David H. Burns wrote:
> You may tired of this theme, but "discrimination" and "discriminated 
> against" in their
> modern usages are the creation of politicians and the media and in 
> themselves have little
> emotive content. 

Have you any evidence to back this assertion up?

> Generally, that's what I, at any rate mean, by 
> "discrimination" in the context
> we're using it here. 

Sure, as long as it includes (for example) not selling houses to people, or 
not giving them jobs, or things like that, even when it doesn't involve 
violence.

> Of course there are many subtle ways of ostracizing 
> a person which
> might not be describe by either term.

Sure. And when the president of the US gets up and says atheists shouldn't 
be considered citizens, it's pretty blatant there *is* prejudice going on.

> OK, if the term has a descriptive meaning what does it mean to you? :)

Did you look at the maps I posted, and the links to definitions? I thought
"southern and midwestern United States where Protestant fundamentalism is 
dominant" was pretty descriptive, didn't you?


-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message