IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Genetic Discrimination Bill.
psychÝ
post Apr 26 2008, 04:15 PM
Post #1


Upstanding Citizen


Group: Members
Posts: 0
Joined: 26-August 04
From: The Steel City, England
Member No.: 1,279



Clicky

I think I agree with this in the cases shown in the article as insurance companies shouldn't be allowed to raise your insurance levels as you may never contract the illness you have a predisposition to, however of course then there is the fact that if you know this and do nothing to reduce these effects would insurance companies be able to make a case not to pay out, as for all intensive purposes you have brought it on yourself, then again if you were living a lifestyle of that kind they would most likely raise your premium.

However in some cases such as choosing between two people with exactly the same credentials, could using their genetic information as part of the equation be useful?

The problem with that is if one person is better for a job genetically, but the other person has done as well as them so far that implies that they have more motivation as they have less natural talent, so who would be better, someone who works hard or someone who doesn't but is as good?

A case could be made that the person with inferior genetics could be betters as if they were promoted they would adapt better for the new situations which the other person may not be used to?

QUOTE(Democratic Senator Edward Kennedy )
"Discrimination based on a person's genetic identity is just as unacceptable as discrimination on the basis of race or religion."
He clearly doesn't know what the hell he is talking about, as it is a far better reason to discriminate than either of those reasons, I mean the person is actually better or are more likely to contract a disease ceteris paribus, it isn't some arbitrary point to make a judgement on.

This post has been edited by psychÝ: Apr 26 2008, 04:28 PM


--------------------

Dragonfly
Achievements
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Screw Loose
post May 2 2008, 04:53 AM
Post #2


Upstanding Citizen


Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 28-October 05
From: Yes
Member No.: 25,696



I'm completely for genetic discrimination...

If a petty officer who guides military aircraft is genetically prone to seizures, i sure as fuck wouldn't let him keep his position, but i also wouldn't fire him. I'd offer him an alternative with equal pay and benefits in which their genetic disadvantage isn't as much of a liability

It isn't the same as racial or religious discrimination, it is practical discrimination because possible problems are being prevented because of it

...Of course, each case should be treated individually, if somebody has worked a position for a long time and has plenty of experience, as well as a strong DESIRE to keep the job, then they should be entitled to keep their job and tell the people applying for it to fuck off

...Of course, just because somebody is genetically prone to it, doesn't mean the illness will EVER happen.

"Discrimination based on a person's genetic identity is just as unacceptable as discrimination on the basis of race or religion." - He doens't know what the fuck he's talking about, this sort of discrimination will prevent possible problems


--------------------
( . )( . )
Achievements
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Skinny†
post May 2 2008, 11:38 AM
Post #3



**

Group: Members
Posts: 258
Joined: 31-December 07
From: A basement full of scientists, puffing on chronic
Member No.: 38,184



QUOTE(psychÝ @ Apr 27 2008, 02:15 AM) [snapback]1422545[/snapback]
QUOTE(Democratic Senator Edward Kennedy )
"Discrimination based on a person's genetic identity is just as unacceptable as discrimination on the basis of race or religion."
He clearly doesn't know what the hell he is talking about,

Yeah, he must have been smoking some serious crack when he wrote that. People who differ in nationality have no real diffrences other than phisical appearence while genetic identity would mean thay actualy do have diffrent capabilities.


--------------------
=D
Achievements
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Severus Snape
post May 2 2008, 01:48 PM
Post #4


Litterer


Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: 8-March 06
From: Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry
Member No.: 28,564



Discrimination on the grounds of genetic identity is still discrimination. Nobody should be discriminated against for something they have no control over. It's like discriminating against someone because of skin color. Or eye color. Or their name.

If we allow discrimination against genetic identity, what's to stop someone from passing a bill that allows any other form of discrimination? We would once again find ourselves back in a time where people were segregated based on skin color. "Oh, you have a genetic predisposition to having some illness that you may never feel the effects of? You people get to use THAT water fountain, and THAT restroom, and your children have to attend THAT school. You can't be in the same places as the rest of us cuz you're different."


--------------------
QUOTE (Massacre @ Mar 14 2011, 02:10 PM) *
We're more than capable of answering you, we're just not doing it because you're being a cunt, and it's you specifically we don't care about, we do care about the rest of the forums.


