(01-15-2021 11:03 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-14-2021 08:43 PM)georgewebb Wrote:  

(01-13-2021 11:46 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  It is simple, Lad. Do not discriminate on the grounds of race or sex.

Again, back to the core difference between "progressives" and others. Leftists believe that government should have the presumptive right to (among other things) discriminate based on race, sex, etc., in case the discriminations it makes are virtuous. Others believe it should not, in case they're not.

When asked how it could be ensured that such a presumptive right to discriminate would be used "virtuously" rather than viciously, the "progressive" answer is essentially: trust us.* The student of history can be forgiven for thinking: not on your life.

*More precisely, for many "progressives" the answer might be: since our ilk defines what is virtuous, as long as you put us in charge, power will necessarily be used virtuously. Of course, when asked how it could be ensured that their perceptions of what is virtuous will be valid over time, the "progressive" answer comes back to: trust us.

Is government discrimination based on race/color/creed/sex/national origin always an unmitigated evil? Probably not. But given the history of such discriminations over time and of governmental power in general over time, it seems tremendously wise to err on the side of fewer rather than more. One of the many ways in which "progressives" discredit themselves is by conspicuously giving short shrift to that wisdom.

Instead of discriminate, which generally has a negative connotation in this instance, it would be better to use differentiate.

I know what you mean, but linguistically it is simply too tempting not to reply that if ever there was a distinction without a difference, this is it.

(01-15-2021 11:03 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I agree that it's better to err on the side of fewer, rather than more, laws that differentiate groups.

I keep telling you: you're a liberal (not a progressive) after all!