"Discrimination" Is Not A Bad Thing

[protectionist]

Leave it to liberals to create a new vocabulary for American English speakers. Words are transformed into how liberals would like them to be understood. In the liberal mentality, the word “discrimination”, is used as something bad, which we all must be required to detest.

One example (out of thousands) is the transgender person who calls opposition to taxpayer funding of sex change surgery >> “discrimination”. She (actually he) claims that this opposition is unacceptable, because it’s “discrimination”. This is ridiculous “logic”.

According to this so-called “logic”, it would be unacceptable to discriminate between free people, and criminals kept in prisons. It would be unacceptable to discriminate between 2 different routes of travel to a supermarket. It would be unacceptable to discriminate between 2 different color shirts to wear in the morning. Or to discriminate between having a chicken or turkey sandwhich.

Obviously it’s WHAT we discriminate about that makes the discrimination acceptable or unacceptable. Discrimination, in and of itself, is neither good nor bad.

In the case of the proposal for taxpayer funding of transgender surgery, this is beyond preposterous. When the VA doesn’t even pay for dental care for some veterans with service-connected disabilities, the notion of paying for some deranged sex surgery, should NOT even be on the table.

 

[RodISHI]

Leave it to liberals to create a new vocabulary for American English speakers. Words are transformed into how liberals would like them to be understood. In the liberal mentality, the word “discrimination”, is used as something bad, which we all must be required to detest.

One example (out of thousands) is the transgender person who calls opposition to taxpayer funding of sex change surgery >> “discrimination”. She (actually he) claims that this opposition is unacceptable, because it’s “discrimination”. This is ridiculous “logic”.

According to this so-called “logic”, it would be unacceptable to discriminate between free people, and criminals kept in prisons. It would be unacceptable to discriminate between 2 different routes of travel to a supermarket. It would be unacceptable to discriminate between 2 different color shirts to wear in the morning. Or to discriminate between having a chicken or turkey sandwhich.

Obviously it’s WHAT we discriminate about that makes the discrimination acceptable or unacceptable. Discrimination, in and of itself, is neither good nor bad.

In the case of the proposal for taxpayer funding of transgender surgery, this is beyond preposterous. When the VA doesn’t even pay for dental care for some veterans with service-connected disabilities, the notion of paying for some deranged sex surgery, should even be on the table.

BPA plastics and hormone altering chemicals shouldn't be used anywhere near food products or water sources either but they are. This country gave its self over to the chemical companies. Now we have lots of boys who think they are girls, and girls who think they are boys. Why isn't that mentioned in all these rants?

 

[Fenton Lum]

Leave it to liberals to create a new vocabulary for American English speakers. Words are transformed into how liberals would like them to be understood. In the liberal mentality, the word “discrimination”, is used as something bad, which we all must be required to detest.

One example (out of thousands) is the transgender person who calls opposition to taxpayer funding of sex change surgery >> “discrimination”. She (actually he) claims that this opposition is unacceptable, because it’s “discrimination”. This is ridiculous “logic”.

According to this so-called “logic”, it would be unacceptable to discriminate between free people, and criminals kept in prisons. It would be unacceptable to discriminate between 2 different routes of travel to a supermarket. It would be unacceptable to discriminate between 2 different color shirts to wear in the morning. Or to discriminate between having a chicken or turkey sandwhich.

Obviously it’s WHAT we discriminate about that makes the discrimination acceptable or unacceptable. Discrimination, in and of itself, is neither good nor bad.

In the case of the proposal for taxpayer funding of transgender surgery, this is beyond preposterous. When the VA doesn’t even pay for dental care for some veterans with service-connected disabilities, the notion of paying for some deranged sex surgery, should even be on the table.

BPA plastics and hormone altering chemicals shouldn't be used anywhere near food products or water sources either but they are. This country gave its self over to the chemical companies. Now we have lots of boys who think they are girls, and girls who think they are boys. Why isn't that mentioned in all these rants?

Because it wasn't your rant hon.

 

[LaDexter]

Discrimination and the Democratic Party are one and the same.

Slavery
Segregation
Affirmative Action

At every point in time, the Democrats were supporting state sponsored DNA discrimination, just like the NAZIs...

 

[RodISHI]

Leave it to liberals to create a new vocabulary for American English speakers. Words are transformed into how liberals would like them to be understood. In the liberal mentality, the word “discrimination”, is used as something bad, which we all must be required to detest.

One example (out of thousands) is the transgender person who calls opposition to taxpayer funding of sex change surgery >> “discrimination”. She (actually he) claims that this opposition is unacceptable, because it’s “discrimination”. This is ridiculous “logic”.

According to this so-called “logic”, it would be unacceptable to discriminate between free people, and criminals kept in prisons. It would be unacceptable to discriminate between 2 different routes of travel to a supermarket. It would be unacceptable to discriminate between 2 different color shirts to wear in the morning. Or to discriminate between having a chicken or turkey sandwhich.

Obviously it’s WHAT we discriminate about that makes the discrimination acceptable or unacceptable. Discrimination, in and of itself, is neither good nor bad.

