What does discrimation mean actually?
339162
I would define discrimination as denying rights or privelages to a person or persons based soley on their physical, social, or economic status in society.
983559
To answer this question would mean to stereotype... It's best not to judge people before knowing them.  I think that you are putting yourself in danger by dropping your guard agaisnt certain people when the fact of the matter is that on an indivual level we are all capable of acting and behaving in similar ways.\n\nGreat question though!  Really gets ya' thinking
1069582
Recognizing racial discrimination...
791100
It's not called discrimination...because some employers have the right to do "ANY" check they would like to do before they hire you. They can do background, credit, income, employer,,,,etc..
308132
if your society systematically puts down or punishes a specific group of people on a racial basis then there is no difference between the two, because that kind of discrimination (jobs, schools, neighbourhoods) will lead to an increase in criminal behaviour....simply because there are fewer and fewer alternatives, if any, available.\n\nif white anglo-saxon protestants were systematically beaten down for generations, then they'd pretty much match the criminal profile.
256762
You don't give any context, but I believe you're asking about equal protection law.\n\nWhen a group is classified by the government, it may or may not trigger equal protection, depending upon the action taken based upon that classification.\n\nFor instance, if the government singles out all health insurance companies for an increased tax on their profits, that is a classification.  If the government singles out a particular groups of people because they have green hair and blue eyes, that is a classification.\n\nSome classifications are suspect classifications - that the very nature of the classification gives rise to concerns that equal protection will be violated.  But the flip side is the benign classification - even if a group is being singled out in some way, as there is no resulting prejudice or harm, the classification makes no difference.  Equal protection is not violated.  Hence, a benign classification.
90866
If you have an arrest record, and becuase it is public information, no it is not discriminatory.\n\nWith that said, because it was a misdemeanor, you should try and have your record expunged.
58990
it works with ruthless discrimnation\n\nyou are not supposed to marry, associate with, have business dealings with, or even acknowledge others outside your caste.
1078623
That doesn't really sound like a discriminatory policy, since it has nothing to do with race, sex, religion, or any other protected class. It's a reasonable policy based on the need to reduce fraud.
161764
Well, there is no such thing as "reverse discrimination."  Discrimination is discrimination, no matter which race is doing it to which.  If you are personally upset because you feel as though someone is discriminating against you solely based on the color of your skin -- whatever that color might be -- you should speak out against it.  It is not considered a hate crime as long as the manner in which you are speaking out is peaceful, free of hate speech and/or actions, and is geared toward working out a solution instead of propogating a long-standing opposition.
585295
disparate treatment means the employer treats people of different races/genders differently.  Affirmative action is an example of this.  Disparate impact means the employer treats every race/gender the same, but one of these policies tends to have the result that more people of one race/gender are hired than not.  An example of this is an employer who checks conviction arrest records may result in more whites/less blacks hired.  In this case an employer would have to show a need for checking conviction records.
868700
In all discrimination cases, the main question is what standard of review should be applied. The simplest is Rational Basis -- anything goes, as long as there is any legal excuse for having the law. The toughest is Strict Scrutiny -- the regulation fails unless there is no other possible way the state could have done what it was trying to do, and what the state was trying to do must have been very important. Those aren't the legal definitions, but close enough.\n\nIn any situation where the discrimination involves who can exercise fundamental rights, Strict Scrutiny applies. That's a function of Substance Due Process. For other rights that are not fundamental, lesser standards apply. So, for example, the right to  eat fatty foods is not a fundamental right, so can be regulated more easily than the right to worship in the privacy of your home, which is fundamental.\n\nAlso, where the discrimination involves a suspect class (race, ancestry, national origin), again Strict Scrutiny applies. Other discrimination is subject to lesser standards. So, a law which discriminates (meaning, operates differently or treats people differently) based on race is less likely to be found valid than a law which operates based on what college degrees someone has, since college education is not a suspect class.
398977
Good question!  Discrimination is a leftover survival instinct.  Long ago when our distant ancestors were living on the African savanna, they had to make quick decisions every hour of every day with very little information in order to survive.  This led to the development of the human ability to conceptualize and classify.\nHumans change slowly.  The downside of the useful ability of conceptualization is the unfortunate tendency to discriminate without any truly rational basis.\nBut take heart - although it is taking a lot of time, things are changing for the better.
625552
if you mean discriminate against them no it is not right
1166470
Check with EEOC for the current rules.  Decades ago it was felt that asking for age, race, religious or ethnic background or gender was prima facia evidence of an intent to discriminate in employment.  A photograph obviously is indicative of age, race, gender and sometimes religious or ethnic background.  \n\nWhile the law is complex, medical schools may still have the right to decide to admit students so as to have an entering class with a certain gender and racial mix.  E.g. a medical school may want to have a male/female ratio close to 50/50; or have a minimum percentage of Native Americans, or Blacks.  A photograph would be useful in deciding which category an applicant would be put in by an observer -- which might be different from the category the applicant might claim.
100921
It means how many of each type of person is in the population; black and white, asian and western, old and young, gay and straight, French-speaking Canadian and English-speaking Canadian, etc.\n\nExactly which groups are in the population and which ones you look for depends on where you are and what you are seling.
815332
I owned my own ad agency and can speak from experience. The purpose of advertising is to target a demographic market that includes various factors such as race, age, gender, religion, geography and culture. If that is a definition of discrimination, so be it. They must exclude those not apt to purchase the product or service and therefore do not cater to everyone. It is an exercise in filling a need for certain groups and not showing bias against others.