4 ms·
> should not be obligated to adapt to a crazy person who is only willing to Actually yes it should and that's why we have non-discriminatory laws (the subject
by nonrandomstring 3y ago
> should not be obligated to adapt to a crazy person who is only willing to
Actually yes it should and that's why we have non-discriminatory laws
(the subject of the article) in the first place. In civilised
countries we do that in order to avoid what John Stuart-Mill called
the tyranny of the majority. But since you already see these
minorities as "crazy" I hold out scant hope for your love of other
people. I even think the US even has some constitutional basis for the
Protection of Minority Rights.
- wang_li 3y agoWe're not talking about people with disabilities, we're talking about people who are choosing to not join the rest of society and using modern technologies to sustain modern life. Someone doesn't want to do banking online? Only wants to pay cash for everything? Doesn't want to carry a cellphone? That's their choice, it doesn't mean everyone else has to act like that too or even streamline their ability to behave that way. Shops can only accept cards, banks can have a reduced number of physical locations and hours, telephone companies can stop offering payphones.
- nonrandomstring 3y ago> We're not talking about I am talking about democracies where we grant people the right to freedom of opinion and lifestyle choices so long as that doesn't infringe on others. It's a precious thing we fought many wars for, and will no doubt fight many more to preserve.against a mentality that puts the convenience of bureaucratic machinery ahead of human needs and human diversity.