View Poll Results: Should the public accommodations portion of the law be repealed?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 65 of 198 FirstFirst ... 1555636465666775115165 ... LastLast
Results 641 to 650 of 1973

Thread: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

  1. #641
    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
    The past explains the present. It's how we got here. Nor is there any aggression. Your still losing credibility by exaggerating.
    The past is 1964 and acting to restrict the rights of the people is aggression. These individuals you're acting on did not violate the rights of anyone and yet you still support using the state against them. That is an aggressive act on your part.

    But consider this, if we change so much we don't need the law, no one should care if its there. The only reason to repeal it is to allow the abuse to begin again.
    The only reason to repeal two titles of the law is to restore the liberty and property rights of the people.

  2. #642
    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
    The civil rights movement spells out the justification very well. I shed no tears for those who ate so much as to wish to deny a group of people service. The courts and our leaders have agreed. A majority of people have agreed. Be a human being, suck the racism up, and make a profit. That's the message I have.
    people have the right to hate other people....now if they turn that hate into action, then there's a problem.

    but its you i feel sorry for, becuase you believe because people dont act as though you think they should, you think you can use the power of government to make/force people to behave in a manner you approve of.

    you are clearly not for freedom, but what your own ideas are.

  3. #643
    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
    The past is 1964 and acting to restrict the rights of the people is aggression. These individuals you're acting on did not violate the rights of anyone and yet you still support using the state against them. That is an aggressive act on your part.



    The only reason to repeal two titles of the law is to restore the liberty and property rights of the people.
    I'm sorry, but your hyperbole is not effective. You might also see the definition of aggression. I posted that as well. It's important to know what words really mean.

    The right to abuse. I know.

    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. #644
    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
    people have the right to hate other people....now if they turn that hate into action, then there's a problem.

    but its you i feel sorry for, becuase you believe because people dont act as though you think they should, you think you can use the power of government to make/force people to behave in a manner you approve of.

    you are clearly not for freedom, but what your own ideas are.

    Hate all you want. But if you choose to enter business, follow the law.

    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. #645
    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
    I'm sorry, but your hyperbole is not effective. You might also see the definition of aggression. I posted that as well. It's important to know what words really mean.
    I know aggression well, thanks. Unlike you understanding aggression is an essential part of my philosophy.

    The right to abuse. I know.
    The right to control the access and use of your property is the most fundamental of rights. There is no abuse involved in it at all. I'm sorry that you feel you have a right to use other peoples property, but just like you don't have the right to have sex with someone against their will, you don't have the right to enter a business. No property that someone else owns you have a right to access and use. In every last example you need to get the consent of the owner of that property to gain access and use of the property.

  6. #646
    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
    Hate all you want. But if you choose to enter business, follow the law.
    i said people can hate, nice try... trying to include me.

    laws which are unconstitutional.

    since you think government is the moral master, would you approve if they made unlawful

    homosexuality

    devil worship

    derogatory speech

    i think you would change your tune very quickly.

  7. #647
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    01-27-15 @ 11:37 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,247

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    A majority of people have agreed.
    So a group of people agreed to something among themselves. By what legitimate authority are they able to impose their decision upon their fellow man?

  8. #648
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,690

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by Geoist View Post
    Do you have evidence for this claim? I am not saying that there wasn't any discrimination but it was minimal compared to how the later-established laws treated minorities.

    For example, in the American colonies (early 1600s I believe) many African Americans were treated almost as equals for many years before laws were put in place to discriminate against them.
    Read the following:

    Joel Williamson- The Separation of the Races

    Edward L. Ayers- The Promise of the New South: Life after Reconstruction

    Leon F. Litwack- Trouble in Mind: Black Southerners in the Age of Jim Crow

    Howard N. Rabinowitz-From Exclusion to Segregation: Southern Race Relations, 1865-1890

    What I am stating is that social and economic segregation post-war was a serious prelude to legal segregation of the two races.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

  9. #649
    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 Misterveritis View Post
    LOL. I did read it. Hence my comment. You are not being discriminated because you are gay. You are being discriminated against for your behaviors. Still, if your money is not welcome for its own sake why shop there?
    I wouldn't shop there. Your comments suggest you did not read my post. If you did you would see I made that very point:

    "But should I be able to force them to cater to me? I don't think I should be. Why would I want to give my money to people like that anyway?"

    A business that refuses to cater to gay couples is discriminating against gays. I shouldn't have to explain something so incredibly obvious to you. Again, do you think it is impossible to be discriminated against for being gay?
    "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."

  10. #650
    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
    I know aggression well, thanks. Unlike you understanding aggression is an essential part of my philosophy.



    The right to control the access and use of your property is the most fundamental of rights. There is no abuse involved in it at all. I'm sorry that you feel you have a right to use other peoples property, but just like you don't have the right to have sex with someone against their will, you don't have the right to enter a business. No property that someone else owns you have a right to access and use. In every last example you need to get the consent of the owner of that property to gain access and use of the property.
    You mean misunderstanding aggression is your philosophy.

    All, no one s harmed by having to accept paying customers. You're entire argument is making mountains out of ant hills.

    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.

Posting Permissions

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