Achievements
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Skinny†
post May 2 2008, 02:14 PM
Post #5



**

Group: Members
Posts: 258
Joined: 31-December 07
From: A basement full of scientists, puffing on chronic
Member No.: 38,184



QUOTE(Leon Kennedy @ May 2 2008, 11:48 PM) [snapback]1428742[/snapback]
Discrimination on the grounds of genetic identity is still discrimination. Nobody should be discriminated against for something they have no control over. It's like discriminating against someone because of skin color. Or eye color. Or their name.

No, being black or Jewish can't interfier with your job. What if, like Screw Loose said you were 'a petty officer who guides military aircraft is genetically prone to seizures'. Would you consider not letting someone prone to seizures guide military aircrafts discrimination?


--------------------
=D
Achievements
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Severus Snape
post May 2 2008, 04:50 PM
Post #6


Litterer


Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: 8-March 06
From: Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry
Member No.: 28,564



QUOTE(8 Ball @ May 2 2008, 09:14 AM) [snapback]1428757[/snapback]
QUOTE(Leon Kennedy @ May 2 2008, 11:48 PM) [snapback]1428742[/snapback]
Discrimination on the grounds of genetic identity is still discrimination. Nobody should be discriminated against for something they have no control over. It's like discriminating against someone because of skin color. Or eye color. Or their name.

No, being black or Jewish can't interfier with your job. What if, like Screw Loose said you were 'a petty officer who guides military aircraft is genetically prone to seizures'. Would you consider not letting someone prone to seizures guide military aircrafts discrimination?

Bolded for effect.

I will agree that being black or jewish won't affect your ability to perform your job. But due to discrimination, it CAN affect your ability to obtain said employment. Which is discrimination. Imagine this:

YOU are a normal, healthy person trying to get a job as a bank teller. You would be handling money all day, and interacting with customers all day. You also happen to (this isn't true, it's just for this scenario) have a genetic pre-disposition (a family history of) for some horrible, contagious disease that would make interacting with customers impossible. You don't have any signs of it, and you probably won't ever contract it fully. But your prospective employer says "Well, you are a great candidate and have all the qualifications. We can't give you the job, however, because you MIGHT infect other people. Sorry." How would you feel?

This is no different than people being disciminated against for jobs in the 80s and early 90s during the major AIDS scare.


--------------------
QUOTE (Massacre @ Mar 14 2011, 02:10 PM) *
We're more than capable of answering you, we're just not doing it because you're being a cunt, and it's you specifically we don't care about, we do care about the rest of the forums.


Achievements
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Skinny†
post May 5 2008, 11:45 AM
Post #7



**

Group: Members
Posts: 258
Joined: 31-December 07
From: A basement full of scientists, puffing on chronic
Member No.: 38,184



QUOTE(Leon Kennedy @ May 3 2008, 02:50 AM) [snapback]1428886[/snapback]
QUOTE(8 Ball @ May 2 2008, 09:14 AM) [snapback]1428757[/snapback]
QUOTE(Leon Kennedy @ May 2 2008, 11:48 PM) [snapback]1428742[/snapback]
Discrimination on the grounds of genetic identity is still discrimination. Nobody should be discriminated against for something they have no control over. It's like discriminating against someone because of skin color. Or eye color. Or their name.

No, being black or Jewish can't interfier with your job. What if, like Screw Loose said you were 'a petty officer who guides military aircraft is genetically prone to seizures'. Would you consider not letting someone prone to seizures guide military aircrafts discrimination?

Bolded for effect.

I will agree that being black or jewish won't affect your ability to perform your job. But due to discrimination, it CAN affect your ability to obtain said employment. Which is discrimination. Imagine this:

YOU are a normal, healthy person trying to get a job as a bank teller. You would be handling money all day, and interacting with customers all day. You also happen to (this isn't true, it's just for this scenario) have a genetic pre-disposition (a family history of) for some horrible, contagious disease that would make interacting with customers impossible. You don't have any signs of it, and you probably won't ever contract it fully. But your prospective employer says "Well, you are a great candidate and have all the qualifications. We can't give you the job, however, because you MIGHT infect other people. Sorry." How would you feel?

This is no different than people being disciminated against for jobs in the 80s and early 90s during the major AIDS scare.

Well, of coarse it is pretty outrageous but I was mearly pointing out that they actually do have diffrent capabilities so it's nothing like not allowing someone to do a job due to race or religion.


