Why racial and sexual discrimination are immoral

Discrimination is the act of denying someone what he/she deserves after considering race, gender, age, ethni etc and it occurs at different levels and locations. Discriminating a person due to his/her race or due to his/her gender either in the workplace, in college, in various schemes among other places is immoral in that, the person has his/her rights infringed and this amounts to corruption (Mill, J. S 2004).
Bias treatment of a person lacks morals in that, the gains associated with such an act are always negative; no gains when someone is discriminated. For example, when one is looking for a job and he/she is said by maybe the management or the person dealing with the recruitment drive that he/she doesn’t fit into the job just because of gender or race means that the organization is not after someone who can deliver but after someone to just fill the vacant position. To the organization, performance of the individual is not the hinge as it should be in normal circumstances.
Also, when one seeks treatment in a hospital and he/she is denied medical services just because he does not belong to the right race or gender then the hospital fails in the mandate of its existence. The hospital is meant to offer medical services to people who in turn make payments which mean continuity. If the hospital fees are not accruing due to discrimination, then it means the hospitals existence is at threat which translates to many loosing their jobs and others loosing the opportunity to be get services.
Again, when one is treated with bias in business matters, he/she may be the unexploited opportunity which other business partners have not discovered and which could take them a notch higher. In this case, such opportunity is given to the least deserving thus minimizing the returns of the venture. This means that, the main objective of the venture is not the driving force which will lead to more profits and thus the continuity of the venture.
The three examples above confirm that, discriminating a person due to gender or race has nothing beneficial. According to Kantianism, an activities worth is measured according to its beneficial aspects. The number of good deeds resulting from the action should surpass the bad ones and if possible bad outcomes should be non-existent in any action that is taken by human beings (Jeremy, B 2007).
When you get someone as an employee due to his/her race (as yours), then performance is compromised in this case. Giving a person an opportunity without regard of gender of race means that the area of key interest is performance and nothing more. This is what the world is looking for and not who you know where. In conclusion, racial and sexual discrimination is corrupt and has no benefits but negatives and goes against Kantianism.
Reference
Jeremy, B. (2007). Consequentialism: Classic Utilitarianism. Retrieved August 4, 2008. Available from: http://plato. stanford. edu/entries/consequentialism/
Mill, J. S. (2004). What Utilitarianism is. The Principle of utility. Retrieved August 4, 2008. Available from: http://ebooks. adelaide. edu. au/m/mill/john_stuart/m645u/