View Poll Results: Should the public accommodations portion of the law be repealed?

Voters
123. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    64 52.03%
  • No

    56 45.53%
  • I don't know

    3 2.44%
Page 2 of 198 FirstFirst 12341252102 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 1973

Thread: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

  1. #11
    #NeverTrump
    a351's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Space Coast
    Last Seen
    09-09-17 @ 08:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    6,902

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lakryte View Post
    Should clubs be allowed to have dress codes? For example, should a club be able to say "to get into this club, you have to have a full tuxedo"?
    The difference being you can purchase an article of clothing whereas one cannot change ones race. I'm well aware that discrimination as a general concept exists in spades, but that in no way justifies excusing and tolerating it in all circumstances.

  2. #12
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    No. History tells us business likely would not be hurt enough. You don't want to serve people due their race or gender, don't go into business.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  3. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by a351 View Post
    The difference being you can purchase an article of clothing whereas one cannot change ones race. I'm well aware that discrimination as a general concept exists in spades, but that in no way justifies excusing and tolerating it in all circumstances.
    Why does it matter what kind of discrimination it is?

  4. #14
    Guru
    soot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Last Seen
    04-25-17 @ 03:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    4,308

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    I disagree with Stossel and Paul.

    In the "modern age" it's easy to say that the market would correct for discrimination against large minority groups like blacks or hispanics, or against outspoken minority groups like LGBT.

    But what would have happened to small minority groups that nobody had any real sympathy or affinty for?

    Like Muslims after 9/11?

    "Don't shop in this deli. Go down the street."

    "YOU, yeah, you Muslim. Don't bring that bag in my store. You cool with your bag, black guy."

    These laws weren't passed to protect empowered or nominal "minorities", they were passed to defend largely defenseless minorities from very real presecution.

    Look, I'll even accept that the market would have ensured the appropriate correction in the case of Muslims in time.

    But WTF is a Muslim family in a remote part of Louisiana supposed to do if there's only one grocery store within reasonable driving distance and the Desert Shield/Desert Storm era veteran manager decided that Mooooooooslims is dangerous?

    The gov can't force him to sell food to this low-income family cuz there'd be no law that says they have to.

    They can't afford to eat at restaurants every night. I make GOOD money and I can't even afford to do that.

    Maybe a sympathetic neighbor would pitch in and help out with the shopping, maybe not.

    What would any Muslim do if America erupted in an Intafada-style spree of minor terror attacks, like say the Boston Marathon bombing was just the first attack in a spree that was still ongoing with no end in sight?

    No. I support public accomodations.

    Americans, by and large, are cowardly assholes.

    They do "the right thing" because they're afraid of the consequences, and they'll largely do the "wrong thing" as long as they think they can get away with it.

    How many of y'all speed from time to time?

    Yeah, then you'd discriminate against a minority if you perceived a chance of a threat, so long as you could get away with doing so.

    So would I.

  5. #15
    Guru
    Lakryte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    06-02-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,982

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by a351 View Post
    The difference being you can purchase an article of clothing whereas one cannot change ones race. I'm well aware that discrimination as a general concept exists in spades, but that in no way justifies excusing and tolerating it in all circumstances.
    Really? So everyone can afford to purchase an expensive tuxedo? I don't think so. Do not clubs with dress codes make the poor who cannot afford such clothes second class citizens?
    "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free."
    "When we live authentically we create an opportunity for others to walk out of their dark prisons of pretend into freedom."

  6. #16
    Sage
    Lutherf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    24,654

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by a351 View Post
    The difference being you can purchase an article of clothing whereas one cannot change ones race. I'm well aware that discrimination as a general concept exists in spades, but that in no way justifies excusing and tolerating it in all circumstances.
    You don't think that statement is, in and of itself, racist?

  7. #17
    Sage
    ksu_aviator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Fort Worth Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    6,680
    Blog Entries
    10

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Discrimination is stupid. But...there's no Constitutional mandate for citizens to be smart.
    You, my brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh; rather, serve one another humbly in love.For the entire law is fulfilled in keeping this one command: “Love your neighbor as yourself.”

