Here are news items that bring out the oddity of the claim, which is now thought fundamental to humanity, morality and justice, that “discrimination” is a definite thing that must be wiped out:
- Black legislators attack Republican governor for “racist” suggestion that SAT scores help determine eligibility for scholarships. There are real differences among groups. Some of the differences are obviously relevant to important practical issues. To do away with discrimination, however, you have to pretend the differences don’t exist, don’t matter, or are somehow evil and unspeakable. Otherwise people will view groups as different, and sometimes act accordingly.
- Christians at Texas senior center sue over decision to ban religious activities. The state is worried about constitutionality, but the seniors don’t see why reading the bible in their their home away from home is a problem. The issue is that if the government is hospitable to something not everyone agrees with that’s discriminatory, but if they aren’t hospitable to it that’s discriminatory too. The conflict is encoded into the “establishment” and the “free exercise” clauses of the First Amendment, which under current law directly contradict each other.
- Australian transgender group complains about exclusion from lesbian festival. Lesfest 2004 got an exemption from antidiscrimination rules so the event could be exclusive. Even the caterers have to be female-born lesbians. It appears that affirming lesbianhood, unlike affirming other things one could imagine, is a good thing under Australian law that trumps nondiscrimination. The transgender group nonetheless took offense, and the organizers replied that they could go celebrate their own identity someplace else. So which comes first, under the rule that self-chosen identities must be respected: the right of the transgenders to identify as female, or the right of the lesbians to identify with a more absolute standard of femaleness? It’s a toughie!