Employers blocked from discriminating against staff using marijuana in Maine

Re:Employers blocked from discriminating against staff using... by GauntletWizard on Saturday February 10, 2018 @06:59PM (#16350348)

Yes, but I dislike that I do. It's absolutely true that I'm going against what I consider principals here; I think the harm from allowing racial discrimination in the workplace is greatly and demonstrably worse than other forms of discrimination. It's a practical trade-off that I don't think we need for marijuana.

I'd also like to see employers discriminate against alcohol users, even though I consume myself. There's plenty of fields that would benefit from employer enforced teetotaling. I don't think that either marijuana or alcohol make you a bad person, just a worse one. They're called vices for a reason. Everyone should have one, but I'd encourage people to play 40k or practice trainspotting or eat too much chocolate, all things shown to have less effect on mental health.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Employers blocked from discriminating against staff using... by perl4ever on Sunday February 11, 2018 @03:30AM (#16351780)

I would not like to see employers discriminate (per se) against alcohol or cannabis users, even though I don't consume myself.

If alcohol (or cannabis) in fact cause problems, then it is not necessary to discriminate against all users, just those who manifest the problems.

I am unclear on why many people (of a libertarian tilt) think that discrimination based on stereotypes is to be defended.* It seems to me to be a way of shifting internal costs of evaluating people onto society, and therefore we should not expect an unregulated market to provide an optimal amount of it.

* Provided it is not against a legally protected class.

[ Parent | on HN ]