It technically does discriminate, since discriminate means to "recognise a distinction" between two things. Just because it is a nasty sounding word doesn't mean it has a nasty meaning. And although smogard's proverb about tampons certainly left something to be desired on the intellectual front, he has actually (and possible inadvertently) stumbled on the heart of the matter; "how can we give equality when we are not all equal and how can we avoid prejudice without causing inconveniences and complications?".

We must discern between people to equalise their opportunities or standard if living but then we would need to give more to those who are naturally unhappy or just incompetent, thus maintains equality of living standards but not equality of treatment or judgement. Aside from the implementation of such a system being completely impossible, it is far from ideal on a wholly moral level since some people who deserve more would get less than those who need more. The opposite of this system is simply to treat everyone the same and this just leads to people creating their own equality, for a while work might be equivalent to reward but with new generations being born eventually some people would be doomed to a substandard existence.

The solution? I don't know, but maybe a balance of both, where those who need more are given enough but not as much as those who earn more. As long as education and employment support those born into families with less, equality, or at least something resembling equality, might as least be close.

I don't know why I am writing like an egomaniac, maybe I just am one. I would appreciate it if someone could prove my propositions wrong so I can stop being so arrogant.

In the context of equality, discrimination is based in prejudice since equality is all about the dominance and oppression between categories of people.


This goes back to my point about fair treatment. Don't take equality too literally. Literal equal treatment sometimes isn't possible. In this discussion, sex has been raised as an example. In cases like this we resort to fair, common sense treatment.


So long as prejudice doesn't restrict the equal rights and opportunities of people, then prejudice is fair game. When it does, I'm not sure what inconveniences and complications you're referring to.

judging someone on relatively inconclusive factors to determine how to treat them is the sort of thing I am talking about. If we have to judge people only on what we know directly about them and not by the sorts of people who do similar things or are from similar backgrounds to them then it would be inconvenient. To put it in a toribash perspective (cuz why not?) in a betting server I am unlikely to bet on someone with a low belt and orc force, especially if they have an illegible username. The biggest prejudice here is me judgement of usernames, in my experience people with loads of numbers at the end of their name as well as weird capitalisations in it tend to lose more than those who don't, I technically have no idea how good they are at toribash but I assume that they are not very good. If you translate it to a more grown up example imagine police searches, you couldn't search people because they looked suspicious, this might sound great but this doesn't just stop racial discrimination, it stops police being able to search people who look like they might be doing drugs or who look like they have been in a fight. they would have to either check everyone or be there whenever a crime happens rather than after or before in order to arrest or question suspects. Prejudice causes a lot of harm but we often need it.

Racial profiling is a controversial issue. It boils down to police making decisions based on race/ethnicity rather than behaviour and evidence/information. If the person is black and exhibiting suspicious behaviour, then it's fair game to act. If they act just because the person is black, then that's quite clearly discrimination. It's not justifiable based on the evidence at the time. You can argue that there's a trend of offence amongst certain races/ethnicities, but if you're doing that you're condemning everyone based on their color. The bottom line is we've moved past those times when we did this.

I was not arguing that racial discrimination is acceptable, simply that it is hard to judge people as being suspicious without making presumptions of what "suspicious" looks like. I feel like, because of the type of society we live in it is hard to imagine a lack of presumptuousness (that word sounds so much shorter than it looks :0) in authority being a problem, but sometimes we need to judge people on past experience (of them). For example the justice system is there because we believe that people who have commuted crime will probably do so again, the reoffending rate proves this. Equality of judgement would mean we did not give people criminal records or take into account previousness crimes after they have served their sentence.

My argument is not that we need more or less equality (in general) since there are many areas which equality can apply to and many different requirements to be taken into account in these areas. My argument is simply that sometimes being more impartial can cause problems and that the problem if equality is extremely complex.

put in a line there is no equality between men and women (to me) that doesn't mean women are slaves to man but also women have their rights, naturally men were made with powerful bodys to endure the hardest conditions in order to provide enough money/food/clothes... to their women/kids,in the other hand women/mothers have to provide love to the family (which is harder than working in farms or elsewhere), both working on one and only goal,leave their trace in history through their kids

now the racial equality (not existing in this time and age) normally a black man is nothing but man,white man as well, the equality between black/white man decrease in the Islamic countrys.
according to the quran:
[...قال تعالـى : [ ياأيها الذين آمنوا لايسخر قوم من قوم عسى أن يكونوا خيراً منهم ولانساءٌ من نساءٍ عسى أن يكن خيراً منهن
but the problem still exist, and the whole racism thing come from the beginning of the civilization, tribal racism wish also exists(especially in between the arabesque tribes). and then again some people say that races doesn't exist, it does and that's the beauty of nature it creates something from nothing, and from another point of view if we (humans) were all the same (can't even imagine it).