--------------------
=D
Achievements
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Severus Snape
post May 5 2008, 11:48 AM
Post #8


Litterer


Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: 8-March 06
From: Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry
Member No.: 28,564



QUOTE(8 Ball @ May 5 2008, 06:45 AM) [snapback]1430566[/snapback]
QUOTE(Leon Kennedy @ May 3 2008, 02:50 AM) [snapback]1428886[/snapback]
QUOTE(8 Ball @ May 2 2008, 09:14 AM) [snapback]1428757[/snapback]
QUOTE(Leon Kennedy @ May 2 2008, 11:48 PM) [snapback]1428742[/snapback]
Discrimination on the grounds of genetic identity is still discrimination. Nobody should be discriminated against for something they have no control over. It's like discriminating against someone because of skin color. Or eye color. Or their name.

No, being black or Jewish can't interfier with your job. What if, like Screw Loose said you were 'a petty officer who guides military aircraft is genetically prone to seizures'. Would you consider not letting someone prone to seizures guide military aircrafts discrimination?

Bolded for effect.

I will agree that being black or jewish won't affect your ability to perform your job. But due to discrimination, it CAN affect your ability to obtain said employment. Which is discrimination. Imagine this:

YOU are a normal, healthy person trying to get a job as a bank teller. You would be handling money all day, and interacting with customers all day. You also happen to (this isn't true, it's just for this scenario) have a genetic pre-disposition (a family history of) for some horrible, contagious disease that would make interacting with customers impossible. You don't have any signs of it, and you probably won't ever contract it fully. But your prospective employer says "Well, you are a great candidate and have all the qualifications. We can't give you the job, however, because you MIGHT infect other people. Sorry." How would you feel?

This is no different than people being disciminated against for jobs in the 80s and early 90s during the major AIDS scare.

Well, of coarse it is pretty outrageous but I was mearly pointing out that they actually do have diffrent capabilities so it's nothing like not allowing someone to do a job due to race or religion.

It is exactly the same concept. Discrimination on the grounds of genetic pre-disposition is the same premise as discriminaton on the grounds of religion or race. Discrimination is discrimination, period. Doesn't matter why you are doing it. You can't discriminate against someone because of race, religion, creed, origin, or sexual orientation. So why should you be able to discriminate against someone because of their genetic make-up?


--------------------
QUOTE (Massacre @ Mar 14 2011, 02:10 PM) *
We're more than capable of answering you, we're just not doing it because you're being a cunt, and it's you specifically we don't care about, we do care about the rest of the forums.


Achievements
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hardcore Ottoman
post May 5 2008, 07:57 PM
Post #9


Goon
Group Icon

Group: Gold Member
Posts: 469
Joined: 2-August 04
Member No.: 41
PSN Name: punxtr



It all comes down to real examples. Not general ideals. In the case of jobs, if their genetic disease can cause a problem in the future and there is another person just as qualified without a genetic disease--the latter should get the job if he isn't selfish. He knows what he has and he shouldn't be trying to make an example out of himself by screaming discrimination. Of course, there is discrimination. Maybe you should rethink the true definition of the word before you place conotations before denotations.

In general, there shouldn't be any bill passed at all. The circumstances in cases of employment are too vast to create a law that successfully ensures that justice is carried out in the hiring process.

This post has been edited by Leng Tch'e: May 9 2008, 08:01 PM


--------------------
"BAKING A LASAGNA IN YOUR PUNANI MIKE PARADINAS IN YOUR PUNANI INTELLVISION BASKETBALL IN YOUR PUNANI HE-MAN AND SKELETOR IN YOUR PUNANI UNDERGOING PLASTIC SURGERY IN YOUR PUNANI WEARING LEATHER JACKETS IN YOUR PUNANI DRIVING MY CAR IN YOUR PUNANI WELFARE WEDNESDAY IN YOUR PUNANI I WANT TO PUT ORANGE JUICE IN YOUR PUNANI EGG SALAD SANDWICHES IN YOUR PUNANI HOT-DOGS AND FRENCH FRIES IN YOUR PUNANI CHEF BOYARDEE IN YOUR PUNANI"
Achievements
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Screw Loose
post May 6 2008, 12:06 AM
Post #10


Upstanding Citizen


Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 28-October 05
From: Yes
Member No.: 25,696



Read my first post... each case should be treated differently


--------------------
( . )( . )
Achievements
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Severus Snape
post May 6 2008, 12:01 PM
Post #11


Litterer


Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: 8-March 06
From: Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry
Member No.: 28,564



QUOTE(Screw Loose @ May 5 2008, 07:06 PM) [snapback]1430999[/snapback]
Read my first post... each case should be treated differently

I did, and I still stand by my argument on this issue. Discrimination is discrimination. You shouldn't be allowed to tell someone that they can't do this, or that they need to be with "those" people, just because they have a pre-disposition (genetically) for something. It would be like telling someone with AIDS that they can't be a cashier at a store because they have AIDS. It's discrimination, and it's against the law.


