Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I know this is going to sound extremely stupid to some, but I hope it makes sense to at least one person out there.
Anyway, I'm a high schooler & witnessed something in class the other day. There's a girl in my class named Denise, as well as a mentally challenged student. They started arguing about something, and Denise went on to call the student "stupid." The teacher heard this, and gave Denise a detention, saying she was making fun of the student for their disability.
Now, I'm no expert, but this IMO shows why true equality will never exist. I'm sure the vast majority of people here have called someone else something that others will find offensive (retard, ***, etc.) Yet if you say this in the presense of someone that fits this description, they probably will be offended.
Reprimanding others for offending others will not make the offended person "equal." It just highlights their difference, which is the exact opposite of what we should be doing. What WILL make them equal, however, is just treating them like a normal person, even if they have some form of abnormality. This probably has not widely been done before, but I believe if you just treat them like a normal person rather than treating them differently because of their difference, they will probably be less likely to suffer from depression.
Does anyone else agree with me, or is my thinking flawed?
That's a difficult issue,
because sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't.
To keep it short... I don't think it should be one way or the other.
I think it should be a combination of both.
I've seen it done to a kid in my school with Down Syndrome and he was the happiest kid in the World and everybody loved him.
I know this is going to sound extremely stupid to some, but I hope it makes sense to at least one person out there.
Anyway, I'm a high schooler & witnessed something in class the other day. There's a girl in my class named Denise, as well as a mentally challenged student. They started arguing about something, and Denise went on to call the student "stupid." The teacher heard this, and gave Denise a detention, saying she was making fun of the student for their disability.
Now, I'm no expert, but this IMO shows why true equality will never exist. I'm sure the vast majority of people here have called someone else something that others will find offensive (retard, ***, etc.) Yet if you say this in the presense of someone that fits this description, they probably will be offended.
Reprimanding others for offending others will not make the offended person "equal." It just highlights their difference, which is the exact opposite of what we should be doing. What WILL make them equal, however, is just treating them like a normal person, even if they have some form of abnormality. This probably has not widely been done before, but I believe if you just treat them like a normal person rather than treating them differently because of their difference, they will probably be less likely to suffer from depression.
Does anyone else agree with me, or is my thinking flawed?
Well first I want to say that you are a bright person to question such a situation. There is no such thing as true democracy or equality. Human nature always will try to establish some type of hierarchy often in terms of education or wealth. Teachers try to establish a sense of equality in the class room. Denise might have gone a little too far. She sounds like she is far more gifted in terms of intelligence and common sense. She on the other hand does not have the right to use her advantage to insult another person. Beside the moment a person uses violence, whether it be verbal or physical, they have already lost the argument
Reprimanding others for offending others will not make the offended person "equal." It just highlights their difference, which is the exact opposite of what we should be doing. What WILL make them equal, however, is just treating them like a normal person, even if they have some form of abnormality. This probably has not widely been done before, but I believe if you just treat them like a normal person rather than treating them differently because of their difference, they will probably be less likely to suffer from depression.
Does anyone else agree with me, or is my thinking flawed?
I am impressed! Do they still have "gifted" programs in high school? You sound very intelligent and wise for your age.
I absolutely agree with you. In fact, I almost posted something in another thread today on this topic as it relates to hate crime laws. By creating new laws specifically designed to protect a particular category of people, we're, in essence, saying that these people are weaker than the rest of us, or need special protection because they can't defend themselves, which then highlights the idea that they are weaker and need special protection. It's a vicious circle.
It also contributes to certain groups having a "victim mentality". Unfortunately, we've devolved to a point where everybody is part of a special interest group - even healthy straight white males.
I am impressed! Do they still have "gifted" programs in high school? You sound very intelligent and wise for your age.
I absolutely agree with you. In fact, I almost posted something in another thread today on this topic as it relates to hate crime laws. By creating new laws specifically designed to protect a particular category of people, we're, in essence, saying that these people are weaker than the rest of us, or need special protection because they can't defend themselves, which then highlights the idea that they are weaker and need special protection. It's a vicious circle.
It also contributes to certain groups having a "victim mentality". Unfortunately, we've devolved to a point where everybody is part of a special interest group - even healthy straight white males.
I'll look forward to your reply.
First let me point out the obvious. People are not equal and never will be. Some people good looking while other people are not so good looking. Some people are intelligent while other people are not so intelligent. Its probably not a good idea to point these things out to the people at the lower end of the scale unless absolutely necessary. Even then an effort should be made to be tactful. In most instances, I don't think there is anything to be gained by making someone feel bad.
Regarding your comment:
"By creating new laws specifically designed to protect a particular category of people, we're, in essence, saying that these people are weaker than the rest of us, or need special protection because they can't defend themselves, which then highlights the idea that they are weaker and need special protection."
People in the minority ARE weaker. They are certainly politically weaker. If the majority of the people were gay do you think we'd have a problem with gay bashing or gay marriage? The Constitution of the United States of America was written with specific provisions designed to protect the rights of minorities from the 'ill humor' of the majority.
