Another race besides caucasian being a brain surgeon

Yes, Obama is not the only man in charge but the job he has is still immensely powerful and holds alot of responsibility, and in reality, he could have a profound effect on your everyday life even though he has to work with the senate. It seems that your argument is one not based on medical reason as I first thought, but more on the ground of trust in the conflict between races. Your hypothetical story is farcical. Even if those circumstances came to light, a doctor has an oath he has to swear by and harming patients or discriminating against them for any reason will result in his losing his job and his livelihood. He would have ruined his hard earned life and in reality, a doctor would simply not do that. If he felt he could not work on that patient equally then he would assign another doctor on ethical terms and he would have no contact. Your reasons could also be applied in a completely Caucasian context as well. In relation to your story, let's say that there is a poor working class Caucasian boy who grew up being relentlessly taunted and bullied all his life by the rich middle to upper class Caucasian children in his town. He manages to get enough money and worked hard enough to become a brain surgeon and one of these upper class boys came into hospital needing brain surgery. Do the tables turn? This could apply to an infinite number of scenarios, so the racial aspect of your story is irrelevant. "There are rules set in place to avoid situations like that." Yes there are, but they are easily changed and distorted to go for the government's favour. For example, in England a law in on its way that a terror suspect could be held for up to 90 days without charge or trial. This is false imprisonment and against human rights but it is going ahead anyway with widespread support, all for the sake of national security. This is a different law to what we are discussing but it is still an example of how the law can easily be changed for national interest. Another example is the Lisbon Treaty that is supposed to be in the process of uniting countries of Europe in a trade pact. Europe said by law that if any country voted against it in a referendum then it would be scrapped. However, Ireland recently voted firmly against it and Europe is pushing for another vote in Ireland while still pushing the treaty ahead. I know these examples are in Europe but the democratic systems are much the same. And with the hairdressers, I will not say I would, just for the debate, I will tell the truth. If there was a Caucasian specialised hairdressers nearby then I would most likely go there instead, but not because I would feel uncomfortable or threatened, but because the 'White' hairdressers would definitely have hairdressers there that specialise in Caucasian hair, while in the Afro-Caribbean hairdressers, the staff may not be qualified. If it clearly said 'Caucasian hair and Afro-Caribbean', I would feel fine (not to mention the prices, if the Afro-Caribbean one is alot cheaper and can do Caucasian hair I would go there). My impression is that you would not let an African American operate on you because you think they would victimise you because you are white. Is this true? And if so, what is your reasoning behind it? Thank you.