--------------------
QUOTE (Massacre @ Mar 14 2011, 02:10 PM) *
We're more than capable of answering you, we're just not doing it because you're being a cunt, and it's you specifically we don't care about, we do care about the rest of the forums.


Achievements
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hardcore Ottoman
post May 9 2008, 08:03 PM
Post #12


Goon
Group Icon

Group: Gold Member
Posts: 469
Joined: 2-August 04
Member No.: 41
PSN Name: punxtr



Stop talking about AIDS... start talking about what actually happens in the real world. AIDS is only genetic if the mother contracted before impregnation.

And stop being idealistic. Ideals never solved the problem, neither do bills that are tackling these impossible issues of today. And re-read what descrimination denotes... and stop equivocating.


--------------------
"BAKING A LASAGNA IN YOUR PUNANI MIKE PARADINAS IN YOUR PUNANI INTELLVISION BASKETBALL IN YOUR PUNANI HE-MAN AND SKELETOR IN YOUR PUNANI UNDERGOING PLASTIC SURGERY IN YOUR PUNANI WEARING LEATHER JACKETS IN YOUR PUNANI DRIVING MY CAR IN YOUR PUNANI WELFARE WEDNESDAY IN YOUR PUNANI I WANT TO PUT ORANGE JUICE IN YOUR PUNANI EGG SALAD SANDWICHES IN YOUR PUNANI HOT-DOGS AND FRENCH FRIES IN YOUR PUNANI CHEF BOYARDEE IN YOUR PUNANI"
Achievements
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BRKS
post May 11 2008, 04:38 PM
Post #13


Upstanding Citizen


Group: Members
Posts: 0
Joined: 19-April 08
From: England
Member No.: 39,601



I dont wanna rain on your parade but....
QUOTE
Nobody should be discriminated against for something they have no control over. It's like discriminating against someone because of skin color.

U cant change your skin colour? Look at Micheal Jackson, dont tell me that shit was genetic. So if they CAN change their skin colour (Do have control) does that make it alright?


--------------------


ENgLiSh AnD PRouD !!

Achievements
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hardcore Ottoman
post May 11 2008, 11:51 PM
Post #14


Goon
Group Icon

Group: Gold Member
Posts: 469
Joined: 2-August 04
Member No.: 41
PSN Name: punxtr



He's speaking idealistically. Ignore him. He doesn't want to believe that people are different and he will give lip to anyone who says otherwise, it seems.


--------------------
"BAKING A LASAGNA IN YOUR PUNANI MIKE PARADINAS IN YOUR PUNANI INTELLVISION BASKETBALL IN YOUR PUNANI HE-MAN AND SKELETOR IN YOUR PUNANI UNDERGOING PLASTIC SURGERY IN YOUR PUNANI WEARING LEATHER JACKETS IN YOUR PUNANI DRIVING MY CAR IN YOUR PUNANI WELFARE WEDNESDAY IN YOUR PUNANI I WANT TO PUT ORANGE JUICE IN YOUR PUNANI EGG SALAD SANDWICHES IN YOUR PUNANI HOT-DOGS AND FRENCH FRIES IN YOUR PUNANI CHEF BOYARDEE IN YOUR PUNANI"
Achievements
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Severus Snape
post May 12 2008, 11:52 AM
Post #15


Litterer


Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: 8-March 06
From: Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry
Member No.: 28,564



QUOTE(Leng Tch @ May 11 2008, 06:51 PM) [snapback]1434253[/snapback]
He's speaking idealistically. Ignore him. He doesn't want to believe that people are different and he will give lip to anyone who says otherwise, it seems.

wtf? Who shit in your cheerios this morning?