If you want to look into what the thinking of the 'founders' was you can read the Federalist Papers. The following is from The Federalist Papers: No. 78 written by Alexander Hamilton regarding the judiciary:
"This independence of the judges is equally requisite to guard the Constitution and the rights of individuals from the effects of those ill humors, which the arts of designing men, or the influence of particular conjunctures, sometimes disseminate among the people themselves, and which, though they speedily give place to better information, and more deliberate reflection, have a tendency, in the meantime, to occasion dangerous innovations in the government, and serious oppressions of the minor party in the community."
- Alexander Hamilton
They started arguing about something, and Denise went on to call the student "stupid." The teacher heard this, and gave Denise a detention, saying she was making fun of the student for their disability.
A better way of handling it would be for the teacher to remind Denise that it's not nice to call anyone stupid and let it go at that. You're right, it's not equality when you have to treat one group very differently than you would have to treat another.
That's a difficult issue,
because sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't.
To keep it short... I don't think it should be one way or the other.
I think it should be a combination of both.
I've seen it done to a kid in my school with Down Syndrome and he was the happiest kid in the World and everybody loved him.
My son was telling me about a child with Down Syndrome, in the third grade out on the playground where he was standing with his brother and my son. Some kids went over and were trying to cause trouble with the brother by pointing out his older brother was a retard and then told the child with the Down Syndrome that he was a retard.
This boy walked over and smiled and held out his hand which the others ended up shaking and then walked away. My son learned a lesson from this child, that most people would have got into a fight over words like that but this special boy took care of it another way.
First let me point out the obvious. People are not equal and never will be. Some people good looking while other people are not so good looking. Some people are intelligent while other people are not so intelligent. Its probably not a good idea to point these things out to the people at the lower end of the scale unless absolutely necessary. Even then an effort should be made to be tactful. In most instances, I don't think there is anything to be gained by making someone feel bad.
Regarding your comment:
"By creating new laws specifically designed to protect a particular category of people, we're, in essence, saying that these people are weaker than the rest of us, or need special protection because they can't defend themselves, which then highlights the idea that they are weaker and need special protection."
People in the minority ARE weaker. They are certainly politically weaker. If the majority of the people were gay do you think we'd have a problem with gay bashing or gay marriage? The Constitution of the United States of America was written with specific provisions designed to protect the rights of minorities from the 'ill humor' of the majority.
If you want to look into what the thinking of the 'founders' was you can read the Federalist Papers. The following is from The Federalist Papers: No. 78 written by Alexander Hamilton regarding the judiciary:
"This independence of the judges is equally requisite to guard the Constitution and the rights of individuals from the effects of those ill humors, which the arts of designing men, or the influence of particular conjunctures, sometimes disseminate among the people themselves, and which, though they speedily give place to better information, and more deliberate reflection, have a tendency, in the meantime, to occasion dangerous innovations in the government, and serious oppressions of the minor party in the community."
- Alexander Hamilton
- Reel
I think you are speaking to one of the core principles of representative democracy. Of course, there is the further complication of enumerating the rights that can't be transgressed by the majority against the minority, which is where the friction in most of today's political debates seems to be centered. I don't think that "freedom from insult" should be one of those rights, though, as it clearly transgresses what I consider to be a more important right, "freedom of speech". That's not to say that someone can say anything, because I believe the "freedom to exist" trumps even that freedom, so speech which is threatening should not (and is not) protected.
That being said, high school is not and should not be considered a representative democracy. I remember a history class where the first thing we learned was the difference between autocracy and democracy, because our teacher wanted us to be sure we knew that her class was an autocracy. The idea that a classroom is some sort of model society isn't always conducive to learning. While the best classes I've had the teacher welcomed informed dissent, the worst classes I had were ones where teachers failed to corral distractions.
I think the teacher in question overheard your friend insulting this mentally challenged person and thought such comments would negatively impact his or her ability to receive an education. Perhaps in this specific case that was not actually the case, but I can understand and the efforts in general.
Reprimanding others for offending others will not make the offended person "equal." It just highlights their difference, which is the exact opposite of what we should be doing. What WILL make them equal, however, is just treating them like a normal person, even if they have some form of abnormality. This probably has not widely been done before, but I believe if you just treat them like a normal person rather than treating them differently because of their difference, they will probably be less likely to suffer from depression.
I don't understand this logic, other than as a roundabout way of saying you disagree with being 'pc'. The only one who's not "making things equal" is the individual using the slur in the first place. Reprimanding the offender is simply an attempt to put things back on an equal plane. Ignoring the slur only serves to perpetuate the inequality, as it reinforces the inherent sense of "power" the user (being 'normal') has over the offended.
Too many are sold on the idea that equality means putting up with being insulted based on difference, and that this somehow equates to being treated normally. It is as if to say that the only true gauge of equality is whether those with abnormalities are being disparaged enough relative to the "normal" population. This is surely flawed thinking. True equality lies in the ability to recognize and RESPECT difference, and not making what an individual cannot help count against him.
Too many are sold on the idea that equality means putting up with being insulted based on difference, and that this somehow equates to being treated normally. It is as if to say that the only true gauge of equality is whether those with abnormalities are being disparaged enough relative to the "normal" population. This is surely flawed thinking. True equality lies in the ability to recognize and RESPECT difference, and not making what an individual cannot help count against him.
Yes, I agree with what you've said, but ultimately, the question is: Should the government be involved in legislating how people treat each other, and to what extent?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
