• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

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

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

No, what makes you a segregationist is your belief that separating people on the basis of what they are rather than who they are is perfectly acceptable. Even endorsed.

I dont believe in seperating people. So where are you going with this?
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Yes, the people dumping stuff on them are criminals, but that doesn't make them somehow warranted to be on that property against the owners permission. Trespassing is a crime, and the individuals sitting down in that picture are guilty of it.

Need to work on your sentence structure. I agree if by "them" in your first sentence you mean the "criminals" vandalising the store.

How do you know the " individuals sitting down in that picture are guilty of" trespassing? Were you there? Do you know if the store owner or manager called for the police to come and remove the sitters?
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Hmmm, it looks like there are still some rational brain cells remaining in Republicans

Jeff Flake Wants Arizona Guv To Veto Anti-Gay Discrimination Bill

A bill that would allow Arizona businesses to discriminate against LGBT individuals on the basis of religious freedom is headed to Gov. Jan Brewer's (R) desk, and Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) wants her to veto it.

Flake tweeted Saturday that he hopes Brewer puts an end to the bill:
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

It is truly amazing to what extent some people will go to defend and endorse bigotry. What makes it more troubling is that in this instance they are doing it in the name of religion, or by proxy in the name of God. Deus vult. When are the crusades starting?
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Need to work on your sentence structure. I agree if by "them" in your first sentence you mean the "criminals" vandalising the store.

How do you know the " individuals sitting down in that picture are guilty of" trespassing? Were you there? Do you know if the store owner or manager called for the police to come and remove the sitters?

The whole sit in business that took place during the civil rights movement was criminal; in that, they were trespassing on private property. For whatever reason they had this notion that they had the right to be on property they did not own, but the fact was, and still is, only the property owner has the right to be on the property. Everyone else in that building in the picture shown was there at the behest of the owner and that includes both those individuals standing up and those individuals sitting down.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

The whole sit in business that took place during the civil rights movement was criminal; in that, they were trespassing on private property. For whatever reason they had this notion that they had the right to be on property they did not own, but the fact was, and still is, only the property owner has the right to be on the property. Everyone else in that building in the picture shown was there at the behest of the owner and that includes both those individuals standing up and those individuals sitting down.

So - you don't actually know much about the picture. You just found it on the internets, OK.

Libertarian thought (what a joke) has never been shown to work in society.
Remember
“There are two novels that can transform a bookish 14-year-kld’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish daydream that can lead to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood in which large chunks of the day are spent inventing ways to make real life more like a fantasy novel. The other is a book about orcs.”
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Sure it is growing....but there isn't much of a city right now. Don't get me wrong....Phoenix is fine....been there a number of times...but it is more of a big suburb than a city.

Because Phoenix was founded late, it was able to be designed for people who have cars. So you don't have narrow one way alleys and people living on top of each other. Other cities envy us for being spread out, you need to be spread out here, especially on a day like today where it will be near 80 degrees and you can lay out in the sun...or go hiking, etc....
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

So - you don't actually know much about the picture. You just found it on the internets, OK.

I didn't post the picture.

Libertarian thought (what a joke) has never been shown to work in society.
Remember

Except I was not influenced by Ayn Rand. I was influenced by such men as John Locke, Frédéric Bastiat, Murray Rothbard, Lysander Spooner, Herbert Spencer, Thomas Paine, Ludwig von Mises, Aristotle, etc.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Yes it is.

It is the right to free association.

Translation: I want the right of free homophobic expression.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

I dont believe in seperating people. So where are you going with this?

No, you only believe businesses have the right to separate people. That makes you a supporter of segregation, regardless of how you wish to portray it.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

There is the ever so small matter that not all humans could be citizens with 'rights' in 18th Century America.

It is like today. Most of the global population has few rights.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

No, you only believe businesses have the right to separate people. That makes you a supporter of segregation, regardless of how you wish to portray it.

No one in this thread or frankly in any of the threads I have talked about these matters, has disarmed the argument that people have a right to control access and use of their property; that people have the right to their own labor and service; that people have the right to association; that people have the right to contract, which includes the right to not form a contract with someone. Indeed, all they have ever really done is complain that it's not fair or claim that public businesses must serve all; as if their rights are somehow trumped or voided because of that decision.
 
Last edited:
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

You mean like homosexuals who don't like the fact that a state has a law prohibiting them from getting "married" should simply move to some other state?

