Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 35
  1. #1
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    21,157
    Quote Originally Posted by arosar
    Yesterday, while sitting on the train to the city, some Christian nut disturbed everyone by singing hymns to Lord Jesus. Allelujah this, allelujah that. You see these sickos around. If you ask me, such behaviour should be banned. Anyway, that was just pissing me off.
    Wouldn't be my thing either.

    Quote Originally Posted by arosar
    But then I saw this piece of news.
    A good piece of news for sure, for sure — separation of church and state and all, in the original Jeffersonian understanding of keeping the government from interfering with religion.
    “The history of the 20th century is full of examples of countries that set out to redistribute wealth and ended up redistributing poverty.”
    “There’s no point blaming the tragedies of socialism on the flaws or corruption of particular leaders. Any system which allows some people to exercise unbridled power over others is an open invitation to abuse, whether that system is called slavery or socialism or something else.”—Thomas Sowell

  2. #2
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,533
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    A good piece of news for sure, for sure — separation of church and state and all, in the original Jeffersonian understanding of keeping the government from interfering with religion.
    That depends on whether the "church" bodies in question are separated from the state in the first place. If they are in receipt of government funding or tax concessions then they are not and should not be entitled to discriminate.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

  3. #3
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    5,540
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham
    That depends on whether the "church" bodies in question are separated from the state in the first place. If they are in receipt of government funding or tax concessions then they are not and should not be entitled to discriminate.
    Generally speaking it's a good idea. However, like any justice, it only work if applied universally, not selectively.
    I agree that any community group should be stripped from government funding, not just religious.

    Same applies to school. Either no funding to schools at all, or every child is funded to the same amount - and parents are free to choose whatever school they want.
    For private coaching (IM, four times VIC champion) call or SMS 0417519733
    Computer tells you what to play. Good coach explains why.

  4. #4
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    21,157

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    I agree that any community group should be stripped from government funding, not just religious.
    Indeed, like ACORN in the USA, albeit belatedly,

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    Same applies to school. Either no funding to schools at all, or every child is funded to the same amount — and parents are free to choose whatever school they want.
    Agreed.
    “The history of the 20th century is full of examples of countries that set out to redistribute wealth and ended up redistributing poverty.”
    “There’s no point blaming the tragedies of socialism on the flaws or corruption of particular leaders. Any system which allows some people to exercise unbridled power over others is an open invitation to abuse, whether that system is called slavery or socialism or something else.”—Thomas Sowell

  5. #5
    Reader in Slood Dynamics Rincewind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    The multiverse
    Posts
    21,575
    I think the recent posts in this thread are off-topic to the original and should be moved to a thread on separation of church and state.

    The first recent post by arosar would be off topic even for that but I don't know if there is a thread for whinging about god-bothers. However it doesn't seem to have legs whereas this secular society and the role of public education could.
    So einfach wie möglich, aber nicht einfacher - Albert Einstein

  6. #6
    CC International Master TheJoker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,646
    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    Generally speaking it's a good idea. However, like any justice, it only work if applied universally, not selectively.
    I agree that any community group should be stripped from government funding, not just religious.
    I think funding is a side issue, since all private non-government businesses are prohibited from discriminating in the manner afforded to religious groups in Vic.

    Religious groups should be subject to the same broad anti-discrimination (and taxation) laws as any other business / not-for-profit organisation.

    Therefore either the laws are changed across the board or they are not.

    I suspect these laws will prevail until a group like the KKK surfaces, albeit targeting sexuality rather than race, under the protection of the new legislation nd then they will revert back to a single law for all organisations.

    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    and parents are free to choose whatever school they want.
    Parents are totally free to choose whatever school they like. It's Australian workers (parents or not) who do not have the option of choosing whether to subsidise both government and private schools.

    Yes the subsidies distort the market price of education for both public and private schools. If you truly believe in the supremacy of the market you'd be arguing for a user-pays system without any public funding whatsoever. But then again we all know that wouldn't work.

    BTW if you're in NSW you'd be best placed choosing a good public school since they perform better academically and cost less per student than thier private counterparts (stats provided in previous threads use the search function if you are interested).
    Last edited by TheJoker; 29-09-2009 at 01:18 PM.

  7. #7
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    5,540
    Quote Originally Posted by TheJoker
    I think funding is a side issue, since all private non-government businesses are prohibited from discriminating in the manner afforded to religious groups in Vic.
    I am not sure whether it's true or not. If it is, then it's wrong, as it nullifies freedom of association.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheJoker
    Parents are totally free to choose whatever school they like. It's Australian workers (parents or not) who do not have the option of choosing whether to subsidise both government and private schools.

    Yes the subsidies distort the market price of education for both public and private schools. If you truly believe in the supremacy of the market you'd be arguing for a user-pays system without any public funding whatsoever. But then again we all know that wouldn't work.
    I generally support user-pays system (with lower taxes). Education is probably the only area where I am willing to compromise to the degree I mentioned before.
    For private coaching (IM, four times VIC champion) call or SMS 0417519733
    Computer tells you what to play. Good coach explains why.

  8. #8
    CC International Master TheJoker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,646
    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    I am not sure whether it's true or not. If it is, then it's wrong, as it nullifies freedom of association.
    So do you rules that expressly prohibit certain people from joining organisations!

