Page 39 of 122 FirstFirst ... 2937383940414989 ... LastLast
Results 381 to 390 of 1212

Thread: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451:959]

  1. #381
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

    Quote Originally Posted by opendebate View Post
    No, that's your assumption. The woman stated that it was made clear to her in each instance why she was chosen to have her tires slashed. It's amazing how easily you leap to the assumption that her claims were false.
    They were yelling "DYKE!" at her with each plunge of the knife or something? That's pretty brazen.

  2. #382
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,145

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

    Quote Originally Posted by beefheart View Post
    Wrong. Phoenix is a 517 square mile city.

    Not very small. Population 1.489 Million (2012) It is the 6th largest city in population in the US. NY, LA, Chicago, Houston, Philadelphia, Phoenix.

    Los Angeles is a 503 square mile city.

    Chicago is a 234 square mile city

    Seattle is 142 square miles.

    Miami is 35.68 square miles

    Pittsburgh is 58.3 square miles

    Philadelphia is 142.6 miles

    Detroit is 142.9 miles
    I'm talking about the city center.....which is why I said Phoenix is more of "suburb"....there really isn't much of a city center.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  3. #383
    Professor
    Phil_Osophy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Earth
    Last Seen
    11-11-14 @ 02:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,450

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Hard Truth View Post
    Racial, religious etc. discrimination harms society and vulnerable people. In small towns, isolated and rural areas, just one or two discriminatory businesses could keep a significant portion of the population from getting a job, shopping, getting a place to live etc. without leaving town. Even in a more urban environment, discrimination can force poor people to unnecessary waste time and money searching for a business that will accept their money in exchange for goods or services. Businesses have the ability to oppress people in their daily lives as much or more than government, especially in these days of a handful of mega-corporations, malls and big box retail dominating retail and services. Addressing government discrimination while allowing business discrimination requires tolerating discrimination and the hardship and oppression it will impose on unpopular minorities and society as a whole.
    how is not selling someone a burger a form of oppression. Yeah, if you don't like the businesses in a town, then move. You don't have a right to another persons property. I agree that government shouldn't be allowed to discriminate. But private businesses should be allowed to serve who they want. A government is a servant of the people. Other people are not your servants. Make sense?


    The business owner who doesn't like serving a customer because of their race, religion, gender etc is harmed much less when forced to serve that person than the would-be customer who has to find another place that will serve him/her is harmed. When a person can't get a job or a home because of race, religion, gender etc discrimination they suffer far more than the employer or landlord will suffer from being forced to treat that person as an equal.
    awful lot of "force" there. Must be a statist.

    Anyhow, you don't have a right to anyone's property. Maybe it's time to stop relying on a single person or business. If one business won't serve gays, there is surely another that will. If not, then gays should put their money together and start their own business.


    There is widespread consensus that there is no right to not be offended. That is the only so-called "right" infringed upon when a business is "forced" to serve someone with the wrong skin color or accent. I believe most people would agree that the right to be treated as an equal human being who is judged by his/her behavior, not by an irrational prejudice, is more important than the "right" to not be offended. The "forced to work like a serf" argument is nonsense. No one is required by anti-discrimination laws to provide a good or service that they are not already willingly providing to everyone else (except the person with the "wrong' skin color) who uses that business.
    you do have a right to equal protection under the law. You don't have a right to another persons labor or property.


    Anti-discrimination laws secure individual's right to be treated as an equal human being who is judged by his/her behavior, not by an irrational prejudice. They prevent the harm from business discrimination against potential employees, employees and customers, which significantly outweighs the harm from being "forced" to tolerate undesirable races, religions etc in one's business.
    fact remains, forcing another person to serve you is slavery.


    In addition, society as a whole is harmed by the impact of discrimination based on prejudice and hate. Discrimination harms society by maintaining an impoverished underclass living with all the ill effects of poverty and oppression, effects which can impact everyone in the form of blight, large numbers of beggars, disease, crime, violence, rebellion and revenge.
    so you're saying everyone will be in poverty if I don't sell you a hamburger? This gets better and better.


    Past experiences and the experiences of other places show us what happens when discrimination is allowed. Jim Crow laws existed during my lifetime and the negative effects from them still impacts life today. I don't believe that such discrimination will be as rare as claimed. These days it is as likely to be directed at Muslims and gays as blacks, but the tendency to ignorantly, irrationally and/or arbitrarily discriminate has not been sufficiently eliminated yet. For evidence, just look at all the racism and bigotry expressed on this forum and other public fora.
    Jim Crow laws are government actions. Not private business policies.

  4. #384
    Sage
    disneydude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    25,145

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

    It should be any minute now....that the bigots that want to discriminate against gays start crying persecution and violation of their first amendment rights when people start boycotting them and exposing their bigotry.
    <font size=5><b>Its been several weeks since the Vegas shooting.  Its it still "Too Early" or can we start having the conversation about finally doing something about these mass shootings???​</b></font>

  5. #385
    Professor
    Phil_Osophy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Earth
    Last Seen
    11-11-14 @ 02:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,450

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    It should be any minute now....that the bigots that want to discriminate against gays start crying persecution and violation of their first amendment rights when people start boycotting them and exposing their bigotry.
    That's pretty retarded. You aren't entitled to anyone's money.