You mean like homosexuals should have moved out of the US in the pre-Lawrence era when sodomy laws were still legal?

I meant like people who are discriminated against by a business are being told that they can simply go to another business that will accept them as customers.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

I meant like people who are discriminated against by a business are being told that they can simply go to another business that will accept them as customers.

I remember once I went to a video game store as a kid to trade in a game, but the store didn't accept it, so what did I do? I went to another store and traded it in there. There was another time, years later, when I went to get a sandwich at Subway, but for whatever reason they were out of bread(GG subway), so what did I do? I went to another place and got myself a sandwich there. Yup, it's pretty easy to deal with really. Sometimes you have something and you have to find someone willing to take it, and other times, you just have to find someone willing to deal with you. The thing about voluntary arrangements is that everyone has the choice to agree or disagree with the arrangement.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

I'd love to see you shout that when you a kicked out of an emergency room and denied treatment because the only man who can save your life does not want to associate with you.
But hey, the stone age had its merits too.

Not covered under the law we are discussing and the emergency room is not a private facility and operates under quite different standards of care than say, a bakery. This is a strawman.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Not covered under the law we are discussing and the emergency room is not a private facility
Seriously? What is it then?

and operates under quite different standards of care than say, a bakery.
But this is about people exercising their conscience, not about standards of operation.


This is a strawman.
So far you offered two failed arguments to support that. Care to try again?
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

I remember once I went to a video game store as a kid to trade in a game, but the store didn't accept it, so what did I do? I went to another store and traded it in there. There was another time, years later, when I went to get a sandwich at Subway, but for whatever reason they were out of bread(GG subway), so what did I do? I went to another place and got myself a sandwich there. Yup, it's pretty easy to deal with really. Sometimes you have something and you have to find someone willing to take it, and other times, you just have to find someone willing to deal with you. The thing about voluntary arrangements is that everyone has the choice to agree or disagree with the arrangement.

Thanks for enlightening us with your deep experiences with discrimination. Now I know that when black people in the south before 1964 were denied jobs, bank loans, prohibited from buying or renting a home in most neighborhoods, and denied the ability to go to a store, take a bus, or eat at a restaurant like everyone else by the private sector, they weren't harmed, just slightly inconvenienced.
 
Last edited:
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Thanks for enlightening us with your deep experiences with discrimination. Now I know that when black people in the south before 1964 were denied jobs, bank loans, prohibited from buying or renting a home in most neighborhoods, and denied the ability to go to a store, take a bus, or eat at a restaurant like everyone else by the private sector, they weren't harmed, just slightly inconvenienced.

It wasn't even an example of discrimination, just having to find someone that is either willing or able to serve me.

In any event, voluntary arrangements have certain downsides that come with them when people aren't willing to work together, but they are far superior than coerced arrangements in all cases.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Seriously? What is it then?

Most emergency rooms are part of a hospital. Most hospitals in the US are not private facilities. Even those who are have agreements for reciprical treatment. They are also ruled by existing law that the law we're discussing does nothing to alter.

But this is about people exercising their conscience, not about standards of operation.

Point stretched to absurdity and unreality. Once again, this law would have zero effect upon emergency rooms or hospitals.

So far you offered two failed arguments to support that. Care to try again?

Not so (care to name those arguments that you believe failed? I believe you are lost and have mixed up who posted what.), the only failure is your strawman here.
 
Last edited:
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

It is truly amazing to what extent some people will go to defend and endorse bigotry.

Hey, stay on topic. There's no need to drag the liberal bigotry against Governor Palin into this topic.

What makes it more troubling is that in this instance they are doing it in the name of religion, or by proxy in the name of God. Deus vult. When are the crusades starting?

Have we been reading the same posts? All I've witnessed have been defenses of freedom, the Pro-Choice advocates battling the closed-minded, anti-liberty bigots of the Anti-Choice movement who want to oppress us all in the name of their own vision of how we should conduct our associations.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

No, you only believe businesses have the right to separate people. That makes you a supporter of segregation, regardless of how you wish to portray it.
It has nothing to do with separating people. I believe a man has the right to control his labor and property. Thats the bottom line. Just because he chooses to serve some people, doesnt mean you get to force him to serve all. He should have a say in what happens with his property.
Thanks for enlightening us with your deep experiences with discrimination. Now I know that when black people in the south before 1964 were denied jobs, bank loans, prohibited from buying or renting a home in most neighborhoods, and denied the ability to go to a store, take a bus, or eat at a restaurant like everyone else by the private sector, they weren't harmed, just slightly inconvenienced.

