|
now before you freak out and hit alert, please read what I actually write carefully. I half-heartedly support AA, at least until we can get rid of the last vestiges of racial prejudice, but one day I'd like to see AA gone, and people judged exclusively by the content of their character instead of the color of their skin.
People are not created equal, and this country wasn't founded on the idea that everybody is equal in every way. This should be obvious. Some people are better looking for others, some have a better personality than others or a better, more efficient brain, some are born with trust funds, some people like coleslaw and some don't, et cetera. We're a diverse crowd. What this country was founded on was the idea that everybody should be equal before the law, that there shouldn't be special perks based upon who you are, how much money you have, et cetera. In other words, everybody is supposed to be accountable to the same laws, and given the same general opportunities as everybody else. It doesn't always work out that way, but that's the goal.
It's not even illegal to discriminate against people in most cases. It's only illegal to discriminate against people based upon certain characteristics (listed in Title 7) that are not subject to change, or the result of personal choices, like if you're handicapped, or based upon race, gender, ethnicity, national origin, religion, et cetera.
EVERYBODY who has ever applied for a job and hasn't gotten it has been discriminated against, and it's only illegal if this discrimination was based upon one of the characteristics listed in Title 7. For example, if 50 white guys (or 50 black women or 50 Asian hermaphrodites or 50 midget albino lesbian Eskimos or whatever, I'm not trying to offend anybody, but trying to make sure people realize that in this example the important thing is that all the applicants are identical except one has a degree and 49 don't) of the same age are the only applicants for a job, and only one has a college degree, and that one gets hired because he's got a degree and none of the other applicants have a degree, the 49 people who didn't get the position were discriminated against, but it's not because of something listed in Title 7, instead it's a factor of marketability, education, et cetera. I don't have a problem with this kind of discrimination, as long as that's the real root of the discrimination, instead of just a smokescreen to hide other prohibited discrimination.
It's legally acceptable to discriminate in housing, too, as long as it's not based upon those Title 7 characteristics. Got pets? Got pets you enjoy having nasty sex with in public areas? Don't bathe regularly because you're lazy and show up at the viewing stinking of 4 month old sweat? Got a really bad credit rating, with a long list of delinquencies and evictions? Hell, make $125K a year and want to move into a section 8 apartment? Then you can be LEGALLY discriminated against.
Anyway, enough rant. My point is that the "all men are created equal" needs to be updated. It should read "All people are inherently equal in the eyes of the law, and should get the same general opportunities."
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
