undefined | Better HN

0 pointsnemothekid12y ago0 comments

Its scary how people jump to these conclusions once their views are those of the flavor of the month. I'd hate to be unemployable because my views don't confirm to that of the majority.

Imagine saying this to guy who attempted to stand up for civil rights in the 1920s. The world makes you believe that this type of thinking is gone when really its just painted a different color.

0 comments

bsder12y ago

Well, if you don't buy the fundamental rights argument, let's try a simple utilitarian argument.

The computer industry, especially in Silicon Valley and San Francisco, employs an abnormally high percentage of people who identify as LGBT. The fact that your company will now have trouble recruiting from that group of individuals places your company at a business disadvantage and makes you unfit to lead such a business.

nemothekidOP12y ago

I completely get the issue. I, personally, support the right for LGBT individuals to get married. However its not about buying the argument

What I'm worried about is the social ostracizing of those who hold different political beliefs than you. At some point in time it was completely kosher to say the same thing about Blacks. At some point in time, a company that hired black individuals would have had trouble recruiting workers that would have given them a business advantage.

What worries me is that you could say the same exact argument for not hiring Black workers in the mid 1900s - the exact same you posted, and you seem to be completely cool with that. Theres a point where we are now using the same tools of suppression that were used on minorities of past on the now unfashionable opinions of today. I would have liked to think the human race has learned from that experience.

bsder12y ago

> What worries me is that you could say the same exact argument for not hiring Black workers in the mid 1900s - the exact same you posted, and you seem to be completely cool with that.

The problem is that your analogy doesn't go far enough.

The analogous situation would be: a company in the 1920's known for hiring an above average number of minorities suddenly appoints as CEO someone who donated to the KKK.

This is what is upsetting people.

kevincrane12y ago

Wanting gay people to be able to have the same rights as you is hardly a "flavor of the month."

nemothekidOP12y ago

On the time scale western society's majority views, gay rights is definitely flavor of the month.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

bsder12y ago

Well, if you don't buy the fundamental rights argument, let's try a simple utilitarian argument.

nemothekidOP12y ago

I completely get the issue. I, personally, support the right for LGBT individuals to get married. However its not about buying the argument

bsder12y ago

> What worries me is that you could say the same exact argument for not hiring Black workers in the mid 1900s - the exact same you posted, and you seem to be completely cool with that.

The problem is that your analogy doesn't go far enough.

The analogous situation would be: a company in the 1920's known for hiring an above average number of minorities suddenly appoints as CEO someone who donated to the KKK.

This is what is upsetting people.

kevincrane12y ago

Wanting gay people to be able to have the same rights as you is hardly a "flavor of the month."

nemothekidOP12y ago

On the time scale western society's majority views, gay rights is definitely flavor of the month.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse