Is LambdaConf for Conservative Christians, Too?

I really do think that there is a very important distinction to be made between what intrinsically makes people who they are and what is just their opinion, a matter of choice.

I may not be very articulate but race/ethnicity/origin/gender/nationality/sex/sexual-orientation/ice-cream-flavor-preferences (I do not list everything and may even be confused myself for some of them, hope I can get explained which and why if I am wrong) are fundamentally part of yourself as a human being. I mean that being challenged to change them is obviously not a process prone to success (if even technically possible for some).

However, I cringe a lot when religion is packed in the same bag. That's a matter of opinion and all opinions are in my book welcome to be challenged. You can be wrong about ideas/opinions. Being religious only means that, right now, you believe something. And people have shown again and again that they can change their mind, be converted to a new one or even just reject the current one without choosing an other one.

Protecting religions as being a defining part of the human being is not only wrong but so dangerous too for freedom of though. I dislike that so much when their are put on the same plan as really person(human-being?)-defining things that people have fought for in order to be acknowledged as equal-rights humans. Especially when so many religious systems refuse to recognize those equal rights.

P.S. : I also do think that political affiliation is exactly on the same level as religion. They are just a choice and it's problematic (even damageable) equating them with the rest in CoCs.

You're right. We should have no laws. /s

We've had a week that went from a fascist AI bot that was taken down immediately to a real fascist who is being tolerated. This person thinks the "weak" should be enslaved by "strong", nonsensical and subjective categorizations where no doubt "strong" probably includes him and means people like him in this view.

There is definetly a camp of developers (not outsiders) who have denigrated StrongLoops decision and praised LambdaConf. These are engineers who may work with members of groups targeted by this fascists' views, engineers who may review a Black / Latino applicant for a job, contribute to the overall work environment for them.

To my point, what I see is a co-optation of the meaning of the world tolerance. When there is an fascist antagonist on minority groups, it is easier for these "tolerant" everyday individuals to say hey fascists should matter too at tech conferences. Because thats what tolerant means, even the fascists and racists matter, no? Things that appear logically equivalent are not always the best things to do. Part of me thinks this is part of antebellum United States' original sin; the wealthy white class using race and slavery to spur hate-mongering from working-middle class whites, who saw Black people as their problem and not class inequity. This is the "vicious lie" that MLK talked about and continues to manifest today as Tim Wise deals with: www.timwise.org/2015/04/how-racism-explains-americas-class-divide-and-culture-of-economic-cruelty-an-excerpt-from-under-the-affluence/

>I really do think that there is a very important distinction to be made between what intrinsically makes people who they are and what is just their opinion, a matter of choice.

I really don't think people actually choose their opinions. Humans' opinions are affected by a wide variety of different conscious and unconscious stimuli, such as culture, socio-economic background, and even genetics. Humans are illogical, and will likely post-hoc rationalize their biases rather than logically thinking up an ideology.

For example, you may be religious because you sincerely believe in it, or because you just happen to grow up in a religious family. Or you may adhere to a political affiliation because you sincerely think it was a good idea...or because you live in an area that shares that same political affiliation and associate with friends with that political affiliation. Or because some celebrity endorses a political affiliation and so you follow that celebrity and so on and so forth.

Assuming humans are fully rational beings is problematic (and damageable), and it's better to provide protections than to take them away just because your own bias makes it seem okay to do so.

Is gender on the same level as race though? You can't change your race but you can change your gender - both in cases it's warranted (gender dysphoria) and in those it's not (otherwise).

Also it's disingenuous that you say religion is not a part of a person's identity, when in fact there are people to whom it's an important part of their identity as a person. Sure you can argue relision is a choice - and I can grant you that - but then it's the same with non-gender-dysphoric transpeople;they just chose a different gender than their biological sex for an arbitrary reason.