From: "Kevin Tarr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> At 02:47 PM 2/16/2004, you wrote: > > > >From: "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > ><Snip> > > > > > First, the question is: "Should marriage be redefined to include > >homosexual > > > unions as well as heterosexual unions?" And indeed, given the current > > > judicial environment, the question can be taken one step further "Does our > > > civilization have a moral responsibility to so redefine marriages, > > > *immediately?*" > > > > > > In my mind, however, the questions can be further redefined to be: "Should > > > our civilization incentivse homosexual unions by redefining marriage to > > > include such unions?" And also, "Does our civilization have a moral > > > obligation to immediately incentivise homosexual unions by so redefining > > > marriages *immediately.*?" > > > > > > I come down very firmly against the latter questions, and also fairly > > > firmly aginst the former question as well. > > > > > >The problem is that your questions are wrong. You ask about *moral* > >obligations. Moral obligations are subjective, and by virtue of that fact, > >not the correct standard to apply as there is clearly massive disagreement > >on that. The real question is: Are we *legally* obligated to do those > >things? Under the standard of equal protection under the law, Yes, we are > >obligated to do so. > > > >Michael Harney > > That's interesting. Why are we *legally* required to discriminate based on > race or gender then? For what it's worth, I'm against affirmative action as it exists now. The government sees it as the only way to ensure that minorities get a fair shake. It is how they interprit equal protection in that instance. The presumption, of course, is that people in power are likely to discriminate against people of minority groups. I don't agree with the methods, but I certainly can't argue that discrimination doesn't happen, and something needs to be done to remedy that. Do you have a better solution to ensure that descrimination doesn't happen? I would love to hear one. Perhaps all job applications should be mailed in, with only social security numbers rather than names. Moreover, resumes would only have social security numbers on them as identifying information as well. And job interviews will be a blind process, where the employer does not know which applicant they are interviewing, or the interview process takes place in such a way that the interviewer is unable to see the applicant. The employer will only know who they hired when the employment choice is made. Michael Harney [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
