View Poll Results: Should the public accommodations portion of the law be repealed?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 42 of 198 FirstFirst ... 3240414243445292142 ... LastLast
Results 411 to 420 of 1973

Thread: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

  1. #411
    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 Henrin View Post
    Yes, I have already been around that tree. The argument is essentially saying people don't have right to pursue their happiness in the way they see fit, but instead must avoid it if they believe in a certain way.
    Oh please. No ones unable to pursuer their happiness. More exaggeration. There should be no real effect at all.

    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.

  2. #412
    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
    which no one is doing, at all, in any way.
    really?.....what about the two cases where two different business owners, where sued because both would not serve gay people. One in WA, and one in HI.

    The gay people claimed they had a right to be served, and the government of both states say you cannot discriminate against gay people.

    If government forces the business to serve them, ...that is involuntary servitude.......and illegal under the constitution.

  3. #413
    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
    It is dependent in being voluntary. No one has to be in business. So someone who c hoses to be in business and sets a payment others meet is not in involuntary servitude. Can't you see your own dishonest exaggeration?
    Do you remember the florist not long that was punished for not serving a gay individual? Do you think that business was in place before or after the state law that made her decision unlawful? Before. So what of all those racist businessmen after the 1964 bill passed? Do you think they were in business before the law passed? Yes. So tell me, did the law make people involuntary servants even if I was to accept your premise? The answer is yes.

    Regardless, I have already dealt with this. If they practice their right to liberty they are forced into servitude.

  4. #414
    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
    really?.....what about the two cases where two different business owners, where sued because both would not serve gay people. One in wa, and one in hi.

    The gay people claimed they had a right to be served, and the government of both states say you can disseminate against gay people.

    If government forces me to serve them, ...that is involuntary servitude.......and illegal under the constitution.
    Nonsense. It is nothing of the kind. It's mere civil fairness. The ones abused here were the people refused services for no valid reason. The community would be just to stop going there altogether.

    But, it is not involuntary servitude. Your claim is laughable hyperbole.

    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.

  5. #415
    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
    Oh please. No ones unable to pursuer their happiness. More exaggeration. There should be no real effect at all.
    So being forced to serve people against someones will is something you would consider a condition of happiness?

  6. #416
    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 Henrin View Post
    Do you remember the florist not long that was punished for not serving a gay individual? Do you think that business was in place before or after the state law that made her decision unlawful? Before. So what of all those racist businessmen after the 1964 bill passed? Do you think they were in business before the law passed? So tell me, did the law make people involuntary servants even if I was to accept your premise? The answer is yes.

    Regardless, I have already dealt with this. If they practice their right to liberty they are forced into servitude.
    Same with those who drove with insurance before the law requiring it was passed. They either adapt or stop driving. Same here. But it is not involuntary servitude. They have choice. And they are not forced to give any service at all.

    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.

  7. #417
    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
    Nonsense. It is nothing of the kind. It's mere civil fairness. The ones abused here were the people refused services for no valid reason. The community would be just to stop going there altogether.

    But, it is not involuntary servitude. Your claim is laughable hyperbole.
    What in the hell is civil fairness?

  8. #418
    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 Henrin View Post
    So being forced to serve people against someones will is something you would consider a condition of happiness?
    Hell no. Happiness is not related to who pays for service. Not a bit.

    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.

  9. #419
    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 Henrin View Post
    What in the hell is civil fairness?
    Basic fairness. Fairness necessary in a civil society. That which legal remedy exists for unfairness.

    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.

  10. #420
    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
    Same with those who drove with insurance before the law requiring it was passed. They either adapt or stop driving. Same here. But it is not involuntary servitude. They have choice. And they are not forced to give any service at all.
    So forcing people to buy insurance to lower the rates of others is somehow a justified course of action for the state to take part in? So you don't find anything wrong with being forced to take part in commerce for the benefit of others? Interesting. You don't find that to be servitude?

Posting Permissions

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