Jägermeister Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 37 minutes ago, Cerridwen said: The situation has been resolved. The 'policy' has been rescinded. There is no background or context as to who and how the rejection of Israeli students was implemented in the first place. It's over and it's done. Next...... I would argue it isn't/should not be resolved. An apology and a change in policy does not negate the fact that such a policy existed in the first place. This policy was in blatant violation of the BC Human Rights Code. Quote Discrimination in accommodation, service and facility 8 (1) A person must not, without a bona fide and reasonable justification, (a) deny to a person or class of persons any accommodation, service or facility customarily available to the public, or (b) discriminate against a person or class of persons regarding any accommodation, service or facility customarily available to the public because of the race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, religion, marital status, family status, physical or mental disability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or age of that person or class of persons. (2) A person does not contravene this section by discriminating (a) on the basis of sex, if the discrimination relates to the maintenance of public decency or to the determination of premiums or benefits under contracts of life or health insurance, or (b) on the basis of physical or mental disability or age, if the discrimination relates to the determination of premiums or benefits under contracts of life or health insurance. If we were all to brush aside such acts and let an apology and a rescindment of the policy be enough to alleviate the issue, then what would really stop people from implementing such policies? It's basically saying it's ok to discriminate until you get called out on it, and once you do you just need to stop. Don't worry about any real repercussions from your actions. This is a story. The school in question deserves to have their name dragged through the mud and for the public to be aware of the policies they enforced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 2 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said: The irony is to much. ... "Funny as a crutch" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerridwen Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 Just now, Jägermeister said: I would argue it isn't/should not be resolved. An apology and a change in policy does not negate the fact that such a policy existed in the first place. This policy was in blatant violation of the BC Human Rights Code. If we were all to brush aside such acts and let an apology and a rescindment of the policy be enough to alleviate the issue, then what would really stop people from implementing such policies? It's basically saying it's ok to discriminate until you get called out on it, and once you do you just need to stop. Don't worry about any real repercussions from your actions. This is a story whether you think so or not. The school in question deserves to have their name dragged in the mud and for the public to be aware of the policies they enforced. So how many Israeli students have been refused entry? This is the ONE AND ONLY complaint. It has been resolved and the policy rescinded. As I said previously, there is no context given as to the who and the how of it being implemented in the first place. The school has done it's bit to resolve a situation that shouldn't have existed in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 9 minutes ago, Cerridwen said: So how many Israeli students have been refused entry? This is the ONE AND ONLY complaint. It has been resolved and the policy rescinded. As I said previously, there is no context given as to the who and the how of it being implemented in the first place. The school has done it's bit to resolve a situation that shouldn't have existed in the first place. Who is to say other students weren't denied and didn't come forward with a complaint? We don't know that. Regardless, the discrimination towards one is still discrimination. Discrimination at any level should not be tolerated. What context do you think would be appropriate for such a policy to exist? Because I truly can't think of any. Do you believe a saying "sorry, won't happen again" is enough to alleviate discrimination and remedy the situation? Like you said, it shouldn't have existed, but it did. There should be awareness brought to the public about that fact, and I'd be curious to find out what the reason for the policy existing in the first place was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tearloch7 Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 I respect your opinion Jager ... the school has been publicly damaged and ridiculed by this 'one-off' incident .. their reputation has been drug thru the mud .. besides, it is not for anyone here to judge whether the School exercised " reasonable justification " in its position .. which makes it page 8 in the local rag. The justification for the restriction was because Israel continue to build illegal settlements in the West Bank and the Owners of the school took a principled stand, at least in their opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerridwen Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 5 minutes ago, Jägermeister said: Who is to say other students weren't denied and didn't come forward with a complaint? We don't know that. Regardless, the discrimination towards one is still discrimination. Discrimination at any level should not be tolerated. What context do you think would be appropriate for such a policy to exist? Because I truly can't think of any. Do you believe a saying "sorry, won't happen again" is enough to alleviate discrimination and remedy the solution? Like you said, it shouldn't have existed, but it did. There should be awareness brought to the public about that fact, and I'd be curious to find out what the reason for the policy existing in the first place was I didn't say the policy should ever have existed. In fact, I'm pretty sure I said the exact opposite. 'Context' as in the ENTIRE story...as I have already laid out......how and who. It will not happen again at this particular school because THERE IS NO LONGER A POLICY THAT SAYS IT WILL NOT ENROLL ISRAELI STUDENTS..... I don't know how much clearer that needs to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 Funny thing: On this thread Strome agrees it is punitive to hold an Israeli responsible for what his government is doing, but on a certain election thread he seems ok with holding the entire populations of countries responsible for what a few terrorists do, even though non of those populations have been involved in an attack on America or americans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 6 minutes ago, Cerridwen said: I didn't say the policy should ever have existed.in fact, I'm pretty sure I said the exact opposite. 