but i noticed that whites are also hated, here an example
white person:i'm white and i'm proud

(you'll think this person is racist an ignorant brat and other stuff...)truth be told

black person:i'm black and i'm proud

( you'll directly think of Obama and the cultural mix and tolerance between races)not trying to be racist

the problem is being black these days means being cool,or you got swag (according to the media)for teenagers, all i know that the situation changes once you grow a little bigger.

that's my opinion as a 15 year old kid, i wouldn't say that goes for all Moroccan or Muslim people, its just my opinion
Note: i like to write in big size :3

I would just like to say I admire Dodi for his bravery in posting such a controversial opinion and explaining why he holds such an opinion. However I doubt this will do much to save him from the shitstorm which he is likely to have caused for himself.

And Dodi, try not to use the word natural when describing how men are supposed to provide money for their family. Almost our entire existence is unnatural. On the other hand it could be argued that since humans are part if nature that everything we create is natural, but this would mean that all sin was natural. On the phycological side women are equal to or greater than men in intelligence (men are more susceptible to being born with brain damage as well). Steroids are usually made using female hormones, although I am not too knowledgable on that side of bio-chemistry so I may be mistaken.

I am sure other people will post better statistics to argue against you than I have, but I figured the more the merrier.

I don't remember learning anything about gender roles or gender stereotyping in highschool. Seems like a YMMV situation. It's entirely possible that SJW agenda is being injected into your local school system, they lobby like crazy.

what you mentioned is correct but according to Nietzsche, the concept of God only exists in the minds of his followers; therefore, the believers would ultimately be accountable for his life and death. Holub goes on to state that “God has been the victim of murder, and we, as human beings, are the murderers”
but you should know that 2nd goal of a religion is organizing the human's life,and even if you look to nature you will find a kind of organization inside each specie which serve the human beings.

(lets leave this side of arguments to a next time)

so by sin you mean an illogical act done by a human in prohibition of a religion, and again we fall in a closed circle
religion(the organization of life not the deity you beleave in) leads to prosperity of the nation, but progress can only come with basic morals in each members of that nation(equality/and other manners as well).
example:lying is a sin because it will result in many problems i dont even have to site them.

about poverty: poverty has always been one of the main reasons causing the hate between people and some people say that there is no cure to poverty in our society.
and most of those people missed to point of poverty, and by poverty i mean the lack of money/resources/food/cloths,but if we look back on our history we can find some examples where poverty wasn't called a problem.
i can think of one in this time:
"i will wont calm down until i will one cheek of a tyrant on the ground and the other under my feet, and for the poor and the weak, i will put my cheek on the ground" - Umar ibn khattab
that's how great of a leader he was

if you seek to know more about this man and his long journey click here

somethings i dont think are equal... one, gay marrige, i dont even want to get into it, but its a relgious law, from a country known for freedom of religion... another thing is, mentally unstable people get treated like prisoners, but thats not their fault, they are people too... and third, whats up with the weed being legal in some states but not others, its kinda annoying that they are and we arent but whatever... and most importantly, animals and animal abuse, animals get abused everyday, we have organizations to stop it, but the thing is, breeds of animals are abused (like the pitbull for example)... not every pit bull is mean, like... i could have a husky, he could be a total bull-dog (im punny xD) but, seriously, he could be a fierce dog, but doesnt mean the breed is, same for pitbulls.. and, since im on this topic and already ranted for like 10 mins, we give animals a voice, we try to protect them, but, we hire people to kill insects, why... like, spiders are alive too, bees and ants are alive, ants live in colonies, who knows what emotional traits they have, like, if they experience a family member die, they could be emotionally distressed, and we sit back and hire people to kill all these innocent bugs, but we try to throw people in jail who abuse animals, just something to think about
-----
by the way, i didnt specify if im with or against gay marrige... what i mean is, i agree that gay marrige should be allowed in all states, and it's banned only because of peoples beliefs in their religion, cristianity, other religions dont care about it, but apparently we made a statement, in the declaration of independance or whatever the hell it is, the legislature, whatever, that we should have freedom of religion and religious beliefs, and that the US will not enact religiously what so ever... so.. why, why the laws that come from whats stated in the bible. it's total bulldog, more puns