- Obama not worried about Ebola at upcoming African summit in D.C.
- Obama: ‘We tortured some folks’ after 9/11
- Obama administration asked whole D.C. Circuit to take on major Obamacare case
- Mark Levin: Topple GOP leadership or country will ‘unravel’
- Massachusetts to let police chief deny gun buys to those deemed unfit
- John Kerry condemns attack on Israeli soldiers, kidnapping
- U.S. starts to evacuate American Ebola patients from West Africa: Report
- Geraldo slammed as ‘dummy’ for backing Clinton’s bin Laden claim
- Israeli spokesman: No need to debate who broke the cease-fire
- 35 Palestinians killed; Israeli officer missing
LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Discrimination is the basis of all law
Question of the Day
Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer has rationalized her veto of a bill designed to protect freedom of conscience and religious liberty in her state with the excuse that the measure could have been misused as an instrument of discrimination (“Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer vetoes controversial religious freedom bill,” Web, Feb. 26).
It seems to me that we have been conditioned to think of all discrimination as bad. But is it?
I can remember when a discriminating shopper was one who had certain standards and would only buy products that met those standards. Is that type of discrimination bad?
When a man marries a woman, he publicly promises that in certain areas of life he will discriminate in favor of that one woman and against all other women. Likewise the woman promises that in those same areas of life she will discriminate in favor of that one man and against all other men. Is this type of discrimination bad?
The claim that laws should not be instruments of discrimination reveals a remarkable lack of insight. Laws by their very nature are instruments of discrimination. Any law on the books discriminates in favor of one type of behavior and against another type of behavior.
Laws against theft discriminate against stealing, and they discriminate in favor of respecting people’s property rights. Is this type of discrimination bad? Laws against murder discriminate against taking the life of a human being without due process of law, and discriminate in favor of respecting a person’s right to live. Is this type of discrimination bad?
The real question ought to be, What should or should not be discriminated against, and why?
THOMAS M. CRAWFORD
About the Author
- Take a first look at The Washington Times' new dynamic website
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: West shouldn't pander to Putin
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: 'Redskins' hardly the only offender
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Radar, torpedos to end Hamas tunnels?
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Gaza 'analysis' poorly veiled bigotry
Latest Blog Entries
TWT Video Picks
By Orrin G. Hatch
Procedural changes impede the chamber's traditional deliberative function
Get Breaking Alerts
- U.N. condemns Israel, U.S. for not sharing Iron Dome with Hamas
- Border agents cleared of civil rights complaints from illegal immigrant children
- Obama military strategy too weak for future security, panel reports
- Ben Carson takes major step toward presidential campaign
- Porn-surfing feds blame boredom, lack of work for misbehavior
- Feds raid S.C. home to seize Land Rover in EPA emission-control crackdown
- CRUZ: A tale of two hospitals: One in Israel, one in Gaza
- House backs faster deportations, cancels 'Dreamer' policy
- Ted Nugent slams 'lying freaks' at liberal media: I'm 'doing God's work'
- HATCH: Destroying the Senate and our liberties