• 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!

Would businesses discriminate today? Are laws against discrimination necessary?[W:83]

Do we need anti-discrimination laws?

  • Total voters
    38
Black Manta said:
It is not a "right" to operate a business in any specific jurisdiction without government aproval. So no.
Click to expand...

You know, telling people what they can and can't do with their property is a violation unless the action itself is violating the rights of someone else. I don't see how your example qualifies.
 
Henrin said:
You know, telling people what they can and can't do with their property is a violation unless the action itself is violating the rights of someone else. I don't see how your example qualifies.
Click to expand...

Then you mite want to look up zoning laws. I am not going to sit here and explain the basic concept that everyone pretty much knows.

Nice try though.

Wonderful how you cut out my examples. I wonder why?
 
clownboy said:
Agreed, however, I don't believe the private property thing was part of the Civil Rights Act, but was adjudicated in later on. I know for a fact that private golf courses were allowed to discriminate until recently.They may have given that up under public pressure rather than from government regulation.
Click to expand...

The private property thing was a part of the CRA initially, but it was challenged and adjudicated in various contexts over the course of the next decade or so. If I'm remembering correctly, things like private golf courses got (and continue to get) around that problem by not being open to the public. A country club (e.g.) requires membership, and can therefore be as discriminatory as it wants. Those that have changed their tune have indeed done so due to public pressure, rather than governmental involvement. Hell, Augusta (probably the most prestigious private golf course in the country) invited its first female members to join like a year ago.
 
MaggieD said:
Sorry, but The Civil Rights Act says it's against the law. If my opinion, that of SCOTUS, and the majority of people in this country is ridiculous? I'll gladly take that label. Bigotry and racism comes in many forms. Yours is but one.
Click to expand...

No, your BEHAVIOR was ridiculous and uncalled for flaming because of your post's content.

You have continued to be not only ridiculous this time, but you have now crossed the line.

Perhaps *you* are the closed-minded bigot, blindly accusing others of racism because they disagree with you politically.

At no point has anyone in this thread advocated for discrimination or promoted racism.

I doubt very much if that will change. I do fear that this discussion is generally impossible because of people who behave like you, accusing others of racism out of turn.

Thankfully there are people like me who are not cowed by those who frivolously play the race card...
 
MaggieD said:
You know, this conversation is like having an argument with someone on why it's okay to beat your wife. It's against the law. Until the law changes, The Civil Rights Act trumps property rights. Period. Much the same as our right to assemble is trumped by laws that require permits.
Click to expand...

No, this discussion is entirely different than one on beating your wife. This premise of laws trumping rights is a faulty one and there is no reason what so ever I should humor it, so consider the rest of your post rejected.
 
Black Manta said:
Then you mite want to look up zoning laws. I am not going to sit here and explain the basic concept that everyone pretty much knows.

Nice try though.

Wonderful how you cut out my examples. I wonder why?
Click to expand...

Zoning laws are a good example. However, it should be pointed out that those are not federal, but state and local, which is consistent with the US Constitution. For the FEDERAL government to be messing about in private property rights - that's the constitutional bridge too far.

Again, I'm not arguing against the Civil Rights Act, but specifically against federal regulation of private property.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Knock off the personal attacks or else!
 
clownboy said:
Zoning laws are a good example. However, it should be pointed out that those are not federal, but state and local, which is consistent with the US Constitution. For the FEDERAL government to be messing about in private property rights - that's the constitutional bridge too far.

Again, I'm not arguing against the Civil Rights Act, but specifically against federal regulation of private property.
Click to expand...

I know all this. Please point out where I said "Federal Government" I did not. I said state and local. :doh

Your quote literally has nothing to do with my point or anything else I was saying...

Black Manta said:
The business license issued buy the state, local governments is a contract. To maintain said license they must obey the laws as set down by the state including discrimination laws. If they don't like it, they can go someplace else to do business.

The contract trumps private property in this case.
Click to expand...
 
Black Manta said:
Then you mite want to look up zoning laws. I am not going to sit here and explain the basic concept that everyone pretty much knows.

Nice try though.
Click to expand...

I already know about zoning laws.

Wonderful how you cut out my examples. I wonder why?
Click to expand...

How did I cut out your example? I highlighted it and backspaced it out.

