View Poll Results: Should the public accommodations portion of the law be repealed?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 39 of 198 FirstFirst ... 2937383940414989139 ... LastLast
Results 381 to 390 of 1973

Thread: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

  1. #381
    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: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Are you suggesting the Constitution doesn't allow for rule of law? We've had them from day one. I'm sorry but you're streatching.
    the constitution was written for the federal government only in 1787, after the civil war, it now applied to states and the federal government,..... however it never .....applied to business or the people........

    the only individuals which the constitution speaks of are individuals which have violated laws which pertain to piracy, counterfeiting and treason, and that is all.

  2. #382
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,387

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    show me were government has authority over people in our constitution?......meaning the ability to apply force to the people.
    In a civil society we have laws to discourage behavior we don't like. It's the difference between anarchy and rule of law. That is what you are debating?

  3. #383
    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?

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    the constitution was written for the federal government only in 1787, after the civil war, it now applied to states and the federal government,..... however it never .....applied to business or the people........

    the only individuals which the constitution speaks of are individuals which have violated laws which pertain to piracy, counterfeiting and treason, and that is all.
    I'm sorry, but business is run by people. And we've had laws from day one, of all kinds. And from the federal government. As much as documents are important, and you've likely misread them, so is precedence, this ability is well established.

    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.

  4. #384
    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: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    In a civil society we have laws to discourage behavior we don't like. It's the difference between anarchy and rule of law. That is what you are debating?
    constitutional law is supreme law, there is none higher.

    how can laws, which are on a lower level ,not as high as supreme law, override constitutional law.

    the constitution is CLEAR, no person or entity including the federal government can force a citizen to do things against his will unless a crime has been committed.

  5. #385
    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: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    I'm sorry, but business is run by people. And we've had laws from day one, of all kinds. And from the federal government. As much as documents are important, and you've likely misread them, so is precedence, this ability is well established.
    discrimination laws are unconstitutional , ............becuase they are statutory laws, and not criminal, and becuase they are not criminal, government cannot apply force to a citizen.

    Section 1.
    Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

  6. #386
    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: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by iguanaman View Post
    In a civil society we have laws to discourage behavior we don't like. It's the difference between anarchy and rule of law. That is what you are debating?
    show be where there is a moral /social duty of congress concerning the people life's

    "we dont like".........who is we?........the people are given no power over their follow man, to direct his life.
    Last edited by Master PO; 06-22-13 at 06:27 PM.

  7. #387
    #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 Geoist View Post
    Any form that does not directly harm individuals should be legal in an ideal world. But as I stated, I don't think Paul and Stossel should even be taking on this issue.
    Some would argue the ostracization of minorities is in fact harmful.

  8. #388
    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 Boo Radley View Post
    No, not by definition, nor in reality. They are merely transacting business.
    So if I was to lets say run a small business and deal with consumers directly I would not be associating with these individuals?

    In any event, you are still forcing people to accept others on their property and do business with them. My point stands.

  9. #389
    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: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by a351 View Post
    Some would argue the ostracization of minorities is in fact harmful.
    in what aspect?

    does discrimination violate your rights..........no

    becuase no citizen, can violate the..................... constitution of the u.s.

    a citizen can only commit a crime against another citizen.

  10. #390
    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
    Some would argue the ostracization of minorities is in fact harmful.
    The business does not violate the rights of minorities or anyone else when they refuse to do business with them or by not allowing them on their property. It really makes no difference if the people in question need a service done as no one is their servant and must deliver them this service.

Posting Permissions

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