... thanks for that. It's an interesting distinction. Sent from my iPad
> On Feb 15, 2015, at 8:26 PM, Graber, Mark <mgra...@law.umaryland.edu> wrote: > > Dear All: > > This goes back in time a bit, but I have had a busy weekend and wanted to > respond to those who wondered why I think the racist prostitute should be > subject to anti-discrimination laws. > > One feature of several rights is that we do not allow people to commodify > them, or at least commodify them in certain ways. So while people have the > right to vote, and may choose when exercising the right to vote may vote only > for persons of color (or white persons), we do not allow persons to sell > their right to vote. We think the reason people ought to have a right to > vote is justified by the same principle that supports forbidding the right to > sell the vote. > > Consider sex. One reason we think persons have a right to certain sexual > relationships is that we think government should not ban intimate > relationships. One reason many people think prostitution should be banned is > that intimacy is not the sort of good that should be bought and sold. But > now imagine we live in a world in which people have no problem commodifying > sex. The best reason for thinking this is that they do not regard commercial > sex as intimate behavior. They regard sex as more akin to back rubs, and or > ice cream, but of which are subject to anti-discrimination rights. But if > people do not think commercial sex is intimate behavior than the main reason > why we allow discrimination has been rejected. > > In short, my claim is that if sex is just business, then sex is not intimate, > and only intimate relationships and actions should enjoy immunity for > anti-discrimination rules. > > MAG > _______________________________________________ > To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as > private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; > people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) > forward the messages to others. _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