Why did I do it? Because the constitutionally of zoning laws I'm not interested in talking about.
 
Re: Would businesses discriminate today? Are laws against discrimination necessary?[W

Henrin said:
I already know about zoning laws.
Click to expand...

Then please explain this...

Henrin said:
You know, telling people what they can and can't do with their property is a violation unless the action itself is violating the rights of someone else. I don't see how your example qualifies.
Click to expand...

So you are saying it is your right to open a store in a residential area? Or something of that nature? My example is not only valid, it is law and Constitutional. It trumps any right you have to do what you want with private property, period. So when you apply for a business licence you are agreeing to their terms and they are legal and Constitutional. They include anti-discrimination laws which have so far passed Constitutional muster.

Henrin said:
How did I cut out your example? I highlighted it and backspaced it out.

Why did I do it? Because the constitutionally of zoning laws I'm not interested in talking about.
Click to expand...

:sinking:
 
Re: Would businesses discriminate today? Are laws against discrimination necessary?[W

JayDubya said:
No, your BEHAVIOR was ridiculous and uncalled for flaming because of your post's content.

You have continued to be not only ridiculous this time, but you have now crossed the line.

Perhaps *you* are the closed-minded bigot, blindly accusing others of racism because they disagree with you politically.

At no point has anyone in this thread advocated for discrimination or promoted racism.

I doubt very much if that will change. I do fear that this discussion is generally impossible because of people who behave like you, accusing others of racism out of turn.

Thankfully there are people like me who are not cowed by those who frivolously play the race card...
Click to expand...

So, then, apparently you are arguing that the purity property rights should trump individual rights to ownership. If that is so, then accept my apology for assuming you are racist. I don't agree with you, however. In your world, people could refuse to sell property to blacks, refuse to rent homes or apartments to them, refuse to serve them in their restaurants. That's not a time in history I'm particularly proud of. A shame we need The Civil Rights Act(s) in all their permutations, but it's quite clear that we do.
 
Re: Would businesses discriminate today? Are laws against discrimination necessary?[W

Black Manta said:
I know all this. Please point out where I said "Federal Government" I did not. I said state and local. :doh

Your quote literally has nothing to do with my point or anything else I was saying...
Click to expand...

Hmmm, I thought we were having this discussion in the context of the FEDERAL Civil Rights Act. Pardon me if I got that wrong, but that is the context I was using for the discussion.

On to the restaurant example, from what is posted here, a business can get around this federal regulation by simply going co-op or membership based. So, the restaurant could offer long term memberships free and temporary day memberships only to those they wished to serve, correct?
 
Re: Would businesses discriminate today? Are laws against discrimination necessary?[W

clownboy said:
Hmmm, I thought we were having this discussion in the context of the FEDERAL Civil Rights Act. Pardon me if I got that wrong, but that is the context I was using for the discussion.

On to the restaurant example, from what is posted here, a business can get around this federal regulation by simply going co-op or membership based. So, the restaurant could offer long term memberships free and temporary day memberships only to those they wished to serve, correct?
Click to expand...

I would have no problem with it, but the state might if a stink was made about it.
 
Re: Would businesses discriminate today? Are laws against discrimination necessary?[W

clownboy said:
On to the restaurant example, from what is posted here, a business can get around this federal regulation by simply going co-op or membership based. So, the restaurant could offer long term memberships free and temporary day memberships only to those they wished to serve, correct?
Click to expand...

I just looked this up, and the requirement is somewhat more specific than what youi're talking about. Title II of the CRA exempts "private clubs." What qualifies as a private club is fairly limited. Here's a short summary courtesy of the ACLU:

"In order to be exempt from the civil rights laws, a "private" club must truly reserve its facilities for members, and must have genuinely exclusive membership criteria – a club that will admit anyone who is not African American does not qualify. Courts deciding whether a club is “private” in this sense will consider the history and purpose of the club (including whether it was created to circumvent desegregation), the club advertises for members, it is directly controlled by its members and operated solely for their benefit, and the club is operated for profit."
When Is a Private Club Not a 'Private Club'? :: American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania

So the day membership concept if used by what is essentially an open-to-the-public restaurant would not pass muster.
 
Re: Would businesses discriminate today? Are laws against discrimination necessary?[W

Black Manta said:
Then please explain this...

