What is worse?

[tris-]

Well im getting pretty sick of you telling me wht I think or wht I feel, and im not the only person youve done it too. Add to that you say "oh i never said that" when its right there in a post. I dont even need to look far for an example of it

"Now, do you agree or not?

Because if you don't, you think your feature is somehow more important."

Telling me what I think?

Here is a tip, you dont tell people what they think or what they will do or how they will act, because its bull shit.

 

[old.Tohtori]

It's a fact, not telling you what you think.

I've never told you what you think or do.

You can't prove it simply due to..oh...i've never did it.

You either think that equal discrimination is equally bad, or you think that your discrimination is worse.

There is no gray area, there is no middle ground, there are two options so choose.

the funny part is, either you're a self-obsessed person who thinks your suffering is worth more, or you agree with me. Ain't it a bitch.

 

[nath]

What Tohtori is saying is that someone being refused entrance to a club on the basis of wearing trainers is as bad as someone being refused entrance because they're black.

This is incorrect.

 

[old.Tohtori]

What Tohtori is saying is that someone being refused entrance to a club on the basis of wearing trainers is as bad as someone being refused entrance because they're black.

This is incorrect.

And why is that?

If you took two persons, in a world where racism wasn't as big of an issue, or a world where trainers were as big of an issue, wouldn't it be equal?

Equal discrimination is ALWAYS equal.

 

[tris-]

It's a fact, not telling you what you think.

.

How the fuck is it a fact?
Youvw just told me "well you think x".

I know what the hell Im thinking without you trying to tell me.

 

[old.Tohtori]

How the fuck is it a fact?
Youvw just told me "well you think x".

I know what the hell Im thinking without you trying to tell me.

Because there's only two choices as answers.

There for, you have to choose one option.

You're trying to choose both.

Never said "you're thinking like that", i said "IF".

 

[tris-]

Ok what ever you say, youre bullshit is really getting too much to try and bother anymore.

 

[mooSe_]

I wouldn't use the word 'worse' or 'better' because that would be implying that I believe that actions have objective value.
However, I would say that people who are prejudiced against someone for a characteristic which they can't help are being more unfair than people who are prejudiced against someone for a choice they have made.
Basically I agree with everyone but toht.

 

[nath]

And why is that?

If you took two persons, in a world where racism wasn't as big of an issue, or a world where trainers were as big of an issue, wouldn't it be equal?

Equal discrimination is ALWAYS equal.

First of all, we DON'T live in a world where racism isn't as big of an issue. As a result, that's an irrelevant point because context and history is important in this discussion.

Secondly, if you're really, genuinely saying that saying "no blacks allowed" amounts to the same as "no trainers allowed" then there's really no point in continuing the discussion. It's absolutely absurd.

 

[old.Tohtori]

I wouldn't use the word 'worse' or 'better' because that would be implying that I believe that actions have objective value.
However, I would say that people who are prejudiced against someone for a characteristic which they can't help are being more unfair than people who are prejudiced against someone for a choice they have made.
Basically I agree with everyone but toht.

That's a clear answer, and as such, in my opinion, I think it's equally bad to judge someone, on the same scale, of any aspect.

No matter what aspect, it shouldn't be treated any worse/better.

You can't put yourself on a higher pedestal because it means you accept that some people can be discriminated against on some level.

First of all, we DON'T live in a world where racism isn't as big of an issue. As a result, that's an irrelevant point because context and history is important in this discussion.

Secondly, if you're really, genuinely saying that saying "no blacks allowed" amounts to the same as "no trainers allowed" then there's really no point in continuing the discussion. It's absolutely absurd.

But it's the whole point.

Discrimination, if done on equal magnitude, is equally bad.

That's what i've been saying all along.

I don't think race gives you any special features, because if you don't want racism, you can't expect special rights.

We could just agree to disagree though, as it's most likely a subject people won't agree on if they don't.

 

[Dark Orb Choir]

you are correct in a way, but there is no "facebook quizzes board" but there IS a race relations board, and thats becasue its of enough importance to warrant one


end of

 

[nath]

But it's the whole point.

Discrimination, if done on equal magnitude, is equally bad.

That's what i've been saying all along.

That's just not true though. How about -
"you can't come in to the club because you're black"
"you can't come in to the club because you have a gun and want to shoot people".


Or how about

"You have to go to jail because you're black"
"You have to go to jail because you killed someone"

 

[old.Tohtori]

That's just not true though. How about -
"you can't come in to the club because you're black"
"you can't come in to the club because you have a gun and want to shoot people".


