Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Politics & Current Affairs => Topic started by: Aruntraveller on May 28, 2020, 05:56:53 PM
-
On another thread a poster has suggested that in very specific circumstances equality should be suspended in favour of honouring the religious views of providers of certain services.
My argument is, and always has been, that if you allow exemptions of this type then there is no equality and the nearest you can then come is to allow equality of discrimination.
So as an example black people can refuse to serve white people if they themselves have been refused service by white people. This seems like an incredibly silly way to run a society and I had thought that the consensus was within our society that by and large people should be treated equally.
Can anyone give examples of areas where they think equality of the sort I have outlined should not stand?
-
If that racist, Trump, turned up on my doorstep and expected to be treated politely and equally as I would treat other guests, he would be disappointed.
-
I think Trent means businesses providing services rather than non-business related personal interactions.
So if Trump turned up to your place of business would you refuse to serve him?
In terms of Equality I assume Trent means in relation to a protected characteristic.
Which then makes me wonder - how did society decide what is a protected characteristic and what isn't? Is it not a bit arbitrary?
With the Ashers Bakery case - the Supreme Court decided political slogans were not a protected characteristic so the Bakery could refuse to bake a cake with a political slogan that referred to a protected characteristic.
-
I am ambivalent about some things. Do I think those working on the NHS should be forced to be closely involved to carrying out abortions if they object for religious and/or ethical reasons - no. But as per the case where a nurse refused to do part of their job organising theatres and got knocked back that seems correct. Same with the B&B - that is just outright discrimination.
The cake refusal in NI seems ok to me as it was about freedom of speech, not discrimination. If they had refused to bake the cake because a gay person ordered it that would be different.
-
The B&B case was not a refusal to allow the gay couple to stay there, only to share a bed. Therefore, the analogy in the OP doesn't work.
-
If that racist, Trump, turned up on my doorstep and expected to be treated politely and equally as I would treat other guests, he would be disappointed.
Hell's teeth! Do you have to crowbar Trump into absolutely everything? >:(
-
Hell's teeth! Do you have to crowbar Trump into absolutely everything? >:(
I wish, that man is a deranged dictator, imo, and that of everyone else I know. Heretofore when meeting up with someone, or talking to them on the phone, the first topic of conversion would be the weather, now it is usually the Covid-19 virus or Trump.
-
The B&B case was not a refusal to allow the gay couple to stay there, only to share a bed. Therefore, the analogy in the OP doesn't work.
The issue was the B&B owners were prevented from imposing their moral values regarding sexual behaviour on customers. The idea being that if they had such strong principles regarding sexual behaviour, it would probably be better for their sensitivities to run a business that did not involve renting out places where people could have sex.
It is slightly different from not serving someone at all because of the colour of their skin, because guests were not refused service completely - they could stay but just not have sex. But the discrimination is the bit where they let some consenting adults have sex but not others.
The argument is that who they allow to share a bedroom in their home on a non-commercial basis is up to them. As a business, there needs to be some standardisation and they are required to adopt the morality of society's laws. If they strongly disagree with society's morality they are required to find a way of earning money that does not compromise their principles - it's up to them to decide which is more important to them and what sacrifices they are willing to undergo to uphold their personal morality. I know Muslims who will not work anywhere in hospitality that sells alcohol so that limits their job prospects but they accept that.
-
If that racist, Trump, turned up on my doorstep and expected to be treated politely and equally as I would treat other guests, he would be disappointed.
Racist? He wanted to stop the biggest drug runners and cartels from Mexico killing the kids in America and he is now racist?
If people from Mexico are bringing drugs to America then put up the wall. Putting up a wall stops all races from Mexico bringing in drugs and killing Children
and dealing with Terroist selling guns to come and kill all Americans or other nations.
It is bigger than an issue of racism it is about life and death.
-
It is bigger than an issue of racism it is about life and death.
Last time I looked Racism was about life and death.
-
Racist? He wanted to stop the biggest drug runners and cartels from Mexico killing the kids in America and he is now racist?
If people from Mexico are bringing drugs to America then put up the wall. Putting up a wall stops all races from Mexico bringing in drugs and killing Children
and dealing with Terroist selling guns to come and kill all Americans or other nations.
It is bigger than an issue of racism it is about life and death.
The only thing Trump want to do is line his own pocket and polish his image, he couldn't give a monkey's who lives or dies.
-
Racist? He wanted to stop the biggest drug runners and cartels from Mexico killing the kids in America and he is now racist?
In principal, fine, but the realities are more nuanced than that, and suggesting that all the Mexicans coming to the US are rapists and other criminals is just fundamentally untrue.
If people from Mexico are bringing drugs to America then put up the wall.
If... that's a big if. The wall is an ineffectual measure to prevent that particular issue, as well as the issue of immigration.
Putting up a wall stops all races from Mexico bringing in drugs and killing Children
Firstly, it doesn't actually very effectively stop people. Secondly, the majority of the people it does stop are those with limited resources and options; drug runners are typically not those people.
and dealing with Terroist selling guns to come and kill all Americans or other nations.
If Trump was interested in dealing with terrorism, he needs to look to the white supremacy movement that is overwhelmingly responsible for domestic terror incidents in the US - except that, of course, he won't do that seeing as how it's so tightly intertwined with his core support.
It is bigger than an issue of racism it is about life and death.
Except that the issues of racism in the US ARE matters of life and death - in healthcare, in infant mortality, in deaths during childbirth, in deaths in custody - as well as in differences in incarceration rates, in differences in conviction rates, in differences in sentencing outcomes...
O.