2 ms·
Do you not know what protected statuses are? There's a reason those exist. There's a reason it's allowed to penalize someone for being bigoted but not for being
by add-sub-mul-div 3y ago
Do you not know what protected statuses are? There's a reason those exist. There's a reason it's allowed to penalize someone for being bigoted but not for being gay. This is not a symmetrical/both-sides thing.
- torstenvl 3y agoI can't quite tell if you're trying to discuss policy (which is currently being discussed in this thread) or the law. If you're trying to discuss the law, then your summary is both paradigmatically flawed (conflation of legislative versus constitutional protections, protected status versus suspect classification, etc.) and factually incorrect (being gay was not a protected class in 2008 in almost any jurisdiction, and making a political donation is not an action subject to the Civil Rights Act). If instead you're trying to discuss principles, then your explicit embrace of being unprincipled seems... odd. Principles always apply symmetrically and to both sides. That's what makes them principles.