England
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
I know this has been done to death here, but I'm interested to see where people views have settled. Feel free to elaborate on your views in the comments. I know it's not "my thread", but there are plenty of other ones where you can debate who the "real bigots" are.

I'm using "protected class" as defined here; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_class ("a protected class is a characteristic of a person which cannot be targeted for discrimination"). I know some people don't like the term, but there you go.

I've distinguished between the public and private sectors as I know (some) people's views differ between these.

Edit: I've not distinguished between "public accommodation" and things like housing, employment etc. In general, I suggest picking the option which most accurately reflects you overall view and going with "public accommodation" if they differ widely.

Usual poll caveat applies (i.e. it's a shit poll and you could have done better).

Poll
1. In the private sector:
I support protected class legislation and do not support exceptions of any kind for sincerely held beliefs
I support protected class legislation, with exceptions for sincerely held religious beliefs which apply to the provision of customised goods and services only
I support protected class legislation, with exceptions for sincerely held religious OR OTHER MORAL beliefs which apply to the provision of customised goods and services only
I support protected class legislation, with exceptions for sincerely held religious beliefs which may apply to the provision of any/all goods and services
I support protected class legislation, with exceptions for sincerely held religious OR OTHER MORAL beliefs which may apply to the provision of any/all goods and services
I do not support protected class legislation but would be prepared to support such legislation in certain circumstances (which I do not believe prevail in my country now)
I do not support protected class legislation
2. In the public sector:
I support protected class legislation and do not support exceptions of any kind for sincerely held beliefs
I support protected class legislation, with exceptions for sincerely held religious beliefs which apply to the provision of customised goods and services only
I support protected class legislation, with exceptions for sincerely held religious OR OTHER MORAL beliefs which apply to the provision of customised goods and services only
I support protected class legislation, with exceptions for sincerely held religious beliefs which may apply to the provision of any/all goods and services
I support protected class legislation, with exceptions for sincerely held religious OR OTHER MORAL beliefs which may apply to the provision of any/all goods and services
I do not support protected class legislation but would be prepared to support such legislation in certain circumstances (which I do not believe prevail in my country now)
I do not support protected class legislation
3. In the private sector, I support protected class legislation for the following classes:
Age
Citizenship
Disability
Gender
Gender identity
Genetic information
Marital status
Nationality/national origin
Parental status
Physical appearance
Political affiliation
Pregnancy
Race/colour
Religion
Sexual orientation
Union membership
Veteran status
4. In the public sector, I support protected class legislation for the following classes:
Age
Citizenship
Disability
Gender
Gender identity
Genetic information
Marital status
Nationality/national origin
Parental status
Physical appearance
Political affiliation
Pregnancy
Race/colour
Religion
Sexual orientation
Union membership
Veteran status
      53 answers
Poll created by AdamTracey
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
flag msg tools
badge
Bitter and Acerbic Harridan
Avatar
Are you mainly talking about public accommodations law - e.g., provision of commercial goods or services, as opposed to other types of things like housing or employment? Many (some?) of us see these differently.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So none of this refers to a person's conduct as a private citizen, but in all cases, business transactions in the Market of our particular country?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Russell
United States
Clarkston
Michigan
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I can't figure out how to input my opinion into your poll, so I'll post it here.

A privately owned business should be able to do business with whomever they choose and not be forced to with anyone else.

A public office (staffed by government employees) should have to serve everyone.

No class protection laws needed.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pandora Caitiff
United Kingdom
Norfolk
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm of the opinion if you can't comply with business law because of your religious beliefs, you need to get out of that business. Or maybe lobby to change the law.

Trust in your god to provide
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I support the underlying idea of protected classes but am wary of the ability of the legal profession not to screw up in practice what is in theory a good idea. So I'm against discrimination of all kind in public and private sectors but the wording of the laws needs to be sufficiently precise, not overly broad and able to accommodate things like example not forcing a religious Jewish school to accept as a student a non-Jewish Hindu or for that matter a Reform Jewish convert who is not Jewish by Jewish Law.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
whac3 wrote:
I support the underlying idea of protected classes but am wary of the ability of the legal profession not to screw up in practice what is in theory a good idea. So I'm against discrimination of all kind in public and private sectors but the wording of the laws needs to be sufficiently precise, not overly broad and able to accommodate things like example not forcing a religious Jewish school to accept as a student a non-Jewish Hindu or for that matter a Reform Jewish convert who is not Jewish by Jewish Law.
Or A religious Christian school from accepting Jews?

So how about a Christian organization refusing to allow entry to Jews (such as a university or political party), indeed where do you draw the line on what is a "religious exemption?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
whac3 wrote:
I support the underlying idea of protected classes but am wary of the ability of the legal profession not to screw up in practice what is in theory a good idea. So I'm against discrimination of all kind in public and private sectors but the wording of the laws needs to be sufficiently precise, not overly broad and able to accommodate things like example not forcing a religious Jewish school to accept as a student a non-Jewish Hindu or for that matter a Reform Jewish convert who is not Jewish by Jewish Law.
Or A religious Christian school from accepting Jews?

So how about a Christian organization refusing to allow entry to Jews (such as a university or political party), indeed where do you draw the line on what is a "religious exemption?

