ahriman

Not what really I said although you clipped it a bit. It is civilised to treat all people as equal until they show themselves to be unworthy of that right. It is uncivilised to treat people unfavourably solely on account of their skin colour, creed etc. It is the person inside the skin that is important. It is not (in my view) uncivilised to make decisions on the basis of an incompatibility of cultures but since most people who are discriminated against on the this basis will choose to believe it is on the basis of race, it is a difficult thing to legislate for. Race and culture are closely linked but they are not the same thing.

You can rent to whomsoever you wish, but you are not allowed to reject any tenant who can pay and maintain the property as well as any other, on the basis of race, creed, sexual orientation if in all other respects they would be a good tenant. This seems reasonable though in reality of course it does disallow you some measure of personal discretion in the atter. These sorts of compromises permeate society and are necessary because some would misuse their ability to discriminate in order to disadvantage people on the basis of personal prejudice or preference.

Same as above.

To my mind, a 'civilised' society is one in which all have the same opportunities to have a useful role; one in which due attention is paid to the poor and needy and does not simply allow the brute force of earning potential or personal prejudice to hold sway. While folk like me and you might find our personal liberties curtailed in some minor ways, this is a trade-off for deriving the increased security and benefits of a 'civilised' society. It is a feature of democracy, a cost of democracy if you will, and there are many examples of us being prepared to make these compromises. Living together as people without killing each other requires many such trade-offs.

Of course, my view on this is pretty immutable, as yours may be. Perhaps we can only agree to differ.