View Poll Results: Should the public accommodations portion of the law be repealed?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 94 of 198 FirstFirst ... 44849293949596104144194 ... LastLast
Results 931 to 940 of 1973

Thread: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

  1. #931
    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 MoSurveyor View Post
    That's not the meaning of "absolute": "having no restriction, exception, or qualification". Obviously the 14th Amendment plainly shows property can be taken away from a person, which on it's face means it's not absolute.

    ... you really need to understand these things. .

    can your rights be taken away........if you have not committed a crime or something were you have done something where pain of death can occur.............no!

    citizens cannot violate the u.s. constitution, they can only commit crimes against their fellow citizens, this is what gives government authority to take or restrict your rights only!

    and i have repeatedly stated ............crimes committed.........if no crime is committed, or health and safety issue................... no rights can be taken or restricted.

    Absolute rights belong to us due to the nature of our existence, are "unalienable" and "self-evident."

    The absolute rights of individuals may be resolved into the right of personal security, the right of personal liberty, and the right to acquire and enjoy property. These rights are declared to be natural, inherent, and unalienable. Atchison & N. R. Co. v. Baty, 6 Neb. 37, 40, 29 Am. Rep. 356.

    By the "absolute rights" of individuals is meant those which are so in their primary and strictest sense, such as would belong to their persons merely in a state of nature, and which every man is entitled to enjoy, whether out of society or in it. The rights of personal security, of personal liberty, and private property do not depend upon the Constitution for their existence. They existed before the Constitution was made, or the government was organized. These are what are termed the "absolute rights" of individuals, which belong to them independently of all government, and which all governments which derive their power from the consent of the governed were instituted to protect. People v. Berberrich (N. Y.) 20 Barb. 224, 229; McCartee v. Orphan Asylum Soc. (N. Y.) 9 Cow. 437, 511, 513, 18 Am. Dec. 516; People v. Toynbee (N. Y.) 2 Parker, Cr. R. 329, 369, 370 (quoting 1 Bl. Comm. 123).

    Chancellor Kent (2 Kent, Comm. 1) defines the "absolute rights" of individuals as the right of personal security, the right of personal liberty, and the right to acquire and enjoy property. These rights have been justly considered and frequently declared by the people of this country to be natural, inherent, and inalienable, and it may be stated as a legal axiom [A principle that is not disputed; a maxim] that since the great laboring masses of our country have little or no property but their labor, and the free right to employ it to their own best interests and advantage, it must be considered that the constitutional inhibition against all invasion of property without due process of law was as fully intended to embrace and protect that property as any of the accumulations it may have gained. In re Jacobs (N. Y.) 33 Hun, 374, 378.



    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    No, I have a right to enter on invitation of the owner, which is how a reasonable person would interpret an OPEN sign and unlocked door. And, yes, that includes 3AM. My wife, who works nights, often enters QT in the wee hours of the morning.
    that does not make sense, a right to enter on his invitation!......that's a privilege, not a right.

    you misunderstand.....if i own a business and i close at 9pm, ...but you have a right to enter my store, then that gives you authority by that right..........to enter my store even if it closed at 3am......that is why it cannot be a right.




    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    If I have done nothing like break a law (disturbing the peace, shoplifting, etc., etc.) and he wants me to leave "just because" then he has openly lied, which in business is called "false advertising". Like it or not, those kind of consumer laws (like false advertisement) are there for a reason.
    dude you are constantly building a mountain, first you say business cannot discriminate becuase.......the people decide the ......peoples behavior.
    then commerce keeps them from discrimination
    now false advertisement. keeps them from discrimination.

    you have no right to be served, that is impossible, becuase it would lay a burden on another citizen, ..no right under the constitution......... lays a burden of cost or service on anyone ...that's unconstitutional
    Last edited by Master PO; 06-26-13 at 04:07 PM.

  2. #932
    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 MoSurveyor View Post
    (fixed)
    If that means "property" to you then more power to you. But that's not what it means to me and, like the religious zealots I reject, I also reject your claims of property omniscience.
    I did not mention the DOI. Why bring it up now?

    Even Locke himself said that didn't apply once men created money and could store the fruits of his labor indefinitely.
    Link please. I don't recall Locke ever saying that property rights became irrelevant after a certain point.

    Sorry, you do not have the right to start a business. You have many rights as a person, you have none as a business/company/corporation - unless you want to accept the USSC's decisions, which includes discrimination laws?
    Being able to start a business is an individual right.