In the case of the proposal for taxpayer funding of transgender surgery, this is beyond preposterous. When the VA doesn’t even pay for dental care for some veterans with service-connected disabilities, the notion of paying for some deranged sex surgery, should even be on the table.

BPA plastics and hormone altering chemicals shouldn't be used anywhere near food products or water sources either but they are. This country gave its self over to the chemical companies. Now we have lots of boys who think they are girls, and girls who think they are boys. Why isn't that mentioned in all these rants?

Because it wasn't your rant hon.

It's irritating when the likely causation isn't included for a problem or issue.

 

[Fenton Lum]

Leave it to liberals to create a new vocabulary for American English speakers. Words are transformed into how liberals would like them to be understood. In the liberal mentality, the word “discrimination”, is used as something bad, which we all must be required to detest.

One example (out of thousands) is the transgender person who calls opposition to taxpayer funding of sex change surgery >> “discrimination”. She (actually he) claims that this opposition is unacceptable, because it’s “discrimination”. This is ridiculous “logic”.

According to this so-called “logic”, it would be unacceptable to discriminate between free people, and criminals kept in prisons. It would be unacceptable to discriminate between 2 different routes of travel to a supermarket. It would be unacceptable to discriminate between 2 different color shirts to wear in the morning. Or to discriminate between having a chicken or turkey sandwhich.

Obviously it’s WHAT we discriminate about that makes the discrimination acceptable or unacceptable. Discrimination, in and of itself, is neither good nor bad.

In the case of the proposal for taxpayer funding of transgender surgery, this is beyond preposterous. When the VA doesn’t even pay for dental care for some veterans with service-connected disabilities, the notion of paying for some deranged sex surgery, should even be on the table.

BPA plastics and hormone altering chemicals shouldn't be used anywhere near food products or water sources either but they are. This country gave its self over to the chemical companies. Now we have lots of boys who think they are girls, and girls who think they are boys. Why isn't that mentioned in all these rants?

Because it wasn't your rant hon.

It's irritating when the likely causation isn't included for a problem or issue.

Rant on brother.

 

[Fenton Lum]

Discrimination and the Democratic Party are one and the same.

Slavery
Segregation
Affirmative Action

At every point in time, the Democrats were supporting state sponsored DNA discrimination, just like the NAZIs...

Yup, all we need to do to solve all the problems in this society is vote for the other party.

 

[LaDexter]

Yup, all we need to do to solve all the problems in this society is vote for the other party.

or reject the Democratic Party completely and drive a stake through the Dem obsession with state sponsored DNA discrimination.

I'm a registered Libertarian, so "the other party" bullshit failed for you here big time...

 

[EvilCat Breath]

to be discriminating is to be a very good thing. It means you don't take everything. You're choosy as to what benefits you the most.

 

[LaDexter]

to be discriminating is to be a very good thing

Sincerely,

Adolph Hitler
Jefferson Davis
Mao
Stalin
Saddam


all either Dems or Socialists...

 

[protectionist]

Yup, all we need to do to solve all the problems in this society is vote for the other party.

It's already helping.

 

[Nosmo King]

Leave it to liberals to create a new vocabulary for American English speakers. Words are transformed into how liberals would like them to be understood. In the liberal mentality, the word “discrimination”, is used as something bad, which we all must be required to detest.

One example (out of thousands) is the transgender person who calls opposition to taxpayer funding of sex change surgery >> “discrimination”. She (actually he) claims that this opposition is unacceptable, because it’s “discrimination”. This is ridiculous “logic”.

According to this so-called “logic”, it would be unacceptable to discriminate between free people, and criminals kept in prisons. It would be unacceptable to discriminate between 2 different routes of travel to a supermarket. It would be unacceptable to discriminate between 2 different color shirts to wear in the morning. Or to discriminate between having a chicken or turkey sandwhich.

Obviously it’s WHAT we discriminate about that makes the discrimination acceptable or unacceptable. Discrimination, in and of itself, is neither good nor bad.

In the case of the proposal for taxpayer funding of transgender surgery, this is beyond preposterous. When the VA doesn’t even pay for dental care for some veterans with service-connected disabilities, the notion of paying for some deranged sex surgery, should even be on the table.

Parse you words as carefully as you wish, you have either missed the point or, worse, ignoring it.

Discriminating between shirts or routes to the supermarket does not rise to the definition implied in racial or sexual discrimination. No shirt is harmed if you do not choose it. The alternative routes to the market are not left seeking equal justice.

And criminals have ceded most of their rights after conviction. So that example serves no purpose.

If you're suggesting that the same rationale exists to permit discriminating against your fellow citizens due to their complexion or sexual orientation as the choice between a yellow shirt or a green shirt, you are suggesting that shirts have rights that must not be infringed. A shallow and specious argument.

Conversely, what is the virtue of discriminating against law abiding, tax paying citizens and customers? What makes it good?

All I can see is vice, unnecessary humiliation and off handed cruelty.

 

[protectionist]

to be discriminating is to be a very good thing. It means you don't take everything. You're choosy as to what benefits you the most.

Can't deny that. And what benefits everyone the most.

 

[protectionist]

Parse you words as carefully as you wish, you have either missed the point or, worse, ignoring it.