'Context' as in the ENTIRE story...as I have already laid out......how and who. It will not happen again at this particular school because THERE IS NO LONGER A POLICY THAT SAYS IT WILL NOT ENROLL ISRAELI STUDENTS..... I don't know how much clearer that needs to be. Where did I say you did? I explicitly said "Like you said, it shouldn't have existed". Again, I ask what context would be appropriate for a ban on admitting a person from a specific country of origin? There is no excuse for such discrimination. I'm very aware there isn't a policy anymore. I'm saying that the fact the policy even existed is a black mark on the school that people should be made aware of. You're clearly missing the argument I'm trying to make. I'll repeat it once more before I finish here. The fact the policy even existed is a black mark on the school that people should be made aware of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerridwen Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 1 minute ago, gurn said: Funny thing: On this thread Strome agrees it is punitive to hold an Israeli responsible for what his government is doing, but on a certain election thread he seems ok with holding the entire populations of countries responsible for what a few terrorists do, even though non of those populations have been involved in an attack on America or americans? Yep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerridwen Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 5 minutes ago, Jägermeister said: Where did I say you did? I explicitly said "Like you said, it shouldn't have existed". Again, I ask what context would be appropriate for a ban on admitting a person from a specific country of origin? There is no excuse for such discrimination. I'm very aware there isn't a policy anymore. I'm saying that the fact the policy even existed is a black mark on the school that people should be made aware of. You're clearly missing the argument I'm trying to make. I'll repeat it once more before I finish here. The fact the policy even existed is a black mark on the school that people should be made aware of. Have to run.....Will deal with this later but there is NO context for a ban......I thought I made that pretty clear, actually, So shall the school be put out of business when the situation has already been resolved and measures taken to ensure it will not happen again? My God, you want to flog them in the town square as well even AFTER the situation has been resolved? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 6 minutes ago, gurn said: Funny thing: On this thread Strome agrees it is punitive to hold an Israeli responsible for what his government is doing, but on a certain election thread he seems ok with holding the entire populations of countries responsible for what a few terrorists do, even though non of those populations have been involved in an attack on America or americans? Show me the post where I sated it was ok. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 3 minutes ago, Cerridwen said: Yep Maybe you can help him find that post. I will wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 5 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said: Show me the post where I sated it was ok. Thanks. Show me the post where I said you stated it was ok. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 16 minutes ago, gurn said: Funny thing: On this thread Strome agrees it is punitive to hold an Israeli responsible for what his government is doing, but on a certain election thread he seems ok with holding the entire populations of countries responsible for what a few terrorists do, even though non of those populations have been involved in an attack on America or americans? 3 minutes ago, gurn said: Show me the post where I said you stated it was ok. Thanks. Again can I see your evidence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurn Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 The post of mine does not state what you then said it did, keep searching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warhippy Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 The irony of some people in this thread opposing this school for saying no based on a persons country of origin vs what they say defending a ban on people in America for their country of origin in the Trump thread is frigging HILARIOUS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostsof1915 Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 It's a private school, they can damage control it all it wants. Even fix it. The reality is that for a private school relying on funds from prospective students, it effects that schools reputation. I find it hilarious that on a Canucks board, people dwell on any mistakes Benning makes, but if a private school makes one and fixes it, let's move on.... At the very least I hope whomever put in that stupid policy gets a reprimand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 10 minutes ago, Warhippy said: The irony of some people in this thread opposing this school for saying no based on a persons country of origin vs what they say defending a ban on people in America for their country of origin in the Trump thread is frigging HILARIOUS Who in this thread stated what Trump did was alright? I see it the other way, people in the other thread are up in arms about what Trump did yet are passive on this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cramarossa Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 Shout out to @Jägermeister for actually discussing the thread instead of dragging out petty, personal arguments. Agree 100% that just having such a policy in the first place- even if they repealed it rather quickly after getting some heat- was despicable. I'm curious what other institutions have similar policies. I read an article in the Chronicle of Higher Education (would link, but requires a paid membership to view) about a similar policy held by an American university's graduate engineering program that banned what I believe were Iranian students. I can (barely) sympathize with the intent of such a policy, but it's implementation paints too many innocent civilians with too broad a brush. I give these policies a thumbs down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Strome Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 8 minutes ago, Ghostsof1915 said: It's a private school, they can damage control it all it wants. Even fix it. The reality is that for a private school relying on funds from prospective students, it effects that schools reputation. I find it hilarious that on a Canucks board, people dwell on any mistakes Benning makes, but if a private school makes one and fixes it, let's move on.... At the very least I hope whomever put in that stupid policy gets a reprimand. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.