|
On November 13 2010 04:18 FabledIntegral wrote:
I have a question for people that keep using hte "private argument." This is not rhetorical, it's an actual question in which I don't know the answer.
Why can private schools discriminate, but private businesses cannot? For example, if I want to open my own restaurant, not funded by the government or anything, I cannot refuse service to homosexual couples, minorities, whites, etc. Where in the law does it make schools exempt?
Well, the arguments I would see are that
1. Most businesses are social Institutions without a 'government' option... there's no 'government' restaraunts.. there are significant 'government' schools
2. The school in this case is religious... a private religious organization/business Can discriminate on religious/moral grounds.. because religion/moral grounds are part of the "job description".
The same way as a church legitimately being able to fire a worker that had an off-work affair, wheras a business probably couldn't, at least not for an employee that wasn't in a high profile position. (but both could fire a high profile person who did so under the argument that it was impairing their job...ie there were potential negative publicity results)
A school in the US (private or not) could not outright exclude different races... probably not politicial affiliations either.
[also it should be noted...this was an All-girl school... they were already excluding people on the basis of sex... because that apparently is consistent with their mission. Same as a strip club could refuse to hire a male for a "pole girl" position... the fact that the dancer is male (if known by the patrons) would interfere with their job.
|
On November 13 2010 04:40 Krikkitone wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2010 04:18 FabledIntegral wrote:
I have a question for people that keep using hte "private argument." This is not rhetorical, it's an actual question in which I don't know the answer.
Why can private schools discriminate, but private businesses cannot? For example, if I want to open my own restaurant, not funded by the government or anything, I cannot refuse service to homosexual couples, minorities, whites, etc. Where in the law does it make schools exempt? Well, the arguments I would see are that 1. Most businesses are social Institutions without a 'government' option... there's no 'government' restaraunts.. there are significant 'government' schools 2. The school in this case is religious... a private religious organization/business Can discriminate on religious/moral grounds.. because religion/moral grounds are part of the "job description". The same way as a church legitimately being able to fire a worker that had an off-work affair, wheras a business probably couldn't, at least not for an employee that wasn't in a high profile position. (but both could fire a high profile person who did so under the argument that it was impairing their job...ie there were potential negative publicity results) A school in the US (private or not) could not outright exclude different races... probably not politicial affiliations either. [also it should be noted...this was an All-girl school... they were already excluding people on the basis of sex... because that apparently is consistent with their mission. Same as a strip club could refuse to hire a male for a "pole girl" position... the fact that the dancer is male (if known by the patrons) would interfere with their job.
Thank you for putting that more eloquently than I could.
|
On November 13 2010 04:18 FabledIntegral wrote:
I have a question for people that keep using hte "private argument." This is not rhetorical, it's an actual question in which I don't know the answer.
Why can private schools discriminate, but private businesses cannot? For example, if I want to open my own restaurant, not funded by the government or anything, I cannot refuse service to homosexual couples, minorities, whites, etc. Where in the law does it make schools exempt?
Because when it is a public organization it is something that "everyone" (taxpayers) have paid for so by discriminating they are getting screwed out of something they paid for. That's why both private schools and businesses should be able to discriminate.
When it is a private organization, they aren't welcome, but they don't have to pay for it - so they haven't really lost something anymore than someone who doesn't get invited to a party loses something.
Private business actually can and do discriminate all the freaking time. Don't believe me? Try going to a high class restaurant dressed poorly. Try going to a popular night club as an ugly fat woman. Try working as a male Hooters waiter. Try working as a male dancer at a strip club for men. There are actually far more things than businesses are allowed to discriminate against, just a certain few have become taboo (and against the law in some cases like you mentioned).
By making discrimination illegal in private business, what is really happening is people are saying "it's okay to initiate violence against people who voluntarily interact with each other but do not welcome other certain types of people" which is why I do not support it.
Discrimination is wrong, but I believe using violence against people just because they are unwelcoming is far worse.
|
On November 13 2010 05:01 Treemonkeys wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2010 04:18 FabledIntegral wrote:
I have a question for people that keep using hte "private argument." This is not rhetorical, it's an actual question in which I don't know the answer.