So you are saying it is your right to open a store in a residential area? Or something of that nature? My example is not only valid, it is law and Constitutional. It trumps any right you have to do what you want with private property, period. So when you apply for a business licence you are agreeing to their terms and they are legal and Constitutional. They include anti-discrimination laws which have so far passed Constitutional muster.
Click to expand...

Sigh..

me said:
This premise of laws trumping rights is a faulty one and there is no reason what so ever I should humor it.
Click to expand...


:sinking:
Click to expand...

Hmm? I'm sorry, but not dealing with something that I consider to be entirely irrelevant doesn't do much for you. You might have noticed I ignored it again when you decided to included in this post as well.
 
Re: Would businesses discriminate today? Are laws against discrimination necessary?[W

Henrin said:
Sigh..

Hmm? I'm sorry, but not dealing with something that I consider to be entirely irrelevant doesn't do much for you. You might have noticed I ignored it again when you decided to included in this post as well.
Click to expand...

Well reality has some bad news for you.
 
Re: Would businesses discriminate today? Are laws against discrimination necessary?[W

MaggieD said:
So, then, apparently you are arguing that the purity property rights should trump individual rights to ownership.
Click to expand...

???

The people that want to use the property do not have ownership of anything they are trying to gain access towards.
 
Re: Would businesses discriminate today? Are laws against discrimination necessary?[W

Black Manta said:
Well reality has some bad news for you.
Click to expand...

For the post in question, not so much, no.
 
Re: Would businesses discriminate today? Are laws against discrimination necessary?[W

Henrin said:
So the act of stopping the firing process is not violating my rights? How very interesting. I like how this right you guys have declared works. A bit nonsensical though.
Click to expand...

who is stopping the firing process!? thats right nobody, whats nonsensical is how dishonest your statement is.

I can play too, so you want a person to be able to fire your wife, sister, grandmother, nice etc for not giving them BJ?
thats cool to each his own.

"us guys" do not, we care about your wife, sister, grandmother, nice more than you do it seems
 
Last edited:
Re: Would businesses discriminate today? Are laws against discrimination necessary?[W

Objective-J said:
who is stopping the firing process! thats right nobody, whats nonsensical is how dishonest you statement is.

I can play too, so you want a person to be able to fire your wife, sister, grandmother, nice etc for not giving them BJ thats cool to each his own,

"us guys" do not, we care about your wife, sister, grandmother, nice more than you do
Click to expand...

So, in other words, like an intern job in the Clinton White House. :mrgreen:
 
Re: Would businesses discriminate today? Are laws against discrimination necessary?[W

clownboy said:
So, in other words, like an intern job in the Clinton White House. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

made me laugh but i think she volunteered ;)
 
Re: Would businesses discriminate today? Are laws against discrimination necessary?[W

MaggieD said:
You are a bigot if you set a price on your property and then refuse to sell it at full price to someone because of their race.
Click to expand...

No disagreement here whatsoever.

But you called Henrin and I "racist" and "bigot" because you disagree with us about whether or not someone has the right to be such a bigot, and that's patently unfair.

I hope you can see that now.
 
Re: Would businesses discriminate today? Are laws against discrimination necessary?[W

Henrin said:
If I don't want to hire someone I do have that right. Stop stripping rights because you want hired. I don't care what the person is, if someone says NO, they said no. Talk them out of it if you can, change cultural acceptance of the practice so its almost never practiced, but don't dare step on the right.
Click to expand...

I do bleed for those who want to put prejudice over qualifications. Truly. But I think the more we lean towards the qualifications for the job, and less of who looks like me, the better we'll be overall.
 
Re: Would businesses discriminate today? Are laws against discrimination necessary?[W

Boo Radley said:
I do bleed for those who want to put prejudice over qualifications. Truly.
Click to expand...

?? I'm saying they can pick whatever they please.

But I think the more we lean towards the qualifications for the job, and less of who looks like me, the better we'll be overall.
Click to expand...

I don't consider the voice of the government in such matters justified.
 
Re: Would businesses discriminate today? Are laws against discrimination necessary?[W

Objective-J said:
who is stopping the firing process!? thats right nobody, whats nonsensical is how dishonest your statement is.
Click to expand...

The law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom