The Word “Discrimination” is Used to Criminalize Opinions

The following video shows the intervention read by John Andrews, representing Americans for America, at OSCE Warsaw today, September 14, 2017, during Session 7, “Tolerance and non-discrimination”.

An afterthought: The OSCE moderator’s response reminds me of Islamic Law, in which a “consensus of the scholars” settles legal issues permanently. The consensus of the scholars was reached more than a thousand years ago, meaning that nothing in Islam can be changed, nor can possible changes even be discussed.

So it is with the OSCE. At one time the organization was devoted to freedom of speech and other civil liberties, but evidently that is no longer true. A consensus has been reached, and the word “discrimination” now means whatever they want it to mean in service of their political goals.

Call it Sharia for the New World Order.

Below is the prepared text for Mr. Andrews’ intervention:

As other speakers have pointed out, we face a persistent problem in these Human Dimension sessions with terms that are pejorative, yet remain undefined. The issue would not be significant except for the fact that undefined words are sometimes use to make national policy or craft legislation.

One such word is “discrimination”. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary includes this among its definitions of “discrimination”: “The act, practice, or an instance of discriminating categorically rather than individually.” The is clearly the process referred to in phrases such as “racial discrimination” and “religious discrimination”.

However, there are other instances of discrimination that are considered acceptable. Take, for example, the sign on a door in a retail business that reads: “Employees Only”. The sign clearly discriminates against non-employees, yet it is entirely unobjectionable. No one would consider filing an anti-discrimination lawsuit on the basis of it.

What, then, are the criteria for “good” discrimination and “bad” discrimination?

Discrimination against gays is considered unacceptable, yet discrimination against members of the Identitaire movement is considered acceptable, or even mandatory.

As long as there is no clear, unambiguous official standard for separating unacceptable discrimination from acceptable discrimination, Americans for America recommends that the word “discrimination” be omitted from official OSCE documents.


Comments (0):

Top content for

Comment of the day