Perhaps people of all minorities have earned their right to "tell people what to do" through legislative means
but people who are a majority haven't earned the right to tell homosexuals they aren't allowed to be married? the whole point is that you shouldn't have some sort of right to
tell people what to do, and that includes who you should be able to marry, who you choose to associate with (in the workplace as an employer, in a church, or whatever) etc.
I would argue that moderate, reasonable anti-discrimination laws perform an important safeguard in a pretty easy-going society like Australia's. I certainly appreciate Australia's anti-discrimination laws are hard won and critically important when one considers judicial and law enforcement systems like those in Iran, for example, where consensual sex between people of the same sex, including 'lustful kissing' is illegal with punishment up to death.
safeguard for what? a safeguard for homosexual execution?
Iranian culture is not open or tolerant towards LGBT people, but would Australians be as open, on personal and professional levels, as they are now, if we never had the kind of anti-discrimination laws (sexual orientation comes under state jurisdictions)?
so basically you're saying that people hate faggots and you basically need laws to make people pretend to like them
lmao
yeah sorry personal levels no (and it wouldn't matter anyway; could you explain how anti-discrimination laws operate to make people pretend to like homosexuals on a personal level), professional level maybe in some places of employment but most no
why faggots are so enthusiastic to be hired by people who dont like them in the first place i';ll never understand
You don't seem the open mind type but maybe if you put yourself in the shoes of a homosexual or a pregnant woman and think how blazingly angry you would feel if you were denied opportunities at the workplace on the basis of your condition
lots of people get discriminated against not just butthumpers for some reason or another at some time in their life, buttpumpers just want to make it seem like they have some sort of monopoly on suffering and personal persecution
i've probably been discriminated against in employment for reasons i don't consider particularly fair (it has nothing to do with my race, sexual orientation, etc, though) but that doesn't mean that i think there should be a billion different laws legislating against freedom of association
do you think we should just make a bunch new laws everytime you become 'blazingly angry' over some perceived injustice
why not bring in anti-discrimination laws for friendship circles too
TOO MANY WHITE PEOPLE IN YOUR GROUP OF FRIENDS
NOT ENOUGH HOMOS
anti-discrimination laws can prob be opposed on a very sensible pragmatic basis that barry goldwater underlined in the 1960s; they lead to employment quotas eventually for a very logical reason. small firms cant defend themselves legally against claims of 'discrimination' from some whingy minority and even if they can, more often than not the legal fees damage them extensively so they self impose employment quotas on themselves to avoid problems in the first place which is BAD BAD BASD. legislative quotas eventually become a desirable thing which is HORRIBLE quotas are the WORST THING EVER
i don't know whether we run quotas in aussie but i'm sure they're going on somewhere