I am trying to draw a parallel between disciminating based on genetics to any other form of discrimination. My point (if you'd read my post) was that discrimination is discrimination, no matter what grounds it is based on. I never said AIDS was genetic. I stated that discrimination on the grounds of genetics was the same as discriminating against someone who has AIDS. It's still discrimination.

And as far as people being different - that's my whole point. All people are different from one another. You cannot exclude a segment of the population from something just because they are different. Which is one of the major reasons that this bill should NOT be passed.

You're getting to be as bad as psycho - not reading the entire post, and spouting off before understanding what you do read.

This post has been edited by Leon Kennedy: May 12 2008, 11:54 AM


--------------------
QUOTE (Massacre @ Mar 14 2011, 02:10 PM) *
We're more than capable of answering you, we're just not doing it because you're being a cunt, and it's you specifically we don't care about, we do care about the rest of the forums.


Achievements
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hardcore Ottoman
post May 12 2008, 11:13 PM
Post #16


Goon
Group Icon

Group: Gold Member
Posts: 469
Joined: 2-August 04
Member No.: 41
PSN Name: punxtr



I'll concede I forgot your stance. The way you kept going on and on I thought you were one of those people that believed we were all created equal and to be treated equally.

Calling me psycho is facetious, however. I don't measure up to the stubborness of him and if you read my earlier posts, I don't support the bill either. We don't need it. It will do no good. My point is that arguing against it based on a parallel between racial discrimination and genetics discrimination is different on the topic of people who carry diseases that endanger the welfare of people in day to day contact with them, for an example. And in noticing that each case deserves unpretentious discretion in deciding whether one be hired or not, I rejected the argument you used against this bill--although I am against it as well. I find it weak. Too idealistic.


--------------------
"BAKING A LASAGNA IN YOUR PUNANI MIKE PARADINAS IN YOUR PUNANI INTELLVISION BASKETBALL IN YOUR PUNANI HE-MAN AND SKELETOR IN YOUR PUNANI UNDERGOING PLASTIC SURGERY IN YOUR PUNANI WEARING LEATHER JACKETS IN YOUR PUNANI DRIVING MY CAR IN YOUR PUNANI WELFARE WEDNESDAY IN YOUR PUNANI I WANT TO PUT ORANGE JUICE IN YOUR PUNANI EGG SALAD SANDWICHES IN YOUR PUNANI HOT-DOGS AND FRENCH FRIES IN YOUR PUNANI CHEF BOYARDEE IN YOUR PUNANI"
Achievements
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
psychÝ
post May 17 2008, 02:19 PM
Post #17


Upstanding Citizen


Group: Members
Posts: 0
Joined: 26-August 04
From: The Steel City, England
Member No.: 1,279



QUOTE(Screw Loose @ May 2 2008, 05:53 AM) [snapback]1428552[/snapback]
I'm completely for genetic discrimination...

If a petty officer who guides military aircraft is genetically prone to seizures, i sure as fuck wouldn't let him keep his position, but i also wouldn't fire him. I'd offer him an alternative with equal pay and benefits in which their genetic disadvantage isn't as much of a liability

That isn't genetic discrimination in anyway, that is due to them being unfit to do the job.
QUOTE
Discrimination on the grounds of genetic identity is still discrimination. Nobody should be discriminated against for something they have no control over.
Why not? They are actually better, it isn't really discrimination if they are biologically better.

QUOTE
It's like discriminating against someone because of skin color. Or eye color. Or their name.
You can quite easily change your name and your eye colour, that is completely forgetting the point that skin colour and eye colour are genetic.
QUOTE
We would once again find ourselves back in a time where people were segregated based on skin color.
Not really as there are very few examples where being black or white will help or hinder your performance at a task.

QUOTE
You people get to use THAT water fountain, and THAT restroom, and your children have to attend THAT school.
Genetic diseases aren't infectious so that would be completely pointless and you could argue that is the case already many schools and all universities have an admission policy based on intelligence and some of that will be genetic.

QUOTE
YOU are a normal, healthy person trying to get a job as a bank teller. You would be handling money all day, and interacting with customers all day. You also happen to (this isn't true, it's just for this scenario) have a genetic pre-disposition (a family history of) for some horrible, contagious disease that would make interacting with customers impossible. You don't have any signs of it, and you probably won't ever contract it fully. But your prospective employer says "Well, you are a great candidate and have all the qualifications. We can't give you the job, however, because you MIGHT infect other people. Sorry." How would you feel?
Genetic diseases aren't infectious, you really don't have a clue what you are going on about, plus the fact that people will lead a normal life up to the point when the phenotypic effects of the genes preside so they would still be able to do the job, but they would have to be got rid of if it did develop as they wouldn't be able to do their job to a satisfactory level, many people lose their jobs due to illness already.