    Property omniscience is what leaves it on the ice. How sad you don't seem to understand the difference.
    What exactly is your protest? That libertarians understand property? That doesn't seem to be much of a protest.

  3. #933
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    can your rights be taken away........if you have not committed a crime or something were you have done something where pain of death can occur.............no!

    citizens cannot violate the u.s. constitution, they can only commit crimes against their fellow citizens, this is what gives government authority to take or restrict your rights only!
    Citizens, not businesses, especially not those that are OTTP.



    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    that does not make sense, a right to enter on his invitation!......that's a privilege, not a right.

    you misunderstand.....if i own a business and i close at 9pm, ...but you have a right to enter my store, then that gives you authority by that right..........to enter my store even if it closed at 3am......that is why it cannot be a right.
    You can call it whatever you want but it doesn't change a thing. You've said I have no right to enter and I say you (if you wish) plainly allowed me to enter by putting an OPEN sign on an unlocked door. If you reverse your decision then you have falsely advertised your intent to do business. If you don't want to serve the public then don't go into business as 'open to the public'.



    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    dude you are constantly building a mountain, first you say business cannot discriminate becuase.......the people decide the ......peoples behavior.
    then commerce keeps them from discrimination
    now false advertisement. keeps them from discrimination.

    you have no right to be served, that is impossible, becuase it would lay a burden on another citizen, ..no right under the constitution......... lays a burden of cost or service on anyone ...that's unconstitutional
    People do decide how businesses can behave. I'd call that one of the main functions of government.

    I don't know where you got the commerce thing. I made note at one point that people (correctly) assume a business is interested in making money, not airing the social or political beliefs of it's owners.

    It is, indeed, false advertisement as well. Do you believe people can only break one law at a time? LOL!
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  4. #934
    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 MoSurveyor View Post
    You can call it whatever you want but it doesn't change a thing. You've said I have no right to enter and I say you (if you wish) plainly allowed me to enter by putting an OPEN sign on an unlocked door. If you reverse your decision then you have falsely advertised your intent to do business. If you don't want to serve the public then don't go into business as 'open to the public'..
    you seem to be under some idea, you can be barred from walking in the door, and that's not want i am saying.

    you have no legal right to be serve by another citizen.

    you have no legal right to enter a business, as you put it the business invites people into its business, by giving them a privilege.

    you need to stop with the false advertising stuff, its bad and silly argument.


    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    People do decide how businesses can behave. I'd call that one of the main functions of government.
    sorry no, you dont get to place your moral standard on other people, if they misbehave in running their bushiness, then they get no customers, and go out of business.

    your proposing a morality standard here, and you cant do that.


    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    I don't know where you got the commerce thing. I made note at one point that people (correctly) assume a business is interested in making money, not airing the social or political beliefs of it's owners.

    It is, indeed, false advertisement as well. Do you believe people can only break one law at a time? LOL!.
    i told you a business must operate within the laws, meaning they cant commit crimes, or do things which would expose people or other property to health and safety issues, government has authority in those areas.

    it has no authority on the moral or social behavior of the people running the business.......that is not governments job. or other people responsibility.

    opening a business up to the public , does not give the public authority over my business and how they think i have to behave .

    if as a business takes government money, meaning government loans or something of that nature,..then government does have a say-so.....other wise ...no.

  5. #935
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    Link please. I don't recall Locke ever saying that property rights became irrelevant after a certain point.
    Second Treatise, section 50 but you really have to read all of chapter 5.

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    Being able to start a business is an individual right.
    Where does it say that?
    Or is this just more minarchist BS?

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    What exactly is your protest? That libertarians understand property? That doesn't seem to be much of a protest.
    LOL! I don't think they understand anything except property - but the world is much more than that.
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  6. #936
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    you seem to be under some idea, you can be barred from walking in the door, and that's not want i am saying.
    you have no legal right to be serve by another citizen.
    you have no legal right to enter a business, as you put it the business invites people into its business, by giving them a privilege.
    you need to stop with the false advertising stuff, its bad and silly argument.
    It isn't lying? It sure seems like it's a lie to advertise OTTP and then refuse service to a member of the public.



    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    sorry no, you dont get to place your moral standard on other people, if they misbehave in running their bushiness, then they get no customers, and go out of business.

    your proposing a morality standard here, and you cant do that.
    Discrimination has nothing to do with moral standards.
    And regulating business is much more than not allowing discrimination.


