Sep 29, 2016
12:06:47pm
12:06:47pm
This is the crux of the 'fairness for all' argument
It is actually an argument to allow discrimination within an religious-based umbrella, just a debate about how moral or amoral discriminating can be and where the umbrella can go.
"Married student housing" and 'no sexual activity' in the HC is a totally religious-based form of discrimination against single people, but no-one is arguing that is amoral discrimination (today), even though there are employment laws against marital status discrimination.
"Married student housing" and 'no sexual activity' in the HC is a totally religious-based form of discrimination against single people, but no-one is arguing that is amoral discrimination (today), even though there are employment laws against marital status discrimination.
- Bio page
- BluebloodOR
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2011
- Last login
- May 2, 2024
- Total posts
- 3,022 (2 FO)
Messages
Time
9/29/16 9:20am
9/29/16 7:49am
9/29/16 7:58am
9/29/16 8:25am
9/29/16 8:48am
9/29/16 8:50am
9/29/16 11:47am
9/29/16 8:31am
Yes, this is what I'm referencing. The idea that tolerance and free exercise should be a prevailing principle
9/29/16 8:45am
9/29/16 11:04am
9/29/16 12:06pm
9/29/16 10:38am