QUOTE
Discrimination on the grounds of genetic pre-disposition is the same premise as discriminaton on the grounds of religion or race.
No it isn't this is actually based on probability, discrimination based on religion or race is just people not understanding it.

QUOTE
AIDS is only genetic if the mother contracted before impregnation.
No AIDS is never genetic.

QUOTE
I am trying to draw a parallel between disciminating based on genetics to any other form of discrimination.
Which you are failing really badly at as you don't even seem to understand the concept of a genetic disposition to something. Then of course you seem to be focusing on disease when there are plenty of cases when people will be better at something due to their genetics.

QUOTE
You cannot exclude a segment of the population from something just because they are different. Which is one of the major reasons that this bill should NOT be passed.
Awesome, you don't even no what the bill is saying either that or you just like contradiction yourself and looking like a fool.

QUOTE
I don't support the bill either. We don't need it. It will do no good.
Lol, what world are you living in, you clearly don't understand the implications of what this means for the future, it is clearly needed, whether it should have such a broad spectra as this is the real question.

QUOTE
I never said AIDS was genetic. I stated that discrimination on the grounds of genetics was the same as discriminating against someone who has AIDS. It's still discrimination.
Only if you call it discrimination, if someone is genetically better or worse at something that isn't discrimination they are actually better. In your idealist society test marks would have to be scaled to stop reduce peoples "genetic advantage".


--------------------

Dragonfly
Achievements
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Screw Loose
post May 18 2008, 06:45 AM
Post #18


Upstanding Citizen


Group: Members
Posts: 2
Joined: 28-October 05
From: Yes
Member No.: 25,696



Unfit for the job? You mean genetically unfit for the job, you're just looking for contradiction, I beleive a pregnant mother with AIDS needs to take a certain medication (really expensive) to prevent her child from getting AIDS, i heard that on National geographic rolleyes.gif

Anyway, occupations for people have always existed, job opportunies are much older then science itself, so far we've been fine, Leng (Squirrelboy?) is pretty much right, it isn't necessary

Contraction of a genetic disease is rarely guranteed, at times very unlikely, so i see how this bill won't do anybody any good, just complicates things, so guess i'm not in support for this bill anymore

This post has been edited by Screw Loose: May 18 2008, 06:46 AM


--------------------
( . )( . )
Achievements
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
psychÝ
post May 18 2008, 02:39 PM
Post #19


Upstanding Citizen


Group: Members
Posts: 0
Joined: 26-August 04
From: The Steel City, England
Member No.: 1,279



QUOTE(Screw Loose @ May 18 2008, 07:45 AM) [snapback]1437548[/snapback]
Unfit for the job? You mean genetically unfit for the job, you're just looking for contradiction, I beleive a pregnant mother with AIDS needs to take a certain medication (really expensive) to prevent her child from getting AIDS, i heard that on National geographic rolleyes.gif
And, if you had any concept of the condition AIDS and how it occurs you would know why that is.

No I don't mean genetically unfit I mean unfit due to the phenotypic properties the condition has resulted in.
QUOTE
Anyway, occupations for people have always existed, job opportunies are much older then science itself, so far we've been fine, Leng (Squirrelboy?) is pretty much right, it isn't necessary

Contraction of a genetic disease is rarely guranteed, at times very unlikely, so i see how this bill won't do anybody any good, just complicates things, so guess i'm not in support for this bill anymore

I fail to see how any of this is even relevant, have any of you even read what the article says the bill is for?


--------------------

Dragonfly
Achievements
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Severus Snape
post May 19 2008, 02:00 PM
Post #20


Litterer


Group: Members
Posts: 53
Joined: 8-March 06
From: Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry
Member No.: 28,564



Hey psycho: I have an idea for you on this topic. Try reading someone's entire post and digesting the whole thing instead of taking it word by word and analyzing what you think it means.

QUOTE
QUOTE(Screw Loose @ May 2 2008, 05:53 AM)
I'm completely for genetic discrimination...

