emilynghiem
Constitutionalist / Universalist
- Jan 21, 2010
- 23,669
- 4,181
Many people have asked me that if I am open to people's BELIEFS against gay marriage as a free choice, would I be open to people who have beliefs against racial equality as a choice?
A. I can think of one exception that I might make for racial accommodations:
What if someone has suffered a brutal crime or rape by a person of a certain race,
such as Black Latino Asian, even a while male. And is going through PTSD and cannot
be around such people alone or they react. What if the effects of that crime last 2-5 years.
If we are going to allow transgender people who are going through sensitive therapy and changes the EXCEPTION to the current bathroom rules (of anatomical males using the men's room and anatomical females using the women's room) IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THEIR EMOTIONAL NEEDS NOT TO BE JUDGED HARASSED OR REJECTED,
then couldn't the same courtesy be extended "in the special case" where someone has
been traumatized and has an adverse reaction to people of a certain race, and don't feel able to
serve those people or they suffer emotional trauma, anxiety or other PTSD symptoms.
The LGBT want an exception for the small percentage of people who need those accommodations.
What about other people in special circumstances who might need exceptions?
B. But if the answer is NO, because PEOPLE WOULD ABUSE THE RACE EXCEPTION
AND CLAIM RIGHTS TO DISCRIMINATE TOO BROADLY
isn't THAT the same or similar argument to people saying
NO
to the transgender bathroom policy "because it would open the door to abuse" by people who AREN'T really transgender.
(And if you're going to say the person going through race related trauma should
"NOT run a public business" but should RETREAT in private until they overcome their issues,
WOULD YOU SAY THE SAME ABOUT TRANSGENDER PEOPLE who can "just use
a PRIVATE restroom" and NOT try to impose a public policy on everyone else "that can be too easily abused.")
Is this a close enough analogy or parallel to work with?
It's not a perfect parallel, so if you are going to nitpick on parallel structure, forget it.
That's NOT what I'm asking.
If not, can you think of a parallel or analogous situation
that would explain this better? Thanks!
A. I can think of one exception that I might make for racial accommodations:
What if someone has suffered a brutal crime or rape by a person of a certain race,
such as Black Latino Asian, even a while male. And is going through PTSD and cannot
be around such people alone or they react. What if the effects of that crime last 2-5 years.
If we are going to allow transgender people who are going through sensitive therapy and changes the EXCEPTION to the current bathroom rules (of anatomical males using the men's room and anatomical females using the women's room) IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THEIR EMOTIONAL NEEDS NOT TO BE JUDGED HARASSED OR REJECTED,
then couldn't the same courtesy be extended "in the special case" where someone has
been traumatized and has an adverse reaction to people of a certain race, and don't feel able to
serve those people or they suffer emotional trauma, anxiety or other PTSD symptoms.
The LGBT want an exception for the small percentage of people who need those accommodations.
What about other people in special circumstances who might need exceptions?
B. But if the answer is NO, because PEOPLE WOULD ABUSE THE RACE EXCEPTION
AND CLAIM RIGHTS TO DISCRIMINATE TOO BROADLY
isn't THAT the same or similar argument to people saying
NO
to the transgender bathroom policy "because it would open the door to abuse" by people who AREN'T really transgender.
(And if you're going to say the person going through race related trauma should
"NOT run a public business" but should RETREAT in private until they overcome their issues,
WOULD YOU SAY THE SAME ABOUT TRANSGENDER PEOPLE who can "just use
a PRIVATE restroom" and NOT try to impose a public policy on everyone else "that can be too easily abused.")
Is this a close enough analogy or parallel to work with?
It's not a perfect parallel, so if you are going to nitpick on parallel structure, forget it.
That's NOT what I'm asking.
If not, can you think of a parallel or analogous situation
that would explain this better? Thanks!
Last edited:
