I want to point out that we will not tolerate personal attacks here. While I understand that debating can be frustrating, especially when you feel you've reached an impasse, venting that frustration into a personal attack is never appropriate.
Back and forths that do not move the debate forward rarely are resolved by the debaters involved. "Yes I did" and "No you didn't" don't, after all, give much room for discussion. And often, they escalate tensions and result in negative outcomes. Rather, when you've reached an impasse, especially about whether something has been supported, appealing to a moderator for review will solve the problem. If you really feel a claim wasn't supported it, report it and it will be adjudicated. Or, if you want, PM a mod and ask for review.
So that the thread can get back on track, here is my evaluation.
The discussion began on post 34 with Even posing a hypothetical, should lookism be a protected category? There is specific back and forth, essentially boiling down to Even stating that by Mican's words any discriminition in effect warrants federal protections.
Mican, however, did not make that claim, but rather stated that all members within a category of class are protected equally (IE whites, blacks, asians, etc.) Or, to be more precise, that the criteria composing that class is barred from consideration, regardless of what sub-group one falls into.
While Even has supported that there is discrimination based on looks, height, etc, he has not supported why that discrimination should be relevant to a change in federal law. Even if we set aside misinterpretting Mican's statements, they are not sufficient to support that point. Thus there is no support offered for why other critieria should be included into federal anti-discrimination rules.
In addition, Mican made a positive claim in post 52 that "There is a specific criteria for when a characteristic meets the standard for receiving such protection..."" Even's request for support does not imply burden shifting. This claim has not been supported either.
While Even's claim is the first, both claims must be supported or retracted. However, if Mican retracts this claim, the burden still remains on Even to support why such criteria should be included.
Bookmarks