|
stella41b -> RE: For anyone who is Homosexual, Virginia could care less (3/7/2010 9:47:59 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: eyesopened
I think it would be easier on everyone if we didn't have the long list of what and who we do not discriminate against and just adopt a "We will not practice discrimination in any form against anyone."
Dictionary definition of discrimination is "treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit:"
Really, that's all that is needed. To include one group, class or category and exclude another is in itself discrimination and it has been alleged that in naming such in policy is actual protection. If it was adopted that discrimination for any reason would not be tolerated then we could forget about which group didn't get mentioned and go about our business.
Exactly, this is the way I see it too. This is what cost me my position as head of an LGBT focus group here in West London as I followed an inclusive policy and wanted to make the group sLGBT (the small 's' for straight people) because (1) the vast majority of those found under the LGBT umbrella are supported by someone who is heterosexual, be it a member of the family or a friend and (2) I feel the actual minority aren't those from within the LGBT community but those who persecute them for whatever reason.
Discrimination is discrimination, period, no matter whether it's in terms of someone's ethnicity, skin colour, gender or sexual orientation, age, whatever, it's still discrimination. If someone isn't prepared to respect someone else on such grounds as skin colour or sexual orientation, then I feel they're hardly likely to respect any piece of legislation protecting them. It doesn't matter where the issue of discrimination lies, these people are still the minority.
quote:
ORIGINAL: eyesopened
But what it looks like to me is that politicians are no longer interested in serving the constituents they have but rather they want to create constituents they like to serve.
This, once again... This is what Ken Cucinelli writes on his website:
quote:
'I come into office with a mandate from the people of Virginia-- to alter the course of change, and keep that path free from insistent government intervention, government mandates, government control.
In addition to standing guard over your individual rights during my tenure, you can count on me to stand guard against constitutional overreaching by the federal government, but only thanks to your support and your efforts.'
The parts above are bolded for emphasis, and come from someone who is now found to be dictating to higher education in Virginia in terms of legislation and who appears to be very concerned with what his constituents are doing in their bedrooms.
|
|
|
|
