes up and down stairs.
- jahewson 4y agoDiscrimination is allowed, it’s not even necessarily a negative thing - a company may discriminate against employees who are late, for example. What is not permitted are certain types of discrimination. Those either need to be enumerated or we need to all guess what they are.