  8. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    01-22-17 @ 09:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    4,136

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by pbrauer View Post
    I ran an identical poll almost three years ago, since DP has added a significant number of users I thought I would try it again.

    In May 2010 Rand Paul announced his candidacy for U.S. Senate from Kentucky on MSNBC's The Rachel Maddow Show. On the show he got into some trouble because he said he wouldn't support the "public accommodations" portion of the Civil Right Act of 1964.

    That led up to this confrontation with Megyn Kelly on Fox where he said he favors repeal of that part of the law.

    Should the public accommodations portion of the law be repealed?

    Yes
    No
    I don't Know



    Here is part of the transcript:

    KELLY: Rand Paul is a libertarian. You are a libertarian. He is getting excoriated for suggesting that the Civil Rights act -- what he said was, "Look it's got 10 parts, essentially; I favor nine. It's the last part that mandated no discrimination in places of public accommodation that I have a problem with, because you should let businesses decide for themselves whether they are going to be racist or not racist. Because once the government gets involved, it's a slippery slope." Do you agree with that?

    STOSSEL: Totally. I'm in total agreement with Rand Paul. You can call it public accommodation, and it is, but it's a private business. And if a private business wants to say, "We don't want any blond anchorwomen or mustached guys," it ought to be their right. Are we going to say to the black students' association they have to take white people, or the gay softball association they have to take straight people? We should have freedom of association in America.

    KELLY: OK. When you put it like that it sounds fine, right? So who cares if a blond anchorwoman and mustached anchorman can't go into the lunchroom. But as you know, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 came around because it was needed. Blacks weren't allowed to sit at the lunch counter with whites. They couldn't, as they traveled from state to state in this country, they couldn't go in and use a restroom. They couldn't get severed meals and so on, and therefore, unfortunately in this country a law was necessary to get them equal rights.

    STOSSEL: Absolutely. But those -- Jim Crow -- those were government rules. Government was saying we have white and black drinking fountains. That's very different from saying private people can't discriminate.

    KELLY: How do you know? How do you know that these private business owners, who owned restaurants and so on, would have said, "You know what? Yes. We will take blacks.

    STOSSEL: Some wouldn't.

    KELLY: We'll take gays. We'll take lesbians," if they hadn't been forced to do it.

    STOSSEL: Because eventually they would have lost business. The free market competition would have cleaned the clocks of the people who didn't serve most customers.

    KELLY: How do you know that, John?

    STOSSEL: I don't. You can't know for sure.

    KELLY: That then was a different time. Racism and discrimination was rampant. I'm not saying it's been eliminated. But it was rampant. It was before my time, before I was born, but obviously I've read history, and I know that there is something wrong when a person of color can't get from state to state without stopping at a public restroom or a public lunchroom to have a sandwich.

    STOSSEL: But the public restroom was run by the government, and maybe at the time that was necessary.

    KELLY: But that's not what Rand Paul said. Rand Paul agreed that if it's run by the government, yes intervention is fine. He took issue with the public accommodations, with private businesses being forced to pony up under the discrimination laws.

    STOSSEL: And I would go further than he was willing to go, as he just issued the statement, and say it's time now to repeal that part of the law

    KELLY: What?

    STOSSEL: because private businesses ought to get to discriminate. And I won't won't ever go to a place that's racist and I will tell everybody else not to and I'll speak against them. But it should be their right to be racist.
    Yes. I do agree with repealing that part of the law, because I just don't see it as being necessary anymore. Today, any company that refused to serve blacks or gays or what ever have you, would have an absolute nightmare of PR on their hands. It simply isn't necessary for the government to persecute business that decide to discriminate, the public will do it for them.

  9. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    02-18-14 @ 08:18 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,660

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    I absolutely agree with Stossel, I should be able to serve/not serve anyone I choose. I make use of the credit report now as that is a legal means to weed out the losers.

  10. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Last Seen
    01-22-17 @ 09:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    4,136

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    No. History tells us business likely would not be hurt enough. You don't want to serve people due their race or gender, don't go into business.
    Circumstances changes. That's why its called history.

Page 2 of 198 FirstFirst 12341252102 ... 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
  •