Skip to main content

Discrimination for A Choice

Choices Not all Equal

  • Chocolate or vanilla ice-cream.
  • Bedtime at 10 or midnight, but get up at 6am.
  • Wear the red dress or black pants and and a cream top.
  • Get blind drunk on two bottles of wine or just have a glass.
  • Take two jabs of a vaccine to get a passport with societal privileges.

Coercion to ensure the correct choice

You have a choice, says the torturer to their victim.  Tell us what we want to know and the pain will stop - it's your choice.

You have a choice, says the fanatical religious zealot back in the days when conversion was forced. Convert to our religion and you can be part of the new society - it's your choice.

You have a choice, says the communist to each ordinary person.  Take on our ideology or be purged - it's your choice.

You have a choice, says the NZ Government to each person who is not fully vaccinated, with two jabs as of this writing.  Submit to the jabs, download the passport and your freedoms will be given back to you - it's your choice.

Discrimination on Choice

There is no discrimination if there is a choice, according to at least one Labour MP and many media influencers on the left side of politics.

It is implied that the choice is so inconsequential, the remedy is so trivial, then how could it possibly be discrimination if a person loses their job or is denied entry to a cafe? 

Surely, all the person has to do is make a different choice and any apparent discrimination disappears.  Choose differently and your world comes back to you.  If a person can choose to make it all go away, there cannot possibly be any discrimination for those who have not yet chosen correctly. This is how discrimination is justified for the person with a troubled conscience. 

It is rationalised that each person experiencing discrimination is able to remedy that problem with a simple choice. Snap your fingers and the discrimination melts away.  The person being discriminated against is doing it to themselves.  

Therefore the discrimination on the part of the discriminator cannot exist as it can be negated by a simple choice by the discriminated to stop the discrimination against themselves.

Trivialised Choice

When a choice seems trivial it can be very difficult to empathise with the difficulty experienced by others who don't consider the choice and the consequence of that choice to be trivial.  Thus creating a major disconnect for those who have absorbed the messaging on there being no discrimination if there is a choice.

Maybe peanut butter is a good example to use to try and explain.  For a person that likes peanut butter, it's trivial to choose to have it.  For a person who is not keen on peanut butter but is given an option of peanut butter or no food, they will choose to have the peanut butter because something is better than nothing.  However, for a person that is allergic to peanut butter, then the choice of peanut butter or no food becomes extremely non-trivial.  

It's irrelevant to the allergic person that the first person found choosing to have the peanut butter trivial and a choice. Yet if the first person is oblivious to the allergic person's major problems with the peanut butter and decides that just offering peanut butter is an acceptable choice because it was an acceptable choice for them, we have the same mental disconnect at work as we do regarding the vaccination for Covid-19.

Sure, not everyone that is refusing to get vaccinated is like the person allergic to peanut butter, but that is not the point of the comparison.  The point of the comparison is to show the extreme point of view exhibited by the person that considers the choice trivial if it were applied to another situation.


Don't justify the discrimination against those who aren't eligible for a passport of privilege by saying it's just a choice.  It shows you are thoughtlessly parroting propaganda designed to ease your conscience so that you can do the work of the regime in implemented a society where complete submission is required.

Instead, consider that the choice as a choice of conscience.


Popular posts from this blog

Sine dominico non possumus

This post was inspired by posts on TBR and A Servant's Thoughts on male vs female church attendance. ... "We Cannot Live without Sunday," takes us back to the year 304, when Emperor Diocletian prohibited Christians, under pain of death , to possess the Scriptures, to meet on Sunday to celebrate the Eucharist and to build premises for their assemblies. In Abitene, a small village in what today is Tunis, 49 Christians , meeting in the home of Octavius Felix, were taken by surprise on a Sunday while celebrating the Eucharist, defying the imperial prohibitions. Arrested , they were taken to Carthage to be interrogated by the proconsul Anulinus. Significant, in particular, was the response given to the proconsul by Emeritus, after being asked why he had violated the emperor's order. He said: "Sine dominico non possumus," we cannot live without meeting on Sunday to celebrate the Eucharist. We would not have the strength to face the daily difficulties and not


The University College London Union will probably never see any irony in this. The president of a London university atheist society has resigned over a row about an image of the Prophet Muhammad. The society at University College London (UCL) published an image on its Facebook page showing "Jesus and Mo" having a drink at a bar. The atheist group was asked by the UCL union to remove it, but refused and started a petition defending its freedom of expression. A student Muslim group began a counter-petition asking for its removal. The cartoon in question of course is designed to be offensive to Christians as well as Muslims. "The society was asked to remove the image because UCLU aims to foster good relations between different groups of students and create a safe environment where all students can benefit from societies regardless of their religious or other beliefs." Source: Muhammad cartoon row leads to resignation

This will scare the liberals

Teenagers in New Zealand are conservative about sex education and abortion. How could this be? After all the sexualisation they have been exposed to, all the State endorsed sex-ed - and they're turning out to be conservative!! Oh, the horror! And David Farrar's polling company did the research. This is hope, people. The young are not lost! Teenagers conservative about sex/abortion – Poll ~ Investigate Daily