GOVERNMENT-SANCTIONED DISCRIMINATION (continued)...

IT TAKES AN IMMENSE AMOUNT OF PATIENCE TO DEAL WITH OUTSPOKEN DISSIDENTS

ONE OF THE MOST INSIDIOUS FORMS OF DISCRIMINATION HERE IN AMERICA (other than the obvious discrepancy between the treatment of human and animal) is the way government employees are treated better than "average" citizens (who supply their fat government paychecks). 

For instance; when SEVERAL PEOPLE attacked me over a multi-year period (GO TO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRVG-rWpemk&list=UU13_WfEgp0MBd6w_RqN1oug -- see: CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT) NO ARRESTS WERE MADE other than me (almost) for being such an outspoken activist/troublemaker speaking out against an unfair governmental system (see: Martin Luther King etc etc etc). 

But! when this EXACT SAME THING happens to (for instance) a police officer or any other government employee (or a woman or a child); IT IS A FELONY PUNISHABLE BY PRISON TIME. And this shows how Civil Rights enforcement has been selectively watered down and/or eroded by and/or for government since the onset of MLK and his genius observations; leaving a gaping hole of discrimination within American law (see: EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW).

What is the rationale behind this ideology? There is no real good reason for any of this; because if "average" citizens were treated the exact same way as government employees like they clearly should be (as if their "average" citizen lives mattered in the same way as government employees) CRIME RATES WOULD LIKELY DECREASE EXPONENTIALLY leaving no more dirty work for law enforcement; leading to eventual layoffs etc. And mainly; since this new ideology might actually pose a problem for police wanting to rough people up during police encounters; it does not happen. 

THE TRUTH IS; much of the reason government allows "average" citizens to be violated the way they do is at least partially based in arrogance on the part of condescending government employees who view their lives with a sort of "delusional narcissism" (judges etc); folks who actually think their lives are more important than others. But the other part is this:THE FACT that government feels it needs to violate our Civil Rights in order to do their job; which could not be farther from the truth...

SEE ALSO: EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW? @ http://addendumblog1.blogspot.com/2013/03/equal-justice-under-law.html + EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW? Pt II @ http://addendumblog1.blogspot.com/2013/07/reverse-discrimination.html + INSTITUTIONALIZED GENDER DISCRIMINATION @ http://addendumblog1.blogspot.com/2013/07/institutionalized-gender-discrimination.html + INSTITUTIONALIZED GENDER DISCRIMINATION Pt. II @ http://addendumblog1.blogspot.com/2013/07/institutionalized-gender-discrimination_25.html + INSTITUTIONALIZED GOVERNMENT DISCRIMINATION (CONTINUED) @ http://addendumblog1.blogspot.com/2013/09/institutionalized-government.html + INSTITUTIONALIZED REVERSE RACIAL DISCRIMINATION (CONTINUED) @ http://addendumblog1.blogspot.com/2014/02/1-black-singer-attacked-in-east-bay.html + TRIAL BY ORDEAL? @  http://addendumblog1.blogspot.com/2013/03/trial-by-ordeal.html + DOES THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT HAVE A DOUBLE STANDARD ON HATE CRIMES? @ http://www.opposingviews.com/i/society/crime/does-justice-department-have-double-standard-hate-crimes

22 JUN 2014 -- "DISCRIMINATION HAS NO PLACE IN ARIZONA, OR ANYWHERE ELSE"? -- I was talking to one of my lesbian friends last night at the bar...and I explained to her how as a heterosexual I got kicked out of a bar after being attacked by one of the bar employees...then i told her how the sunnyvale police later refused to pull up the damning surveillance footage to prove my claims and instead asked me to leave the bar as well. My lesbian friend responded saying that she worked as a karaoke host for many years and (in California) if a bar decides to refuse service to somebody they have the right to do it...and she almost seemed happy about this; like it was the right thing to do and good to have a law such as this. But I countered saying there was recently a big argument coming out of Arizona about how homosexuals could potentially be denied service based upon businesses asserting their "religious beliefs" -- So what's the difference between Arizona and California in this case? California business interests are apparently very powerful and influential within the state; and I suppose that while California supposedly has some of the most progressive anti-discrimination laws in the country; the media is so highly controlled and/or so blind and/or so whatever they are; that this gaping loophole in California anti-discrimination law has never been fully addressed; until now that is...> http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/26/politics/arizona-brewer-bill/

"To disagree with three-fourths of England on all points is one of the first elements of vanity, which is a deep source of consolation in all moments of spiritual doubt." -- Oscar Wilde