    We already do legalize moral standards. Liquor stores and strip clubs usually cannot operate within a certain distance of schools and churches. Both are further limited in their hours of operation. Blue laws still exist in many places, though it's getting less common. And, once again, nudity is outlawed as is profanity and other such behaviors. Discrimination has nothing to do with that type of thing.



    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    i told you a business must operate within the laws, meaning they cant commit crimes, or do things which would expose people or other property to health and safety issues, government has authority in those areas.
    it has no authority on the moral or social behavior of the people running the business.......that is not governments job. or other people responsibility.
    opening a business up to the public , does not give the public authority over my business and how they think i have to behave .
    if as a business takes government money, meaning government loans or something of that nature,..then government does have a say-so.....other wise ...no.
    To some extent it does give government that authority. If you don't want to abide by those OTTP laws then don't have an OTTP business. Plenty of restricted entry, private businesses in America. No need to lie to people by claiming you're something you're not.
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  7. #937
    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 MoSurveyor View Post
    Second Treatise, section 50 but you really have to read all of chapter 5.
    Who did you get property rights is moot after gold and silver is used from that?

    Where does it say that?
    Or is this just more minarchist BS?
    It says it right where it says you have a right to property.

    LOL! I don't think they understand anything except property - but the world is much more than that.
    What did you have in mind when you made this comment? Only things that are tangible can ever be property. The book on my shelves, the computer I'm typing on, the piece of paper in front me, the flower pot on the floor across the room are pieces of property, but the air around me can not be owned and is not property. Almost everything in this world is either property or under the property rights of the item it is on or in.
    Last edited by Henrin; 06-26-13 at 05:15 PM.

  8. #938
    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 MoSurveyor View Post
    I do? Where did I say that?

    For that matter, where do you even think I implied that?
    Then you do not agree with taxing business?

    Owners of government are people, too, and the sooner people realize this the better.
    Owners of government? There is no owners of government. Even if there was they could not use their rights to limit the rights of others.

  9. #939
    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 MoSurveyor View Post
    It isn't lying? It sure seems like it's a lie to advertise OTTP and then refuse service to a member of the public.

    Discrimination has nothing to do with moral standards.
    And regulating business is much more than not allowing discrimination.
    i have an open sign and i am closed ...you call that false advertizing.......i in my life have seen the sign of stores both ways, open when closed and closed when open, ..are you going to claim you could sue over that?

    discrimination is not a morality issue?.........what did you say already....

    Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    People do decide how businesses can behave. I'd call that one of the main functions of government.

    if you making people behave in a certain way you wish them to behave, becuase you dont like what they are doing..... then you dont like how they are behaving morally.

    regulating business has to see that people are not being defrauded, business are not misrepresenting themselves, something that would involve a crime, or something which would be a health or safety issue to another business, or people.

    government do not have authority or the people to tell other citizen how to behave.....unless that behavior is criminal.


    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    We already do legalize moral standards. Liquor stores and strip clubs usually cannot operate within a certain distance of schools and churches. Both are further limited in their hours of operation. Blue laws still exist in many places, though it's getting less common. And, once again, nudity is outlawed as is profanity and other such behaviors. Discrimination has nothing to do with that type of thing.
    are we saying those business cannot exist, no,......... and those are zoning laws, once a zoning law is in place, a liquor or strip club, cannot move into it becuase its already established zone, however you cant toss businesses out, liquor and strip clubs, becuase you wish to rezone becuase of their behavior.



    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    Yes, it does. If you don't want to abide by those laws then don't have an OTTP business. Plenty of restricted entry, private businesses in America. No need to lie to people by claiming you're something you're not.
    WHERE do you get this authority to do this?

    in order for government to act it must have authority under law, ..well where is that authority give the people power over a private business........have you been studying at the Elizabeth Warren school of the people

  10. #940
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 04:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,040

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    wrong.......the population does not get to decide what i get to do with my rights.

    and property is a right


    you have no rights to enter a business....thats insane!

    a right is an absolute, ...if a citizen had a right to enter a business, then that right would hold true to entering the business at 3am, even though the business closed at 9pm.

    you get a privilege on entering a business, becuase the owner wants your business........you have no right to enter or be served..........care to show me a founders who says you have a right to be served or enter?
    A business owner, by virtue of opening a business, grants a right to the public to enter their property. And so they must treat everyone equally regardless of race, under various laws.

Posting Permissions

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