Why can private schools discriminate, but private businesses cannot? For example, if I want to open my own restaurant, not funded by the government or anything, I cannot refuse service to homosexual couples, minorities, whites, etc. Where in the law does it make schools exempt? Because when it is a public organization it is something that "everyone" (taxpayers) have paid for so by discriminating they are getting screwed out of something they paid for. That's why both private schools and businesses should be able to discriminate. When it is a private organization, they aren't welcome, but they don't have to pay for it - so they haven't really lost something anymore than someone who doesn't get invited to a party loses something. Private business actually can and do discriminate all the freaking time. Don't believe me? Try going to a high class restaurant dressed poorly. Try going to a popular night club as an ugly fat woman. Try working as a male Hooters waiter. Try working as a male dancer at a strip club for men. There are actually far more things than businesses are allowed to discriminate against, just a certain few have become taboo (and against the law in some cases like you mentioned). By making discrimination illegal in private business, what is really happening is people are saying "it's okay to initiate violence against people who voluntarily interact with each other but do not welcome other certain types of people" which is why I do not support it. Discrimination is wrong, but I believe using violence against people just because they are unwelcoming is far worse.
But private businesses can get tax cuts depending on how many employees, etc. from the government. I guess as long as it's not a subsidy (which can almost be viewed as the same thing as it has the same outcome), it wouldn't be bad?
|
On November 13 2010 05:06 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2010 05:01 Treemonkeys wrote:On November 13 2010 04:18 FabledIntegral wrote:
I have a question for people that keep using hte "private argument." This is not rhetorical, it's an actual question in which I don't know the answer.
Why can private schools discriminate, but private businesses cannot? For example, if I want to open my own restaurant, not funded by the government or anything, I cannot refuse service to homosexual couples, minorities, whites, etc. Where in the law does it make schools exempt? Because when it is a public organization it is something that "everyone" (taxpayers) have paid for so by discriminating they are getting screwed out of something they paid for. That's why both private schools and businesses should be able to discriminate. When it is a private organization, they aren't welcome, but they don't have to pay for it - so they haven't really lost something anymore than someone who doesn't get invited to a party loses something. Private business actually can and do discriminate all the freaking time. Don't believe me? Try going to a high class restaurant dressed poorly. Try going to a popular night club as an ugly fat woman. Try working as a male Hooters waiter. Try working as a male dancer at a strip club for men. There are actually far more things than businesses are allowed to discriminate against, just a certain few have become taboo (and against the law in some cases like you mentioned). By making discrimination illegal in private business, what is really happening is people are saying "it's okay to initiate violence against people who voluntarily interact with each other but do not welcome other certain types of people" which is why I do not support it. Discrimination is wrong, but I believe using violence against people just because they are unwelcoming is far worse. But private businesses can get tax cuts depending on how many employees, etc. from the government. I guess as long as it's not a subsidy (which can almost be viewed as the same thing as it has the same outcome), it wouldn't be bad?
You can get a tax cut by making your home more green friendly, does that mean everyone should have a welcome invitation?
Plus they are still paying taxes, a lot of taxes. It's not like a tax cut is paying them tax money. It's the same thing as a subsidy IF you have the mentality that the government owns everything and allows people to keep some of it.
|
On November 13 2010 05:23 Treemonkeys wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2010 05:06 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 13 2010 05:01 Treemonkeys wrote:On November 13 2010 04:18 FabledIntegral wrote:
I have a question for people that keep using hte "private argument." This is not rhetorical, it's an actual question in which I don't know the answer.
Why can private schools discriminate, but private businesses cannot? For example, if I want to open my own restaurant, not funded by the government or anything, I cannot refuse service to homosexual couples, minorities, whites, etc. Where in the law does it make schools exempt? Because when it is a public organization it is something that "everyone" (taxpayers) have paid for so by discriminating they are getting screwed out of something they paid for. That's why both private schools and businesses should be able to discriminate. When it is a private organization, they aren't welcome, but they don't have to pay for it - so they haven't really lost something anymore than someone who doesn't get invited to a party loses something. Private business actually can and do discriminate all the freaking time. Don't believe me? Try going to a high class restaurant dressed poorly. Try going to a popular night club as an ugly fat woman. Try working as a male Hooters waiter. Try working as a male dancer at a strip club for men. There are actually far more things than businesses are allowed to discriminate against, just a certain few have become taboo (and against the law in some cases like you mentioned). By making discrimination illegal in private business, what is really happening is people are saying "it's okay to initiate violence against people who voluntarily interact with each other but do not welcome other certain types of people" which is why I do not support it. Discrimination is wrong, but I believe using violence against people just because they are unwelcoming is far worse. But private businesses can get tax cuts depending on how many employees, etc. from the government. I guess as long as it's not a subsidy (which can almost be viewed as the same thing as it has the same outcome), it wouldn't be bad? You can get a tax cut by making your home more green friendly, does that mean everyone should have a welcome invitation? Plus they are still paying taxes, a lot of taxes. It's not like a tax cut is paying them tax money. It's the same thing as a subsidy IF you have the mentality that the government owns everything and allows people to keep some of it.