If a Catholic school only accepts Catholics, that's fine. If it on;y excludes Jews, that's not.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
whac3 wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
whac3 wrote:
I support the underlying idea of protected classes but am wary of the ability of the legal profession not to screw up in practice what is in theory a good idea. So I'm against discrimination of all kind in public and private sectors but the wording of the laws needs to be sufficiently precise, not overly broad and able to accommodate things like example not forcing a religious Jewish school to accept as a student a non-Jewish Hindu or for that matter a Reform Jewish convert who is not Jewish by Jewish Law.
Or A religious Christian school from accepting Jews?

So how about a Christian organization refusing to allow entry to Jews (such as a university or political party), indeed where do you draw the line on what is a "religious exemption?

If a Catholic school only accepts Catholics, that's fine. If it on;y excludes Jews, that's not.
What about if they accept any Christians, but ban any non Christians is that also OK?

Do we extent this to private business or municipalities? Would it be OK to set up a Christian township where none Christians are banned from living?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
slatersteven wrote:
whac3 wrote:

If a Catholic school only accepts Catholics, that's fine. If it on;y excludes Jews, that's not.
What about if they accept any Christians, but ban any non Christians is that also OK?

Do we extent this to private business or municipalities? Would it be OK to set up a Christian township where none Christians are banned from living?

See my statement above. Restrictions like that need to be very specific. Religious education has a reason for only involving people of that religion. None of the other stuff you mention does.

Indeed if religious education is confined to only certain classes then the school should not exclude anyone except from those classes.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bimmy Jim
Canada
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm very happy to see gender and race at 100%. Those are obviously things you can't choose whatsoever, and there is no practical reason to be discriminated against based on gender or race (unlike the pregnancy/disability example below).

I'm sad that sexual orientation is not at 100%.

---

I didn't check pregnancy or disability.

"We need a contractor for the next 1 month to attend multiple meetings to accumulate business requirements and implement an application by the end of the month"

"I'm 8 months pregnant, but am a protected class - so you HAVE to hire me".

Yeah... no.

--

Also, hiring a disabled person may require a HUGE amount of money to spend being able to support that person.

Example: If you are at a building without an elevator and a paraplegic applies, I think it's OK he be refused based on his disability if it'll make the company go bankrupt to install an elevator.

---

If you're applying to be a spokesperson for the GOP, it makes little sense to be an open democrat.

---

If you're applying to be a fitness icon, or a model for a fitness/nutrition industry.. being fat would be a realistic disqualifier.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Boaty McBoatface
England
County of Essex
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
whac3 wrote:
slatersteven wrote:
whac3 wrote:

If a Catholic school only accepts Catholics, that's fine. If it on;y excludes Jews, that's not.
What about if they accept any Christians, but ban any non Christians is that also OK?

Do we extent this to private business or municipalities? Would it be OK to set up a Christian township where none Christians are banned from living?

See my statement above. Restrictions like that need to be very specific. Religious education has a reason for only involving people of that religion. None of the other stuff you mention does.

Indeed if religious education is confined to only certain classes then the school should not exclude anyone except from those classes.
Do they not, is that not what monasteries are, religious communities?

I can see that an education about how you should act is not appropriate unless you are from that group. It just seems to be that making entire institutions "religious exception" is open to far to much abuse. Why should it only be schools, and if not only schools what else?

I can just see such a law being litigation city Especially if you include the caveat, "but only from religious classes", so what defines a religious class, and would a schools curriculum have to be 100% religious to allow blanket bans on admissions?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pandora Caitiff
United Kingdom
Norfolk
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
BimmyJim wrote:
Also, hiring a disabled person may require a HUGE amount of money to spend being able to support that person.

Example: If you are at a building without an elevator and a paraplegic applies, I think it's OK he be refused based on his disability if it'll make the company go bankrupt to install an elevator.


I don't know what it's like in Canada, but here in the UK, companies are only required to make reasonable adjustments to accommodate people from protected classes.

Fitting an elevator might not be reasonable if the paraplegic worker can do all their work on the ground floor, and there aren't any other staff members or customers who need access to other floors, but have mobility issues.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James Myers
United States
Redmond
WA
flag msg tools
Mandelbrot/Simurgh hybrid etc etc
badge
I made both of these fractals, hurray!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This is a weird poll.

If you don't support protected classes, you don't support the civil rights act, and you should have voted all blanks in the second half of the poll.

Interestingly, literally no one did that... unless the polling system interprets blanks as non-responses, which is very likely the case.

If that is the case, it would be elucidating to add a "none of the above" option to the second half of the poll, so we could see.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
S C
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Terwox wrote:
This is a weird poll.

If you don't support protected classes, you don't support the civil rights act, and you should have voted all blanks in the second half of the poll.

Interestingly, literally no one did that... unless the polling system interprets blanks as non-responses, which is very likely the case.

If that is the case, it would be elucidating to add a "none of the above" option to the second half of the poll, so we could see.


Well there are 41 votes in the top section and only 30/31 in the bottom so that's probably your answer.

For me the concept of 'protected class' is wrapping society up in cottom wool. The only things that should be protected is the right to basic food/other needs, healthcare and education. You should not be able to refuse a gay diabetic with low blood sugar from buying chocolate, for example, however refusing to make a special occasion cake should be the businesses choice.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.