SnailyBoy   10 #217 Posted October 19, 2018 Be careful what you wish for - if you're happy for words and meanings to be taken out of definition to serve a purpose, let's hope you don't suffer the consequence. Where law is concerned, i want my definitions very well... well, defined. If i use the definitions of words to argue, don't be surprised when that comes back to bite you in a court of law or the fascist state in which you so desire to live.  If someone is refused service for some reason, i want to know what that reason is so i can choose whether i want to shop there or not.  Would you be happy with a Muslim baker being forced to create a cake for the BNP? Because that's what you're advocating. Discrimination runs both ways... good and bad!  Seriously, are you okay? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Guest makapaka   #218 Posted October 19, 2018 Be careful what you wish for - if you're happy for words and meanings to be taken out of definition to serve a purpose, let's hope you don't suffer the consequence. Where law is concerned, i want my definitions very well... well, defined. If i use the definitions of words to argue, don't be surprised when that comes back to bite you in a court of law or the fascist state in which you so desire to live.  If someone is refused service for some reason, i want to know what that reason is so i can choose whether i want to shop there or not.  Would you be happy with a Muslim baker being forced to create a cake for the BNP? Because that's what you're advocating. Discrimination runs both ways... good and bad!  Nah I think you’re getting a bit mixed up here. The ruling was right because it wasn’t prejudice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
phil752 Â Â 10 #219 Posted October 19, 2018 May have been said before. Just get a life why are we all intent on getting people to do thing they don't want to do. Did they insult the guys wanting a slogan on the cake, did they deny them a cake no, just didn't want to put a provocative slogan on it. In the world at present does it matter. Now I know I'm going to get caned here, but why do minorities seem to get the majorly of headlines. Is this just a case in hand. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Cyclone   10 #220 Posted October 20, 2018 Why did we ever force businesses to remove those "No blacks, no Irish" signs? Why force them to do things they didn't want them to do?  ---------- Post added 20-10-2018 at 06:35 ----------   Would you be happy with a Muslim baker being forced to create a cake for the BNP? Because that's what you're advocating. Discrimination runs both ways... good and bad!  I'm not sure why political opinion should be considered a protected characteristic, unlike things like sexual preference, skin colour and so on, politics is something that can change.  ---------- Post added 20-10-2018 at 06:36 ----------  Yep, no problem there Mister M, but I actually had something different in mind... For example, there are not enough purple people working in industry X, so let's hire more purple people (when better trained non-purple people are available) or give them free training opportunities to get them involved, so it doesn't look like we're discriminating against purple people. Some call it positive discrimination, but it is however, discrimination against non-purple people.  To be clear, there aren't enough purple people because they are somehow systematically disadvantaged. They don't benefit from the same opportunities that non-purple people do. And so additional training is merely an attempt to level the field.  ---------- Post added 20-10-2018 at 06:38 ----------  I actually agree on this with you, it makes sense - you assess individual needs, you assess even risks and create a filter for best candidate. All backed up by logical reasons. But to set a filter only to get more balanced numbers and artificially suppress under-representation? That's just wrong.  Which is all fine, until you find that you have a police force with very few ethnic minorities, which actually causes an operational problem, because you still have to police those ethnic minorities. And then when you look closely you realise that the fair and even filter was institutionally biased in the past by prejudice and perception. And that even now lower numbers of ethnic minorities apply at all, due to that ongoing perception. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Waldo   96 #221 Posted October 20, 2018 (edited) @Cyclone.  Sure, but it's a bit like putting a sticky plaster on it, and not addressing the core problem.  How and why are purple people systematically disadvantaged? I would imagine, systems are generally run by people, and people tend to be cliquey, and act more favourably towards other people who are more like themselves. To my mind, that's the core issue, and the long-term solution is to diminish this proclivity we have for being discriminatory.  ---------- Post added 20-10-2018 at 10:13 ----------  Also, how will non-purple people feel, who are more disadvantaged than some of the purple people being offered opportunities that they themselves are not? Could that conceivably increase tensions and discrimination? Edited October 20, 2018 by Waldo Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
fill   10 #222 Posted October 24, 2018 Positive discrimination is just another word for discrimination.  if discrimination is always wrong...... and i do mean if  then that obviously also includes positive discrimination  if you disagree then what you are really saying is that the discrimination you approve of is ok and any other discrimination is not.  how bad is that?  and if you 'claim' to mean something else then you are just trying to wriggle out of what you said to remain PC in the eyes of other equally deluded folk Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Eater Sundae   12 #223 Posted October 24, 2018 if discrimination is always wrong...... and i do mean if then that obviously also includes positive discrimination  if you disagree then what you are really saying is that the discrimination you approve of is ok and any other discrimination is not.  how bad is that?  and if you 'claim' to mean something else then you are just trying to wriggle out of what you said to remain PC in the eyes of other equally deluded folk  Re bib...  It isn’t Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Hots on   10 #224 Posted October 24, 2018 Wrong. It's called positive discrimination to highlight the fact that it's intended to redress an imbalance.  There isn't an imbalance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Cyclone   10 #225 Posted October 24, 2018 There isn't an imbalance.  Where? Nobody was discussing a specific example... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Waldo   96 #226 Posted October 25, 2018 (edited) if discrimination is always wrong...... and i do mean if then that obviously also includes positive discrimination  if you disagree then what you are really saying is that the discrimination you approve of is ok and any other discrimination is not.  how bad is that?  and if you 'claim' to mean something else then you are just trying to wriggle out of what you said to remain PC in the eyes of other equally deluded folk  Do you ever feel when you post something on here, (some) people just aren't intelligent enough to grasp the subtleties what you're saying? And that you just can't be bothered to enlighten them?  In the simplest of terms...  Positive discrimination for a group 'A' of people, is the same as negative discrimination against all people who are not in group 'A'. Edited October 25, 2018 by Waldo Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
choogling   14 #227 Posted October 25, 2018 talking about positive discrimination ,the BBC have got to be guilty for example the morning news has a totally useless black woman who can barely string a sentence together and asks stupid questions co-hosting the breakfast program, on a Saturday BBC radio 2 has become a gay male presenter day, look north has a gay weather guy talk about over representing the minorities . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Ramjit   10 #228 Posted October 25, 2018 talking about positive discrimination ,the BBC have got to be guilty for example the morning news has a totally useless black woman who can barely string a sentence together and asks stupid questions co-hosting the breakfast program, on a Saturday BBC radio 2 has become a gay male presenter day, look north has a gay weather guy talk about over representing the minorities .  Thats a good point. Some minorities are way way waaaaaaaaaaaay over represented on tv including the commercials in in between programmes. Women seem to be way over represented too for some reason. I don't watch TV much myself but a person who I work with said pretty much the same as you a little while ago so I just had to have a nosy and see if that's the case. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...