If a petty officer who guides military aircraft is genetically prone to seizures, i sure as fuck wouldn't let him keep his position, but i also wouldn't fire him. I'd offer him an alternative with equal pay and benefits in which their genetic disadvantage isn't as much of a liability

That isn't genetic discrimination in anyway, that is due to them being unfit to do the job.

See, you don't read. Screw Loose stated GENETICALLY PRONE. If they are being fired/reassigned based on this, it would be genetic discrimination.

QUOTE
QUOTE
Discrimination on the grounds of genetic identity is still discrimination. Nobody should be discriminated against for something they have no control over.

Why not? They are actually better, it isn't really discrimination if they are biologically better.
Should we all say "Sieg Heil!" to you? Your statement sounds exactly like Nazi Germany under Hitler. The master race. Biologically superior.

QUOTE
QUOTE
We would once again find ourselves back in a time where people were segregated based on skin color.
Not really as there are very few examples where being black or white will help or hinder your performance at a task.

So, then, show me a few good examples where a genetic pre-disposition to something will hinder your ability to perform a task?

QUOTE
QUOTE
You people get to use THAT water fountain, and THAT restroom, and your children have to attend THAT school.
Genetic diseases aren't infectious so that would be completely pointless and you could argue that is the case already many schools and all universities have an admission policy based on intelligence and some of that will be genetic.
Again, you need to read the statement in the context of the entire post. The statement was that we would be back in an age similar to racial segregation. And you are wrong on intelligence. Intelligence is a learned behavior and not a genetic fact. I know - studies have been done. And I'm sure you'll quote Bouchard and McGue (1981), or Daniels (1998), or Franke (1999), or some other study that has the same thoughts as you. Read the rest of them before you spout off.

QUOTE
QUOTE
YOU are a normal, healthy person trying to get a job as a bank teller. You would be handling money all day, and interacting with customers all day. You also happen to (this isn't true, it's just for this scenario) have a genetic pre-disposition (a family history of) for some horrible, contagious disease that would make interacting with customers impossible. You don't have any signs of it, and you probably won't ever contract it fully. But your prospective employer says "Well, you are a great candidate and have all the qualifications. We can't give you the job, however, because you MIGHT infect other people. Sorry." How would you feel?

Genetic diseases aren't infectious, you really don't have a clue what you are going on about, plus the fact that people will lead a normal life up to the point when the phenotypic effects of the genes preside so they would still be able to do the job, but they would have to be got rid of if it did develop as they wouldn't be able to do their job to a satisfactory level, many people lose their jobs due to illness already.

1. While I agree with you that a genetic pre-disposition is not infectious, the actual disease that you have the pre-disposition for may be. The disease itself is not genetic - the disposition to possibly have it is. Read the entire post in the context it was intended.
2. You made my point exactly. They are still able to do the job, but they have to be let go cuz of the disease. And don't give me this right-winged bullshit about people being let go for diseases all the time.

QUOTE
QUOTE
Discrimination on the grounds of genetic pre-disposition is the same premise as discriminaton on the grounds of religion or race.
No it isn't this is actually based on probability, discrimination based on religion or race is just people not understanding it.
Which part of "discrimination is discrimination" do you not understand?

QUOTE
QUOTE
I am trying to draw a parallel between disciminating based on genetics to any other form of discrimination.
Which you are failing really badly at as you don't even seem to understand the concept of a genetic disposition to something. Then of course you seem to be focusing on disease when there are plenty of cases when people will be better at something due to their genetics.


QUOTE
You cannot exclude a segment of the population from something just because they are different. Which is one of the major reasons that this bill should NOT be passed.
Awesome, you don't even no what the bill is saying either that or you just like contradiction yourself and looking like a fool.

How do I look like a fool? I draw the parallel, I make my case, and you are the only person who thinks that I don't know what's going on. Again, you cannot exclude a segment of the population from something just because they are genetically different. And again, you aren't reading the whole topic in its context.

Psycho, you really are a pompous ass. Try thinking before speaking. And try looking at a point of view other than your own once in a while. Then maybe you wouldn't be pwned so much out here.


--------------------
QUOTE (Massacre @ Mar 14 2011, 02:10 PM) *
We're more than capable of answering you, we're just not doing it because you're being a cunt, and it's you specifically we don't care about, we do care about the rest of the forums.


Achievements
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 28th November 2014 - 07:06 AM

GTA 5 | GTA San Andreas | Red Dead Redemption | GTA 4