army1987 comments on Rationality Quotes November 2013 - Less Wrong

5 Post author: malcolmocean 02 November 2013 08:35PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (388)

CC Licenced

Tags: quotes

Comments (388)

Sort By: Best

Show:

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: [deleted] 12 November 2013 04:49:54PM 1 point [-]

Yes, it's a continuum. That's why I said “to some extent”, “hardly”, and “more ... than”.

Comment author: Jiro 14 November 2013 04:43:47PM 2 points [-]

That would still mean that if I say "convert to Christianity or I won't hire you" and you refuse, that wouldn't count as discrimination. It would also mean that refusing to hire gay people would not be discrimination, as long as you only refused to hire people who participated in some activity, whether having gay sex, wearing rainbow flags, having a gay wedding, etc.

Comment author: [deleted] 15 November 2013 12:58:09AM * 1 point [-]

That would still mean that if I say "convert to Christianity or I won't hire you" and you refuse, that wouldn't count as discrimination.

So what? I'm not particularly outraged that atheists aren't allowed into the Swiss Guards.

It would also mean that refusing to hire gay people would not be discrimination, as long as you only refused to hire people who participated in some activity, whether having gay sex, wearing rainbow flags, having a gay wedding, etc.

For some reason, this sounds more problematic to me; not sure why.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier comment score below threshold [+] (27 children)

Comment author: [deleted] 17 November 2013 03:20:29AM * 1 point [-]

Actually I think it's the other way round, at least in the last few years. (There are many more atheists than gay people in my social circles.)

Comment author: JoshuaZ 18 November 2013 05:08:11AM * -1 points [-]

Alternate hypothesis: one has a choice and the other one does not.

Comment author: Vaniver 21 November 2013 05:49:30AM 2 points [-]

You realize this is circling back around, right? The issue is that the two are both defined by choices, because the second group is not gay men but men who have consensual sex with men, and the second group's membership is voluntary regardless of whether or not the first's is.

Eugine_Nier responded, in effect, that the most likely reason to see those restrictions as being in different classes is the "who--whom?" of religious hiring restrictions being 'okay' and sexual-behavior-based hiring restrictions being 'not okay' because of status alignments of religion and sexual behavior.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 21 November 2013 05:51:52AM 1 point [-]

That's a good point.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier comment score below threshold [+] (22 children)

Comment author: JoshuaZ 18 November 2013 02:56:01PM 0 points [-]

I'm not sure there's a coherent one here. But for issues such as this, what people, or society are comfortable with is a to a large extent a function of what intuitions they have. In this sort of context, the distinction is likely connected to intuitions of free will, whether or not that makes any sense.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier comment score below threshold [+] (20 children)

Comment author: JoshuaZ 19 November 2013 01:46:14AM * 1 point [-]

How a priori reason do you want it to be? There's at this point a general consensus that sexual orientation, while culturally mediated, has a large genetic component. I don't think that anyone thinks there's say a gene for Christianity or the like. And while self-identified sexual orientation can change, that's substantially less common an occurrence as changes in one's religious self-identification. For example, in the US about half of all adults have changed their religion at least once in their lives. See here. Some of those people are people changing from one version of Protestantism to another, but even when you take them out, one is still talking about around a third of the population. And this is fairly well known- people understand that religious beliefs can change: indeed, many major religions have specific rules about how to handle conversions, and many forms of major religions (especially in Christianity and Islam) have active commandments to go and convert people.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier comment score below threshold [+] (11 children)

Comment author: passive_fist 20 November 2013 10:24:25PM * 1 point [-]

I'm not aware of any 'consensus' that sexual orientation has a 'large' genetic component. Some research suggests there is a genetic component, and it is known that there are developmental factors as well (i.e. what happens in the womb and afterwards) and also environmental factors. It is widely accepted that homosexuality is 'not a (conscious) choice' but that's most definitely not the same as saying "it's genetic".

continue this thread »

Comment author: [deleted] 20 November 2013 09:46:27PM 1 point [-]

I don't think that anyone thinks there's say a gene for Christianity or the like.

Well, atheism is correlated with IQ and (ISTM) Openness to Experience, which are both somewhere around 50% inheritable.

Look at what I found by googling for atheism twin studies!

continue this thread »

army1987 comments on Rationality Quotes November 2013 - Less Wrong

Article Navigation

Comments (388)

Nearest Meetups

Virtual Study Room

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Recent Rationality Quotes

Recent Wiki Edits

Top Contributors, 30 Days

Recent Karma Awards

Comments (388)

Top Contributors, 30 Days

You'll need to login or register to do that

(Don't worry, it only takes a few seconds)

Create

Login