To the first part, point made 
To the second part, a tax cut is in essence paying you money in the sense you're required to "pay less." It's government giving preferential treatment, so I disagree with you that there has to be the premise that the government owns everything and allows people to keep some of it.
|
I don't understand why people are doing the whole "Private School Discrimination" thing.
The school itself says this isn't a case of that. The school claims to not having a problem with lesbianism. The school claims this is an issue of gender, not sexual orientation. Just because its a private, christian school does not mean they discriminate. And quite frankly I'm surprised people assume that all private christian schools do.
So if people are saying this is open discrimination based on sexual orientation, then you are already going against the school. There's no need to derail the thread based on private organizations discriminating against people. Either way, I'm pretty sure there's nothing legally wrong about any of this.
|
On November 13 2010 08:15 DoubleReed wrote:
I don't understand why people are doing the whole "Private School Discrimination" thing.
The school itself says this isn't a case of that. The school claims to not having a problem with lesbianism. The school claims this is an issue of gender, not sexual orientation. Just because its a private, christian school does not mean they discriminate. And quite frankly I'm surprised people assume that all private christian schools do.
So if people are saying this is open discrimination based on sexual orientation, then you are already going against the school. There's no need to derail the thread based on private organizations discriminating against people. Either way, I'm pretty sure there's nothing legally wrong about any of this.
Why would they admit to it? I hardly see that as even a remotely viable reason to dismiss this case.
|
I'm so glad I live in Australia :D
|
Here's what I hate about these types of situations. People that raise hell about these things and make the topic much more about themselves than about the greater cause.
Whatever happened to punk rock, just do what you want. If you want to goto the dance as a couple then goto the dance as a couple. Racist ways were not changed because people tried to raise an issue about Rosa Parks having to move so a white person could sit down on the bus, it changed because Rosa Parks refused to move.
If you want to change a system you have to simply do what you want, and do what you believe in then be prepared for the consequences of your actions. If you really and truly believe in something then sitting in a prison cell or getting an expulsion from the school is of no important matter if it means you're living with your own values.
Everybody seems to whine to the media these days about everything. Nobody has the balls to do something about anything. Hockey players whine to the media about headshots but nobody goes out and drops the mitts with Matt Cooke in the first minute of a game to send a message like Probert used to do if somebody looked at Yzerman funny. American football players whine to the refs now and make post game comments rather than going after dirty players like James Harrison, you better believe I'd cut him first 5 players I could if I had to play him.
People don't like the wars going on, people don't like the way homosexuals are handled but is there anybody getting arrested for simply standing in front of the white house with hundreds of others stating their beliefs and getting arrested for it? nope. Everybody relies on celebrities and the media to get their message across and sooner rather than later the world is going to be filled with mindless drones with chips in their brains and barcodes on their foreheads because frankly nobody really gives a shit anymore.
We need a more punk rock world where people do things based on their own values and belief systems and if the world gets in your way, then fuck it bring it on.
|
Stupid homophobic school... Their supposed reasons are complete BS and everyone knows it in their heart. I would prefer that they'd just be honest about their stance on same-sex relationships because that would at least provide a starting point for discussion and potentially, change.
|
On November 13 2010 02:37 Crushgroove wrote:
Legal drinking age in Australia is 18. This kid was inviting other kids to her home to illegally consume alcohol before a school function... and people are mad at the school for trying to rain on her parade? IMO, I'd prefer the school that my kids attend some day in the future just expel people who participate in illegal activity, especially if they bring other kids into it.
Her sexual preference issue is fair, however. She should be able to go the damn dance with whatever "guest" she chooses.
EDIT: After reading the post above me, I retract the last part of the statement. Schools making rules is fine, especially if they apply to everyone. I feel for troubled youth.
Source: It is legal for minors to consume alcohol on private property with the consent of their parents.
I'm going to say that again so people stop acting as if there is another story in the OP that people need to be addressing: the girls were not breaking the law by having pre-drinks at their house as long as their parents were in on it and there was an adult around, it being their house. Australian NSW law!=every other country in the world's laws.
|
Arguing that the school's excuse is bad seems a little petty, if they made up a better excuse would you then be happy? Of course they couldn't come out and say, no we dont want gays because ppl would grab their torches. But i may be biased because i would support the school denying entry. Just the same as i would support them enforcing a dress code etc.
It's a private school no? So they can pretty much do what they want within reason and if someone doesnt like it well.... dont go to that school?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
