Re: POLITICS - Disurbing article

[Guest guest]

Chris-

Again, please remember the POLITICS tag.

>But there is a

>fundamental difference between a law that is applied differently to two

>groups,

>and a law that is applied equally to two groups. I think made the

>point better than I'm making it, so I might as well just observe the two

>of you

>debate it.

Yes, there is a difference, but both kinds of laws can be discriminatory

when two groups have needs which are in some ways unequal. Most people,

for example, would agree that a law requiring the worship of Kali and

banning the worship of all other deities (and prescribing specific methods

of Kali worship and proscribing all other forms of worship) would be

discriminatory even though it would apply to every citizen equally because

it would have unequal effects: it would support preexisting Kali

worshippers and strip all other people of their preferred religion. Such a

law would impair freedom of religion in a highly unequal way despite its

equality of application. Similarly, in my wolf/rabbit hypothetical, the

pro-carrot/anti-sheep law boasts a similar equality of application while

featuring no equality of necessity or effect: rabbits would thrive and

wolves would starve.

-