Page 58 of 122 FirstFirst ... 848565758596068108 ... LastLast
Results 571 to 580 of 1212

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

  1. #571
    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 Mach View Post
    They don't have to. They can close up shop.

    There are a wide range of business laws that govern the way you treat employees, and customers. This is just one of many (presumably).
    So youre saying i can only sell my product to someone if i sell to everyone? Why should you decide who i serve?

  2. #572
    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 Wiggen View Post
    Well, neither one of them are Libertarians, so that makes sense. Just wait until the NFL threatens to pull the Super Bowl next year. You'll see a number of these right wing clowns in Arizona come to Jesus.
    Dude, I haven't watched football since I was ten. I really couldn't give a damn about the Super Bowl.

  3. #573
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:00 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,803

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    1.)Can the government come down on them if they don't?
    2.) What happens when they fail to serve you?
    3.) Can you sue?
    4.) Do you use the government to sue someone?
    5.) Then you agree with me. Good.
    1.) for simply not serving people? nope
    2.) nothing
    3.) for not serving me? nope
    4.) theres no grounds in your description
    5.) doubtful your question didnt even make sense or apply and when theres facts involve i go with them something you rarely do

    its amazing how obvious, factual and direct statments are confusing some of you
    Last edited by AGENT J; 02-24-14 at 04:06 PM.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  4. #574
    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 AGENT J View Post
    1.) for simply not serving people? nope
    2.) nothing
    3.) for not serving me? nope
    4.) theres no grounds in your description
    5.) doubtful your question didnt even make sense or apply and when theres facts involve i go with them something you rarely do
    You already know the grounds of the lawsuit. We both know that people can sue if they are denied service and because of this threat who will provide service against their will? Think.

    To suggest the government has no rule in this or that somehow the government was given a new power that didn't involve force is idiotic.

  5. #575
    Guru

    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Last Seen
    12-12-17 @ 11:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    3,899

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

    Quote Originally Posted by tech30528 View Post
    Should I be forced to do business with the lesbian because she is gay but not the other because she does not have minority status? And at what point are MY rights being violated?
    Quote Originally Posted by tech30528 View Post
    At some point one person's rights are going to collide with another person's rights. At that we need to defer to common sense, which unfortunately is not all that common.
    And with that in mind, a good division will be to differentiate between services and contracts. Those providing services can still refuse, but only in limited circumstances (ie provided the service in the past, they were disruptive).

    Contracts, however, have more personal involvement and thus more leeway: "I dont customize gay wedding cakes", "I dont want to contract on remodeling the abortion center, the strip joint, the church, the bar, the evangelical Christian gay conversion center etc". In contracts, refusal can be for any reason (social or religous) or simply for no stated reason.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiggen View Post
    Stunning, but par for the course for Libertarians - who don't give a damn about people, just property.
    Very true, and another illustration of why libertarian ideaology has never worked in real world. At the end of the day, we dont live on islands and we do have a social contract with each other. Of course, that contract can be pretty limited, but in contrast to libertarianism, it does exist.
    Last edited by Cryptic; 02-24-14 at 04:15 PM.

  6. #576
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Mach View Post
    No one is forcing them to run a business, so it's not strictly a matter of forcing commerce on another person.
    i did not say that....i have a right to commerce.......meaning buying OR selling, no person/government has a right to use force on another citizen, to force them to sell to them or buy from them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mach View Post
    This is too lightweight IMO. A crime is a legal term and nearly anything under the sun can (and maybe has) been labeled a crime at one time/place or another. No, being a crime doesn't legitimate or delegitimize a particular government action. As you know well, it's something outside of government and law that is the primary driver for what is right,and what is not. And discrimination is not OK in that context.
    the constitution states that a government cannot force a citizen to serve another citizen [13th], unless a crime has been committed........when a citizen infringes on another citizens rights.......thats a crime, not a constitutional violation.

    if a citizens commits no crime, or does nothing which could cause a rights infringement, ....IE. health and safety of the people.......then government has no authority to act.........because the "people" are not endangered in any way.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mach View Post
    You can run a discriminatory club or organization, or private "group", etc. But a general business that serves the public, no, discrimination is not OK.
    you statement is based on emotional content, and not the rights of the people.

    government is not here to protect your .......feelings

  7. #577
    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 Wiggen View Post
    Apparently you haven't read the 1965 Civil Rights Act. Wait until your loon Rand Paul gets elected and repeals the law before you make silly statements like that.
    I read the 1964 civil rights act. What of it?

  8. #578
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:00 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,803

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    1.)You already know the grounds of the lawsuit.
    2.)We both know that people can sue if they are denied service
    3.) and because of this threat who will provide service against their will?
    4.) Think.

    To suggest the government has no rule in this or that somehow the government was given a new power that didn't involve force is idiotic.
    1.) no i dont, youll have to explain it, there is no grounds for denying service, if there is please tell me what it is
    2.) they can try but they will fail unless you know some law i dont
    3.) what threat you havent listed one or even shown who will be forced to provide service against thier will lol
    4.) i did and everything you just said is factually wrong until you can tell me what grounds a person can sue for for simply not being served, ive never heard of something so retarded and nonsensical, whats it called?
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  9. #579
    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 AGENT J View Post
    1.) no i dont, youll have to explain it, there is no grounds for denying service, if there is please tell me what it is
    2.) they can try but they will fail unless you know some law i dont
    3.) what threat you havent listed one or even shown who will be forced to provide service against thier will lol
    4.) i did and everything you just said is factually wrong until you can tell me what grounds a person can sue for for simply not being served, ive never heard of something so retarded and nonsensical, whats it called?
    For being DENIED service. What is the protect classes? ****, I thought I could provide you an overview without going into every last detail.

    So again, when people are DENIED service can they sue? The answer is yes. The threat of a lawsuit and the act of a lawsuit acts as government FORCE. Is there some sort of reason people can't grasp this?

  10. #580
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:00 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,803

    Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    1.)For being DENIED service.
    2.) What is the protect classes? ****
    3.) I thought I could provide you an overview without going into every last detail.
    1.) theres no law against being denied service, you an keep repeating it all you want but you're gonna have to tell us what you are talking about
    2.) protected classes? you, me we are all protected that has nothing to do with being denied service
    3.) well you thought wrong, you'll have to educate us on how one possible sues for being denied service, i've never heard of anything so inane, so what will the person be suing for, what law will be broken? right to service?
    Last edited by AGENT J; 02-24-14 at 04:31 PM.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

Posting Permissions

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