Or how about

"You have to go to jail because you're black"
"You have to go to jail because you killed someone"

Oh come on.

You're actually trying to compare discrimination with braking the law?

Please don't place words in my mouth as i never stated anything of that sort.

 

[tris-]

But what if we were in a world were having a gun wasnt such a big issue?

 

[old.Tohtori]

But what if we were in a world were having a gun wasnt such a big issue?

If we were in a world where having a gun wasn't an issue, then it would be equally wrong to deny access due to having one.

 

[tris-]

As for breaking the law, discrimination such as racism, against disability etc is also breaking the law, at least in england.

 

[old.Tohtori]

As for breaking the law, discrimination such as racism, against disability etc is also breaking the law, at least in england.

Yet, i believe there's no law against discrimination of ALL things.

That's the wrong part of the world.

You should never, EVER, be discriminated against on any basis that is something that is not viable.

You see, peple have this tendency for "subjectional" view. It's ok to kill all chavs, but it's not ok to kill all blondes.

It's just not right.

fair enough, if you think it is, then you think so, but it doesn't make it right.

 

[Dark Orb Choir]

like i said tris, race relations board and no facebook quiz board

 

[Dark Orb Choir]

what kind of utopian world do you live in tbh, stop eating the magic shrooms @ tohtori

 

[old.Tohtori]

what kind of utopian world do you live in tbh, stop eating the magic shrooms @ tohtori

I would LIKE to live in a world where people don't judge eachother on choices, look, height, etc.

It's not so, i know very well, but it doesn't mean i should stop saying it's wrong.

 

[Dark Orb Choir]

i dont think anyone is denying what you are saying tbh, but its just not like that irl, i would love to be all hippie flower power and peace and love but its all fucked up isnt it.

so lets stop arguing about it andf you tris and nath have a group hug

 

[old.Tohtori]

Well, you are right in that, it's not...but i'll be damned if i give up provoking it

 

[nath]

Oh come on.

You're actually trying to compare discrimination with braking the law?

Please don't place words in my mouth as i never stated anything of that sort.

I never placed words in your mouth at all, I was doing that whole "reductio ad absurdum" thing.


If you think the examples I suggested don't follow then clearly there is SOME discrimination that is acceptable. It's just a case of where you draw the line. You appear to be (correct me if I'm wrong) drawing the line at breaking the law. I.e. it's OK to discriminate against people who have broken the law, but anything beyond that is OK.

Am I closer to gauging your opinion or is that still not what you're saying?

 

[old.Tohtori]

I never placed words in your mouth at all, I was doing that whole "reductio ad absurdum" thing.


If you think the examples I suggested don't follow then clearly there is SOME discrimination that is acceptable. It's just a case of where you draw the line. You appear to be (correct me if I'm wrong) drawing the line at breaking the law. I.e. it's OK to discriminate against people who have broken the law, but anything beyond that is OK.

Am I closer to gauging your opinion or is that still not what you're saying?

It's quite alright as an assumption.

If we have established rules, then discrimination is ok according to such rules, but it has to be done within those rules.

I never said otherwise, atleast i don't think so.

It's not discrimination to judge someone for braking the rules of the society.

 

[tris-]

Well racism is illegal, discriminating disabilities is illegal, ageism is illegal
discriminating people for facebook quizzes is not illegal

So racism etc is worse on that basis.

 

[nath]

It's not discrimination to judge someone for braking the rules of the society.

Right OK, then here's another question.

"You can't come in to the club because you're black"
"You can't come in to the club because you've told me that your intention is to spend the evening verbally abusing people."

 

[old.Tohtori]

Well racism is illegal, discriminating disabilities is illegal, ageism is illegal
discriminating people for facebook quizzes is not illegal

So racism etc is worse on that basis.

Well i do think ou'll find that if someone is denied a job for doing facebook quizzes, it's not ok.

Right OK, then here's another question.

"You can't come in to the club because you're black"
"You can't come in to the club because you've told me that your intention is to spend the evening verbally abusing people."

Ofcourse, that's a solid reason not to let someone in.

 

[tris-]

Well i do think ou'll find that if someone is denied a job for doing facebook quizzes, it's not ok.

Its not illegal in any law I know of England.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Its not illegal in any law I know of England.

Perhaps not in those words, but i think you'll find it's not alright.

Haven't seen many court cases, but i bet hte ruling would be in favor.

 

[tris-]

I dont think so, since its not illegal.
Some employers only hire graduates, you will say that discriminates against people without a degree.

I can tell you 100% that that is not illegal.