Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

'I was falsely branded a paedophile'

news.bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 86 posts

Re: 'I was falsely branded a paedophile'

#31

Post by jacquesm »

dantheman wrote: post #26
xiaoma wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You should be able to fire someone for any reason. I disagree. You shouldn't be able to fire someone for being Jewish. You shouldn't be able to fire someone for not voting how you want them to. You shouldn't be able to fire someone for not having sex with you. There are a lot of things that you shouldn't be able to fire someone for.

If you don't like Jewish people and it's your company you shouldn't have to work with them. It will only hurt you as you are limiting your labor pool to non-Jewish people, and this is the same for any other form of discrimination. The only place that should not be allowed to discriminate is the government since they represent all people. Freedom of association is the key hear, you should be able t o associate with an…

Even inquiring about the religion of your workforce should be illegal, let alone taking punitive action because of that.

Re: 'I was falsely branded a paedophile'

#32

Post by dantheman »

xiaoma wrote: post #29
dantheman wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't like Jewish people and it's your company you shouldn't have to work with them. It will only hurt you as you are limiting your labor pool to non-Jewish people, and this is the same for any other form of discrimination. The only place that should not be allowed to discriminate is the government since they represent all people. Freedom of association is the key hear, you should be able t o associate with an…

Firing Jewish people doesn't just hurt the bigoted employer, it hurts the people wrongfully fired, too! There is something appealing to letting everyone keep to whatever groups they wish, but historically the idea has led to horrible things for the shunned groups.

Agreed, it hurts everyone involved -- just as hate speech does.

As for the history of discrimination, I believe that the majority of it was actually codified into law. So, I don't know if we can blame individuals acting on their own. Has there ever been a group that was shunned where it wasn't codified into law/sponsored by the government?

Re: 'I was falsely branded a paedophile'

#33

Post by btilly »

jacquesm wrote: post #31
dantheman wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't like Jewish people and it's your company you shouldn't have to work with them. It will only hurt you as you are limiting your labor pool to non-Jewish people, and this is the same for any other form of discrimination. The only place that should not be allowed to discriminate is the government since they represent all people. Freedom of association is the key hear, you should be able t o associate with an…

Even inquiring about the religion of your workforce should be illegal, let alone taking punitive action because of that.

I think that you are talking past each other because you have different value systems.

I've known plenty of people like dantheman before. They believe in and value the right to private property, which means believing that it is right to let other people do what you don't like with their private property. Add to that the belief that a personal business is private property, and you get the conclusion that no matter how much you personally dislike it, business owners "should" be allowed to discriminate.

By contrast if your belief in private property is not so absolute, then you're more willing to tolerate society restricting the free use of private property in ways that society does not like.

Different fundamental values leads to different conclusions. Even with agreement on the facts, the laws, and how bad discrimination is. And arguing "should not", "should too" back and forth will get you nowhere.

Re: 'I was falsely branded a paedophile'

#34

Post by jacquesm »

btilly wrote: post #33
jacquesm wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even inquiring about the religion of your workforce should be illegal, let alone taking punitive action because of that.

I think that you are talking past each other because you have different value systems. I've known plenty of people like dantheman before. They believe in and value the right to private property, which means believing that it is right to let other people do what you don't like with their private property. Add to that the belief that a personal business is private property, and you get the conclusion that no matter how…

My house is my private property, I can invite whoever I want there, and can discriminate freely on sex, race and so on (not that I do, but I could) because the decision affects only me.

A business is private property and I can hire whoever I want there, discriminating on factors such as suitability for the job, education and other associated factors.

Religion, sex, skin colour and other personal attributes are not amongst those and for very good reason, discrimination on those grounds affects the other party economically, individually and as a group.

In spite of all those rules there is enough workplace discrimination going on as it is, take those rules away and we're right back in the 1950's.

Re: 'I was falsely branded a paedophile'

#35

Post by rlpb »

dantheman wrote: post #26
xiaoma wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You should be able to fire someone for any reason. I disagree. You shouldn't be able to fire someone for being Jewish. You shouldn't be able to fire someone for not voting how you want them to. You shouldn't be able to fire someone for not having sex with you. There are a lot of things that you shouldn't be able to fire someone for.

If you don't like Jewish people and it's your company you shouldn't have to work with them. It will only hurt you as you are limiting your labor pool to non-Jewish people, and this is the same for any other form of discrimination. The only place that should not be allowed to discriminate is the government since they represent all people. Freedom of association is the key hear, you should be able t o associate with an…

The problem is that if you discriminate against a minority, then you don't suffer from the limitation of the labor pool very much (since it's a minority). However, that minority can suffer greatly.