Black people eventually started opening their own businesses. Some of the black owned businesses, like night clubs, did better than white owned businesses
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Aren't homosexuals also subject to laws when the laws say that there is no such thing as homosexual "marriage?"

Weren't homosexuals also subject to laws which made sodomy illegal?

Since when is "it's the law" a good rebuttal in a philosophic debate? Look, I'll grant you if homosexuals had followed your advice and desisted in their agenda to devalue marriage and to overturn sodomy laws, that is, if they obeyed the law without trying to change the law, then your argument would have some merit, but that reality never existed, so it's kind of ludicrous to sputter and exclaim "It's the law!"

Protected class is a political designation in a body of law created by erroneous reasoning on the part of courts. This doesn't give us much insight into issues which arise from natural rights.

It's like you looked at the words in my post without reading them. I never made the argument that anti-discrimination laws are good or just simply because they are the existing law. The argument I was making is that a business owner practicing discrimination is nothing like a woman choosing a sexual partner based on whether or not they are a Star Trek nerd. The fact that you believe such a comparison is even worthwhile of discussion blows my mind.

You didn't respond to any of my points, in fact. Why don't you go back and read the part about health inspections, respond to that, and only then will I bother to have a conversation with you. Do you disagree with health inspections? Should women be required to pass a health inspection before going out on a date? Unless you are completely insane, your answer will be "no" and "no," and then I respond: "then you agree that business owners must obey certain laws in order to protect consumers," and then you proceed to evade my point, and throughout this exchange it is all too clear that your hyperbole has not succeeded in making any valid point.
 
Last edited:
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

It has nothing to do with separating people. I believe a man has the right to control his labor and property. Thats the bottom line. Just because he chooses to serve some people, doesnt mean you get to force him to serve all. He should have a say in what happens with his property.


Black people eventually started opening their own businesses. Some of the black owned businesses, like night clubs, did better than white owned businesses

So let me see if I've got this straight. You are a black person who lives in a small town with one drugstore/pharmacy. You have diabetes and need refills of insulin on a fairly regular basis. You are perfectly fine with the owner of that drug store simply refusing to serve black people, and if a black person goes into diabetic shock and dies, that's just the breaks. At least the property rights of the guy who owns the drug store were upheld. Amazing.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

So let me see if I've got this straight. You are a black person who lives in a small town with one drugstore/pharmacy. You have diabetes and need refills of insulin on a fairly regular basis. You are perfectly fine with the owner of that drug store simply refusing to serve black people, and if a black person goes into diabetic shock and dies, that's just the breaks. At least the property rights of the guy who owns the drug store were upheld. Amazing.

First of all, this hypothetical black person is a moron for living in such a town. That's like living on the side of an active volcano, the. Bitching and moaning when it erupts.

You simply move to a new town and shop at a pharmacy that wants your money. Somebody, somewhere wants that persons money.

And yes, his property rights should be upheld, the same way the property rights of said black person should be upheld. Now if this was some taxpayer funded clinic, ID have a problem with that. But I have no problem with somebody exercising their property rights.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

The fight for freedom has to start somewhere. We Pro-Choice advocates have a long battle ahead of us for you totalitarians have been quite successful in your war against human rights and your spread of oppression needs to be rolled back.

I have no idea wtf you're talking about! A jim crow setup oppresses the minority only, not the bigot business owners who take part. Your only battle is against common decency. In your perfect world the minority has to crawl on their knees in the streets for whatever crumbs were accidentally left out. Now behold 3rd world america!

Do you agree with people who burn the US Flag? Do you agree that the US Flag should be burned? Or do you agree that people should have the right to burn the Flag as part of their right to free speech even though you disagree with that speech and that action?

It's just a ****ing piece of cloth to me, i couldn't care less! Far more symbolic are the roads and bridges crumbling to **** all around you.

I don't believe that anyone in this thread has asked you to patronize a restaurant which only wishes to associate with white people, but any person who defends human rights has to recognize that such a restaurant must have the freedom to exercise the right to free association, just like we recognize that we don't have to agree with the burning of the Flag in order to defend the right of people to make such statements.

I must recognize no such thing. Such racists can die in the gutter.
 
Back
Top Bottom