Discriminating between shirts or routes to the supermarket does not rise to the definition implied in racial or sexual discrimination. No shirt is harmed if you do not choose it. The alternative routes to the market are not left seeking equal justice.

And criminals have ceded most of their rights after conviction. So that example serves no purpose.

If you're suggesting that the same rationale exists to permit discriminating against your fellow citizens due to their complexion or sexual orientation as the choice between a yellow shirt or a green shirt, you are suggesting that shirts have rights that must not be infringed. A shallow and specious argument.

Conversely, what is the virtue of discriminating against law abiding, tax paying citizens and customers? What makes it good?

All I can see is vice, unnecessary humiliation and off handed cruelty.

You missed the point. The transgender person is using the word "discrimination" as if ALL discrimination was bad, and as if we are all required to never discriminate. Simple idiocy, but it is one of the hallmarks of the left. Get it ?

As for discrimination regarding sex and race, 95% of that is Affirmative Action discrimination against whites and males, still allowed by 42 states, still allowed after 56 years.

 

[Defiant1]

Whenever there is a group crying discrimination over some action the government is taking, it is more than likely the government shouldn't be involved in the first place.

 

[Nosmo King]

Parse you words as carefully as you wish, you have either missed the point or, worse, ignoring it.

Discriminating between shirts or routes to the supermarket does not rise to the definition implied in racial or sexual discrimination. No shirt is harmed if you do not choose it. The alternative routes to the market are not left seeking equal justice.

And criminals have ceded most of their rights after conviction. So that example serves no purpose.

If you're suggesting that the same rationale exists to permit discriminating against your fellow citizens due to their complexion or sexual orientation as the choice between a yellow shirt or a green shirt, you are suggesting that shirts have rights that must not be infringed. A shallow and specious argument.

Conversely, what is the virtue of discriminating against law abiding, tax paying citizens and customers? What makes it good?

All I can see is vice, unnecessary humiliation and off handed cruelty.

You missed the point. The transgender person is using the word "discrimination" as if ALL discrimination was bad, and as if we are all required to never discriminate. Simple idiocy, but it is one of the hallmarks of the left. Get it ?

As for discrimination regarding sex and race, 95% of that is Affirmative Action discrimination against whites and males, still allowed by 42 states, still allowed after 56 years.

How you inferred that a transgender person wants to employ the same cam shaft straight logic you're using to define 'discrimination' with one definition. Discrimination against law abiding, tax paying fellow American citizens based on race or gender is always wrong. Discriminating over a menu is fine. There are more than one meaning for discrimination.

And I had no idea, as a White man and an American citizen for three score years now that I have been so oppressed. You have to be making stuff up if you want us to believe that 95% of racial discrimination is due to Affirmative Action. Where, other than in your imagination, did you come up with that statistic?

 

[LaDexter]

Why is the Democrat Party so OBSESSED with ALWAYS having some sort of state sponsored DNA discrimination on the books???

Slavery
Segregation
Affirmative Action

The Dems are ALWAYS for state sponsored DNA discrimination. So are the Dem supporters...

 

[LaDexter]

Jeopardy! music still playing...

 

[Fenton Lum]

Yup, all we need to do to solve all the problems in this society is vote for the other party.

It's already helping.

Sure it is hon, sure it is.

 

[protectionist]

How you inferred that a transgender person wants to employ the same cam shaft straight logic you're using to define 'discrimination' with one definition. Discrimination against law abiding, tax paying fellow American citizens based on race or gender is always wrong. Discriminating over a menu is fine. There are more than one meaning for discrimination.

And I had no idea, as a White man and an American citizen for three score years now that I have been so oppressed. You have to be making stuff up if you want us to believe that 95% of racial discrimination is due to Affirmative Action. Where, other than in your imagination, did you come up with that statistic?

1. Thanks so much for repeating what I said in the OP.

2. Liberals often have "no idea" about political realities in America, Their OMISSION media rarely, if ever mentions things they don't want us to know about (Affirmative Action, Islamization, Mexican Imperialism by remittances$$, etc) So it's no surprise to hear liberals say that they have "no idea". They are the most information deprived folks in America, and walkaround not realizing how much they don't know. I have proved this many times with my Islamization Quiz. It's amazing how many liberals say "Islamization. What's that ?"

You're a White man in America, and are unaware of your racial discrimination victimization ? Wow! That what I call ignorance., Big time. And no I'm not making up the assistantship that I (and 16 other non-Blacks) was denied in graduate school, causing us to drop out, and putting 5 years of college studies right down the drain.

Whether you know it or not isn't really relevant. You've been discriminated against for job hiring, job promotions, college admissions, college financial aid, business loans, etc. Time to get your head out of the sand. They're not going to walk right up to you and say "We discriminated against you by AA". It's up to you to be smart enough to know.

PS - I never "infer", imply, or insinuate anything. If I want to say something, I say it.

As for the 95% number, it's just a guess, but probably not far from accurate. Since ALL whites are discriminated against every minute of every day, just be the continued existence of AA, and since Whites are so populous, it's fair to say, anti-white discrimination is, by far, the most prolific.