[ SECRET POST #2748 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2748 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.












Notes:

Early because ... World Cup! No other excuse.

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 087 secrets from Secret Submission Post #393.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[skippydelicious]

I think you are fully able, in just about every western country, to ban whoever the hell you feel like from your property for whatever reason you damn well want. Hell, you can ban someone from coming on your property for no reason except "because fuck you, that's why". In Florida and Texas you can even shoot 'em if they don't retreat.

[(Anonymous)]

Then I can refuse to hire a mutant who I feel might be dangerous. "Oh. This mutant can run through walls? How did I know he won't steal from me?"

[skippydelicious]

That would be a states rights issue. You'd have to refer to your own state's employment law. In some states, almost certainly.

[(Anonymous)]

It's not a states' rights issue when it comes to protected classes like EG race. Being allowed to not hire black people is not a states' rights issue and it hasn't been for like 60 years. That's the argument that the opponents of the civil rights movement used, but it was not successful.

And I don't think that's irrelevant, given how frequently mutants have been used as an analogue for African-Americans and other minority groups.

[(Anonymous)]

DA
In some states you can fire someone for being gay.

[(Anonymous)]

In many.

[ozaline]

The book "The Law of Superheroes" actually goes into a great deal if current civil rights legislation would protect mutants... the answer is "probably, partially."

But they're also often used as an lgbt analog (and that rings truer given you know a black person is black from birth and many mutants are not "out" until puberty), and in much of the states it's still legal to discriminate against trans people, not to mention bills being pushed forward to try and allow people to refuse service based on their religious beliefs.


Anyway it's important to Remember Eric and Raven never wanted Charles to give up his gifts and Eric was taken quite aback to find out he had. They have a right to protect themselves or to ask Charles to get out of their head. The same way Havok needed to be trained to not hurt people, Charles had to train himself not too.

I don't think Eric would have an issue with Charles using his powers against their oppressors... but both of them agree powers like that shouldn't be used to hurt innocents, the only distinction is their definition of innocent. Remember Magneto recruited Emma into his brotherhood at the end of first class and lamented her death in Days of Future Past.