Personally, I think its WRONG to discriminate against hard-working law-abiding citizens, just because they expressed an opinion about how the government runs. What about YOU?
why should there be freedom for “hard-working”? are “lazy” people excluded?
hey, by the way, why “law abiding” be only entitled to that? -there are not so many people left … 
why only stick to US citizens? this should apply to illegal migrants and other citizens of strange countries or planets …:o
I think it’s wrong to discriminate against anyone for any reason.
It’s obviously “bad” to discriminate no matter the cause. If someone was doing something illegal, then it no longer becomes discrimination, but law enforcement - which then brings the issue to “Should action X actually be illegal?”
Even when selecting bed mates, on the basis of gender or physical attraction?
The regimen of background checking, interrogation, etc. also extends to employees of some government contractors, and sub-contractors of those government contractors.
The polygraph covers more than drug use and political views… it can also query one’s morals (is it okay to download music illegally?), one’s consumption of alcohol, tobacco, pornography, etc., one’s social habits (do you have regular conversations with strangers?) and one’s relationships (are you very close with your mother / father?).
The polygraph test has been removed from some background investigations as some people have felt it to be too personal in nature.
Billy’s really touched on something here:
Discrimination may be wrong, but it’s alllllll natural 
Definition of being human: Striving against it’s own nature. Discuss.
Discrimination isn’t always wrong. To act ethically, one must discriminate among goods and evils. The problem is when discrimination occurs against someone or something that is not necessarily evil.
That’s a whole different thread.
And I’m so glad I was able to contribute to the first post in the thread
I discriminate against discriminators