We hear a lot abit PL being champions for civil liberties with the introduction of civil unions and the stand they told on divorce. However we still live in a discriminitive country. Why for example can a short, overweight person join the police for and a heavily tattooed and fit person cannot. There is still discrimination against ex-drug addicts, disabled people are still not given the opportunity to move forward in society. Championing civil liberties is not just LGBT, but much more.
I believe the a PN government has to remove stigma for 'different' cultures, tendencies and abilities. Even though same sex couples can marry, many parents are still shocked when their kids come out. A tattooed person risks not getting a job or has to cover up on the job. Why should a tattooed police office look bad. Employing a disabled person, is still done more as charity rather than for ability. We have to build a society which enhances ability, and everyone can be the best version of themse
We live in a soceity where first impressions matter. Now if you want to work in a bank or anywhere else where you are on the frontline with the public such as flight attendants there are certain rules you have to comply with. No jewelry least of all piercings are to be worn with a uniform. Now tattoos are still considered bad taste unless you are a rock star. Again it depends on the tattoo. Some people never stop to think what looks cool when you are 20 looks awful when you are 60.
There's alot to be said on the subject. Of course people are shocked when their children come out. We like nothing better than the norm and again you can't force people what to think. I don't see what this has to do with employing heavily tattooed people. Consider that tattoos are something of a passing phase. What is cool today may well be shunned tomorrow. I know people with tattos who regret it. Besides it's being linked with skin cancer. All that ink under your skin can't be healthy.
You mention too many things like disabled people being kept back. It depends on the person and the disabilty and the type of work they wish to do. Common sense has to prevail here. Let me mention a worst case scenario. Can someone bound to a wheelchair become a surgeon? Obviously not. But they can work from behind a desk. This really is a case by case issue not a generalisation.
@JenniferDebono actually a wheelchair-bound person CAN be a surgeon http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/11/27/article-2513994-19AE115700000578-568_634x826.jpg
Let's be practical though. I'm defo for inclusion but then again a company has every right to choose the image they want to portray through their front staff's image. It wouldn't be practical nor safe for a physically disabled person or a person with communication difficulties to work in a physically demanding or high risk environment. Not becasue of their disability per se. Employees need to fulfill job competences and sometimes disability is in direct conflict with that.
@JenniferDebono @Christian Pace, my point here is not, that a disabled person has to be a surgeon, if he has the capabilities to do so than why not. The core of the argument is that everyone, has to be given the opportunity to full fill their potential. With regards tattooed people, i was referring, to government posts, in the private sector it is up the the employer to decide what image represents best the company.
This content is created by the open source Your Priorities citizen engagement platform designed by the non profit Citizens Foundation