Belly, I am not being precocious or petulant by asking for explanations on my points.
I am being honest/serious.
You see, I am surprised by the title and furthermore by the author.
I believe he is an OLO adjudicator.
If so, the question comes as an even bigger surprise to me as OLO has pinged me and others for, quite honestly, insignificant, and minor comments, compared to others and especially the ones I was responding too.
So knowing this, one of the reasons I would like to know the answers to my questions, is because it will highlight the differences between people and their opinions on the same topics, and the author of this topic seems to agree.
ie; We are ALL entitled to speak our minds, irrespective of where we are.
This also includes the risk of discrimination, even if un-intended.

Who is it ok to discriminate against
Belly,
Those who discriminate !

Only with real freedom are people allowed to discriminate. In that freedom a person can say one person is better then another, one act is better then another, or even on a larger scale, that certian people are better/worse, and certian behaviors are worth standing against and fighting against. Or even to be allowed to challenge those perspectives and hold different standards. To make a case for this point, think of an employer hiring for an open position. The employer gets several people to consider for the job, some with a questionable history either bouncing between jobs frequently or have a criminal history in their background check, or failed their drug tests. The basis of an employer to discriminate against these candidates without any other considerations is the same case for anyone to discriminate for whatever reason to judge one person over another.

It's not a case of whether the discrimination is justified, but whether it's allowed. On that note no one should suggest to have no standards thereby removing discrimination, because we should have standards we hold ourselves and those around us to. However, freedom to discriminate is itself a handicap on another person's freedom of equal Liberty. And the acts of discrimination sometimes go over the top in harming other. It's because of the harms that there are policies against racism, sexism, and many other things. So that someone of a different race isn't oppressed, or so that women aren't abused and sexually assaulted. The right to freely be able to discriminate as you see fit has gone down the ragged road of what's still allowed to be discriminated against, and what is held on a pedestal to not be allowed to be challenged even when it's in the wrong.

(Continued)

(Continued)

In other words the issue of discrimination and freedom (including free speech, as well as free from discrimination itself), has become an issue of extremes and PC agendas. Where instead of calling out when something is wrong, or show your stance against it by not accepting those who are part of the problem; instead people go to extremes and make rules that you can't speak out or act out against certain groups. A woman who is abusive therefore is more protected then a man that is abusive; though they both do wrong and the punishment should be equal. A homosexual is more privileged because they are less allowed to be spoken against or acted against on the basis of their sexuality. Same with a disabled person, or with any number of people.

The protection against certain groups have become a PC agenda that any minority group wants to get aboard, and is causing issues with the ability to freely hold standards as individuals or as a society. The only real way to get around this is to at least be able to have free speech. To be allowed to speak against anything with no rules or strings attached is the best defense against extremes between being allowed to discriminate, and being protected against discrimination.

Hi ALTRAV,

"Especially when discrimination is just another natural part of life.
So just get used to it, or better still, ignore it."

But what about if discrimination becomes persecution, and persecution become retribution. Can you ignore that, or is it to late.

Left handed people are the cause of all our problems!
At first a few agree, later more agree, eventually the majority agree.

Left handed people, the cause of all our problems, should be locked up and reeducated for their own good!
At first a few agree, later more agree, eventually the majority agree.

Left handed people, the cause of all our problems who are beyond reeducation, should be disposed of for the good of the majority!
The majority agrees.

ALTRAV, it does happen.

Paul, I think I get it.
I can understand the reasoning behind your example/message.
As much as it would seem far fetched, I must agree in that people are what they are, and because of this anything is possible, as frightening as your example may be.
I would like to think that if that is the way of the people, then so be it.
Many people can be swayed by so few people, (Hitler, comes to mind) and if such people are mal-contents, with an evil streak, then we have a problem.
I suppose I am coming from a much closer and smaller circle of example; myself.
It is because I don't want to be censured or questioned by another, thereby relinquishing my freedom and giving it to another or them taking it away from me, if I don't consent, that I am more about, rather than having considered the bigger picture.
I suppose my response to your example is more one of fatalism.
Or to say, if what you say is correct then so be it.
I would like to think, and I do have a certain amount of optimism, that given the chance, we can say and do (to a certain degree) what we want in the hope that society, with all it's faults and flaws, will still recognise what is bad and not go down that path.
I realise it is dependent on the psyche and maturity of the people in question.
So I suppose I can only speak for myself, when I say, I do not want my freedoms curtailed or questioned in any way.