So market forces can't hold this sort of behaviour in check, and this can lead to the suppression of an entire culture, which is where the issue lies.

Re: 'I was falsely branded a paedophile'

#36

Post by dantheman »

btilly wrote: post #33
jacquesm wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even inquiring about the religion of your workforce should be illegal, let alone taking punitive action because of that.

I think that you are talking past each other because you have different value systems. I've known plenty of people like dantheman before. They believe in and value the right to private property, which means believing that it is right to let other people do what you don't like with their private property. Add to that the belief that a personal business is private property, and you get the conclusion that no matter how…

I think you've hit the nail on the head. I wasn't being intentionally obtuse, I was just trying to state the case as clearly as I could and answer any objections/clarify any misconceptions. I agree often people fundamentally disagree about core issues, but it only manifests itself at higher levels.

I hope we didn't jump into the "should not"/"should too" argument.

Re: 'I was falsely branded a paedophile'

#37

Post by cousin_it »

So someone in Indonesia, using only a computer with Internet access, got a man in England arrested, labeled a pedo and disowned by his employers and family? We live in interesting times indeed. Hey guys, I live in Moscow, wanna set up a little extortion racket? I hear it's pretty easy to buy stolen credit card numbers in bulk.

...And also I'd like to go on record saying that the real villains in this story are those who fan up public hysteria about child porn.

Re: 'I was falsely branded a paedophile'

#38

Post by elpuri »

xiaoma wrote: post #23
dantheman wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should be able to fire someone for any reason. It's immoral to fire people accused of crime, you should treat your employees with respect, but there should be no law involved.

> You should be able to fire someone for any reason. I disagree. You shouldn't be able to fire someone for being Jewish. You shouldn't be able to fire someone for not voting how you want them to. You shouldn't be able to fire someone for not having sex with you. There are a lot of things that you shouldn't be able to fire someone for.

(Std disclaimer: I don't approve biggotry, but...)

I might be repeating someone here, but the problem is that once you start enforcing laws against things like this you also give the other party the opportunity to slap employers with false claims of sexism/racism. Which in turn might actually lead to even rational non-biggoted employers favouring (other factors being equal) groups that are less likely to make such claims if the employee is fired. Biggots are not going to hire you in the first place, so who's winning here? Ok ok, in many cases the person who hires you is not the person who fires you, so (surprise surprise) it's not that black and white.

Maybe being a heterosexual white male I'm not feeling the problem first hand and that affects my judgement, but usually when thinking these things I come to the conclusion that laws written with good intentions to abolish all sorts of nasty things end up doing more harm than good (and no I'm not a ultra-libertarian either).

Re: 'I was falsely branded a paedophile'

#39

Post by codexon »

jacquesm wrote: post #34
btilly wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that you are talking past each other because you have different value systems. I've known plenty of people like dantheman before. They believe in and value the right to private property, which means believing that it is right to let other people do what you don't like with their private property. Add to that the belief that a personal business is private property, and you get the conclusion that no matter how…

My house is my private property, I can invite whoever I want there, and can discriminate freely on sex, race and so on (not that I do, but I could) because the decision affects only me. A business is private property and I can hire whoever I want there, discriminating on factors such as suitability for the job, education and other associated factors. Religion, sex, skin colour and other personal attributes are not am…

A business is private property and I can hire whoever I want there, discriminating on factors such as suitability for the job, education and other associated factors.

A couple decades ago, businesses in the US would have argued the same thing, claiming that Black and Hispanics are naturally lazier.

Think about a company like Walmart, Ikea (or any company you frequent that has a near monopoly). How would you like it if they suddenly don't like your race and decided to stop selling to you or allowing you into their "private" stores that everyone else can shop at?

Seeing how you come from a predominately white country, I can understand how you cannot conceive this to be a problem.

Re: 'I was falsely branded a paedophile'

#40

Post by mprime »

It's upsetting to read that he just now started being wary of credit cards and shredding his papers. Someone should not have to go through such an ordeal before caring about the privacy of their personal information. The same goes for his "once bitten, twice shy" comment - why did he have to have his life ruined before being 'cautious' (a.k.a. exercising common sense) about online shopping?

Still, this is absolutely terrible. I think the police automatically assuming that anyone buying child porn was stupid enough to use their own credit cards is ignorant and obnoxious.

Post reply on HN