  6. #386
    Sage
    RiverDad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-14 @ 02:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,039

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Hard Truth View Post
    Racial, religious etc. discrimination harms society and vulnerable people.
    If we pretend that this is a true statement, then the same can be said about Flag Burning and other unpopular speech. The same can be said about how some religious groups are perceived by the public.

    Here's how I think society is harmed. Unpopular speech doesn't go away simply because you ban it. Unpopular religions don't go away because you ban them. People's ideas about religions and race and sex don't get erased because you ban the expression of those ideas, and rights to free association are a form of speech.

    Forcing people who want to burn the Flag to instead salute the Flag doesn't make everything alright. Forcing Muslims to pretend that they are Baptists doesn't make everything alright. Forcing a Christian baker to bake a wedding cake for two homosexual men doesn't make the baker's beliefs go away, that coercion doesn't make him more tolerant, in fact, I would argue that it could make his intolerance burn hotter for now he has to contend with liberal totalitarians running roughshod over his human rights and forcing him to pretend something he doesn't feel.

    This liberal totalitarianism is what is harming society.

    In small towns, isolated and rural areas, just one or two discriminatory businesses could keep a significant portion of the population from getting a job, shopping, getting a place to live etc. without leaving town. Even in a more urban environment, discrimination can force poor people to unnecessary waste time and money searching for a business that will accept their money in exchange for goods or services.
    You point to some possible real world harms. There is no denying that these could arise. How though do these harms justify stripping other people of their human rights? I frankly don't see the logic in that formulation.

    To put this in more concrete terms, over the course of history 80% of women have had children compared to only 40% of men. Some men have reproduced with multiple women and most men have reproduced with no women. That's a harm to men, isn't it? It's not "fair" that so many men throughout history, and even today, don't get the chance to be fathers. Is the solution to this "harm" that we FORCE women to reproduce more "fairly" and "equitably" by assigning women partners to insure a more evenly matched pairing?

    Fixing some harms for one groups of people shouldn't entail violating the human rights of other people.

    Businesses have the ability to oppress people in their daily lives as much or more than government, especially in these days of a handful of mega-corporations, malls and big box retail dominating retail and services.
    And individuals have even more power than corporations. It was individuals who brought down South African Apartheid by exerting pressure as individuals in the marketplace and then onto corporations and government. Corporations were more than happy to do business with South Africa until the pressure from people became too much to bear.

    The business owner who doesn't like serving a customer because of their race, religion, gender etc is harmed much less when forced to serve that person than the would-be customer who has to find another place that will serve him/her is harmed.
    Says you. The problem with your "says you" strategy is that it's none of your damn business to try to balance harms here. On the one side we have inconvenience and hurt feelings and on the other side we have violation of human rights and potential oppression of human rights.

    It's funny how you don't apply this same logic to abortion issues. The woman's right to abort is not up to vote by strangers deciding for her how the harms balance out between her and her fetus and the father and other people in her life and society. Why don't you make the argument that her right to control her own body is not supreme?

    Anti-discrimination laws secure individual's right to be treated as an equal human being who is judged by his/her behavior, not by an irrational prejudice.
    1.) Right to be treated . .. human rights run into problems in formulation when they are dependent on forcing action onto others. You have a right to believe in the god of your choice and that right isn't dependent on me to do anything. You have a right to free speech and you can say what you believe and that right doesn't force me to listen to you. Your "right" to be treated "equally" though is different, now your "right" compels me, a free citizen, to act in some particular manner when I would rather not. Your right to be treated equally is not a right because it violates other people's actual human rights.

    2 a.) It's not up to you to judge whether a belief is rational or irrational; and
    2 b) Are you implying that a "rational" prejudice voids this imaginary right to be treated equally?

  7. #387
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Over the edge...
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    14,208

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    Property rights and the right to ones own labor only bothers those that want to impose their will on others.
    Yea, like those who oppose abortion. ****ing evangelical bigots just cant keep out of other people's lives.

  8. #388
    Professor
    Phil_Osophy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Earth
    Last Seen
    11-11-14 @ 02:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,450

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

    Quote Originally Posted by prometeus View Post
    Yea, like those who oppose abortion. ****ing evangelical bigots just cant keep out of other people's lives.
    Abortion is a completely different non related topic.

  9. #389
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

    Quote Originally Posted by prometeus View Post
    Yea, like those who oppose abortion. ****ing evangelical bigots just cant keep out of other people's lives.
    Did you take the wrong exit? This isn't the abortion forum and this thread isn't about abortion.

    Look, it's cool, just don't drive the next time you get drunk.

  10. #390
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Over the edge...
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    14,208

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    I'm not understanding why you're so hostile to Christians and why you are similarly hostile to human rights.
    Christians are not the problem. Bigots are ans they exist in every walk of life, but it is especially hypocritical when relf righteous self proclaimed Christians spread hate instead of love.

Page 39 of 122 FirstFirst ... 2937383940414989 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •