View Poll Results: Should the public accommodations portion of the law be repealed?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 95 of 198 FirstFirst ... 45859394959697105145195 ... LastLast
Results 941 to 950 of 1973

Thread: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

  1. #941
    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 jonny5 View Post
    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.
    wrong, an owner gives the public a privilege of entering is business and shopping or a service.

    if you have a right to enter my business, then that would give you authority to enter it anytime of day or night, even it if closed, ..becuase you would have a right.

    it says governments must treat everyone equally under the law, it does not say a person or business.

    where do you believe you have the power over other people property to decide how they will use it or run it.........show me this power.

    because have already use the 14th and 13th amendments, have you anything higher than those.

  2. #942
    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
    Who did you get property rights is moot after gold and silver is used from that?
    Not moot, just not natural anymore. According to Locke all your "natural" property rights went out the window when we started using money because now you can own more than you can use, which is the "natural" limit on ownership.


    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    It says it right where it says you have a right to property.
    Where does it say I have a right to property?


    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    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.
    And who or what, exactly, determines what those property rights are in the US? You? The Libertarians? The minarchist and anarchists?
    Last edited by MoSurveyor; 06-26-13 at 05:54 PM.
    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

  3. #943
    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
    Then you do not agree with taxing business?
    What do you think that has to do with it?


    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    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.
    Of course there are owners, the People - at least, that's how I would interpret it for your property-minded views.
    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. #944
    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
    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?
    Is the door also locked or unlocked as the case may be? Let's not use half the example and claim it's a whole.



    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    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.
    So even you understand that not all behavior is a morality issue and that the word 'behavior' includes things beyond your narrow interpretation at the beginning of this post. Thank you for admitting it. Problem solved.



    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    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.
    In a great many places those businesses cannot exist. Whole counties outlaw alcohol. Whole states outlaw prostitution. The whole country has essentially outlawed opium dens.


    You sure as hell can toss 'em out. I've seen it done. All it takes is rezoning.



    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    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
    Where does any government get the authority to license a business? Can I license myself as a cab company and then start selling hot dogs on the street corner? Can I be licensed as a candy store and start selling alcohol? If not, then what makes you think I can license an OTTP business and then not run an OTTP business?
    Last edited by MoSurveyor; 06-26-13 at 06:18 PM.
    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

  5. #945
    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 MoSurveyor View Post
    That would depend on the exact circumstances now, wouldn't it?

    Who's to say what's constitutional and what isn't? At this time, only the USSC can do that.
    I gave you the circumstances. A law is passed that denies all Americans the right to free speech. The Supreme Court upholds it as constitutional. Would you say it was constitutional given those circumstances?
    "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. #946
    Professor

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Last Seen
    11-21-14 @ 03:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,120

    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"?
    Private membership clubs are not public accommodations, thus yes. But it doesn't have anything to do with public accommodations.

  7. #947
    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 FilmFestGuy View Post
    Private membership clubs are not public accommodations, thus yes. But it doesn't have anything to do with public accommodations.
    Should they be public accommodations? Why or why not?
    "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."

  8. #948
    Professor

    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Nashville, TN
    Last Seen
    11-21-14 @ 03:20 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    2,120

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lakryte View Post
    Should they be public accommodations? Why or why not?
    No. While it's probably wise of them to be welcoming, they don't have to be.

    Example: A hotel is a public accommodation. A "time-share residence" is not. I can't pull up to a time-share residence and expect to "get a room." With a hotel, I can.

    I can't drive up to a country club and expect dinner to be served, if I am not a member. I can, if I'm hungry, expect to be served in a restaurant.

    Private membership clubs are just that: private; intentionally exclusive. Public accommodations are not and are thus subject to different laws.

    If a restaurant doesn't like serving a particular population, then they have the option of charging membership dues and thus being able to restrict who comes in.

  9. #949
    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 Lakryte View Post
    Should they be public accommodations? Why or why not?
    liberals do not respect property rights, becuase it destroys their agenda.

  10. #950
    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 FilmFestGuy View Post
    No. While it's probably wise of them to be welcoming, they don't have to be.

    Example: A hotel is a public accommodation. A "time-share residence" is not. I can't pull up to a time-share residence and expect to "get a room." With a hotel, I can.

    I can't drive up to a country club and expect dinner to be served, if I am not a member. I can, if I'm hungry, expect to be served in a restaurant.

    Private membership clubs are just that: private; intentionally exclusive. Public accommodations are not and are thus subject to different laws.

    If a restaurant doesn't like serving a particular population, then they have the option of charging membership dues and thus being able to restrict who comes in.
    Ok, then why not? If discrimination is bad, then why allow it in any case? Why is there this distinction? How does the act of charging membership dues justify discrimination when the act of charging for the service itself does not?

    All private property is exclusive. The degree to which it is inclusive to others is entirely the choice of the owner of said property. Another point: what about customers? Should customers be allowed to discriminate against businesses owned by black people, for example? If a black businessman discovered that a large portion of people were refusing to shop at his store because of his race, why is there no government protection forcing people to do business with him, but there are government laws forcing him to do business with the customers?
    Last edited by Lakryte; 06-27-13 at 12:34 AM.
    "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."

Posting Permissions

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