February 26, 2009 — 10:56
Andrew Moon Category: Links News Religion and Life Comments: 41
Alexander Pruss mentioned this counterpetition toward the end of the previous discussion, but I decided I’d put it up front for more to see.
The distinction the counterpetition strikes me as a relevant distinction; it’s actually the distinction I tried to make in the earlier discussion. Here’s what I said.
A school can have a policy against adultery without having a policy against those who have an orientation to act adulterously. Probably better, a school might discriminate against those who use pornography without discriminating against those who have an orientation to use pornography. (And the number of the latter is legion.)
But do such policies violate the spirit of the anti-discrimination clause as the original petition suggests? Consider the following scenario. Suppose the APA had a clause which said that you could not discriminate on the basis of whether or not you have an orientation to look at pornography. Now suppose a school has a policy which discriminates against those who view pornography. It’s not at all obvious to me that such a school would be violating the spirit of the APA clause which I am imagining.
Are there any disanalogies between my scenario and the current issue?