  9. #9
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    21,157
    Quote Originally Posted by TheJoker
    So do you rules that expressly prohibit certain people from joining organisations!
    Come off it. There is no right to be associated with groups that don't want to be associated with you.
    “The history of the 20th century is full of examples of countries that set out to redistribute wealth and ended up redistributing poverty.”
    “There’s no point blaming the tragedies of socialism on the flaws or corruption of particular leaders. Any system which allows some people to exercise unbridled power over others is an open invitation to abuse, whether that system is called slavery or socialism or something else.”—Thomas Sowell

  10. #10
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    5,540
    Quote Originally Posted by TheJoker
    So do you rules that expressly prohibit certain people from joining organisations!
    Is it alright for fitness club to be "women only"?
    By any definition it's a gender based discrimination.
    Personally, I have no problem with it.
    But why other organisations aren't and shouldn't be allowed to do the same?
    For private coaching (IM, four times VIC champion) call or SMS 0417519733
    Computer tells you what to play. Good coach explains why.

  11. #11
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    40,533
    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    Is it alright for fitness club to be "women only"?
    By any definition it's a gender based discrimination.
    Personally, I have no problem with it.
    But why other organisations aren't and shouldn't be allowed to do the same?
    It often comes down to the strength of the reasons for being allowed to discriminate that an organisation or business is able to offer. Women's-only fitness clubs are generally fairly easy to justify because there are women who will not go to mixed-gender fitness clubs because of concern that sports jocks will perve on them or try to chat them up. Furthermore in most cases the existence of such clubs cannot be argued to concretely disadvantage men or deny men a service. It gets a bit trickier if there is only one fitness club in an area and it is female-only.

    That said, there have been cases where complaints against women's-only fitness clubs have succeeded, in some jurisdictions.
    Moderation Requests: All requests for, comments about, or questions about moderation of any kind including thread changes must be posted in the Help and Feedback section and not on the thread in question. (Or by private message for routine changes or sensitive matters.)

    ACF Newsletter Information - All Australian players and administrators should subscribe and check each issue for relevant notices

    My psephology/politics site (token chess references only) : http://kevinbonham.blogspot.com.au/ Politics twitter feed https://twitter.com/kevinbonham

  12. #12
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    5,540
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham
    It often comes down to the strength of the reasons for being allowed to discriminate that an organisation or business is able to offer. Women's-only fitness clubs are generally fairly easy to justify because there are women who will not go to mixed-gender fitness clubs because of concern that sports jocks will perve on them or try to chat them up. Furthermore in most cases the existence of such clubs cannot be argued to concretely disadvantage men or deny men a service. It gets a bit trickier if there is only one fitness club in an area and it is female-only.

    That said, there have been cases where complaints against women's-only fitness clubs have succeeded, in some jurisdictions.
    But why does an organisation has to justify anything? Don't like the rules - don't join. As long as the rules are transparent, I see no problems with that.
    For private coaching (IM, four times VIC champion) call or SMS 0417519733
    Computer tells you what to play. Good coach explains why.

  13. #13
    CC International Master TheJoker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,646
    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    But why does an organisation has to justify anything? Don't like the rules - don't join. As long as the rules are transparent, I see no problems with that.
    Because organisations are part of the community and therefore accountable to the community. Remember its the community that decides the rules in a democracy.

  14. #14
    CC International Master TheJoker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,646
    Quote Originally Posted by Igor_Goldenberg
    Is it alright for fitness club to be "women only"?
    By any definition it's a gender based discrimination.
    Personally, I have no problem with it.
    But why other organisations aren't and shouldn't be allowed to do the same?
    The answer is simple, you evaluate expections to the general rule of prohibiting certain forms of discrimination (e.g. gender, race etc) based on there merit.

    Women-only gyms obviously have a large number of benefits and dont cause any form of servere disadvantage.

    A big difference to say denying someone access to earning a particular income beacause of race or gender without being able to demonstrate that it has some benefit other than allowing an organisation or individual to enact their predjudices.

    What argument do reglious groups have for discriminating against gender or sexuality? What's the benefit to the community of allowing them to do so?

  15. #15
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    21,157
    Quote Originally Posted by TheJoker
    Because organisations are part of the community and therefore accountable to the community. Remember its the community that decides the rules in a democracy.
    That's a problem with pure democracy then — a tyranny of the majority (or of bureaucrats purporting to represent the majority). The American Founders specifically rejected a democracy for that reason. In Federalist Paper No. 10, James Madison wrote, “Measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority. ... democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.” John Adams predicted, “Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There was never a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” At the 1787 Constitutional Convention, Edmund Randolph said, “… that in tracing these evils to their origin every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy.” In ancient Greece, such tyranny resulted in ostracisms, for example.

    How many other decisions would you like being made for you by the majority? If and whom to marry? What car to drive? What food you eat? So why should freedom of association be decided by the majority?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheJoker
    A big difference to say denying someone access to earning a particular income beacause of race or gender without being able to demonstrate that it has some benefit other than allowing an organisation or individual to enact their predjudices.
    Why should they have to? It's enough that they don't want to associate with them. Then the community's choice is whether to join this association.

    What argument do reglious groups have for discriminating against gender or sexuality? What's the benefit to the community of allowing them to do so?[/QUOTE]
    Why is it the community's business?
    Last edited by Capablanca-Fan; 06-10-2009 at 11:11 AM.
    “The history of the 20th century is full of examples of countries that set out to redistribute wealth and ended up redistributing poverty.”
    “There’s no point blaming the tragedies of socialism on the flaws or corruption of particular leaders. Any system which allows some people to exercise unbridled power over others is an open invitation to abuse, whether that system is called slavery or socialism or something else.”—Thomas Sowell

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The dangers of a belief in a spiritual "truth"
    By Rincewind in forum Religion and Science
    Replies: 697
    Last Post: 21-04-2021, 03:02 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •