• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is this unreasonable/illegal discrimination?

Questions regarding discrimination

  • Is he discriminating against white power rallies?

    Votes: 13 76.5%

  • Is he discriminating against white people?

    Votes: 1 5.9%

  • If there is discrimination, should it be legally allowed?

    Votes: 11 64.7%
  • Total voters
    17
AGENT J said:
as far as i know he is legally discriminating against white power rallies

I see nothing that is illegal by laws and rights here
he has the right to legally discriminate in this case because

the rally is not illegally about age, disability, origin, race/color, gender, religion or in some cases sexual orientation


UNLESS the KKK is a recognized religion in his state, county or municipality then there could be an issue.

would be an interesting case if they took it up but unless the KKK is a recognized religion in his municipality, county or state id see them completely losing
Click to expand...

Really? Can one also legally discriminate against black power rallies, gay power rallies or christian/jewish/muslim power rallies? You seem to assert that any discrimination against members of a "protected group" (race, religion or sexual orientation) is taboo yet since the KKK members are (likely) whites (not a protected group) then it is OK.
 
Zyphlin said:
A black man owns a barbeque joint and caters for events regularly; christmas parties, birthdays, weddings, etc.

A local KKK outfit is having an annual "White Power" Rally and cookout and actually seeks to hire said black man to cater their event.

The business owner, realizing that the event he'd be catering is a "White Power Rally", doesn't want the groups business and refuses to cater the event.

A few questions here...

1. Is the owner discriminating against catering "White Power" events?

2. Is the owner discriminating against white people?

3. If there is discrimination, is it discrimination that should be legally allowed?
Click to expand...

N/A across the board. He's choosing not to do business with a group whose ideology he feels is specifically and pointedly hostile to himself.
 
Zyphlin said:
A black man owns a barbeque joint and caters for events regularly; christmas parties, birthdays, weddings, etc.

A local KKK outfit is having an annual "White Power" Rally and cookout and actually seeks to hire said black man to cater their event.

The business owner, realizing that the event he'd be catering is a "White Power Rally", doesn't want the groups business and refuses to cater the event.

A few questions here...

1. Is the owner discriminating against catering "White Power" events?

2. Is the owner discriminating against white people?

3. If there is discrimination, is it discrimination that should be legally allowed?
Click to expand...

Yes, he's discriminating against white power events.

No, he's not discriminating against white people...just those who are sponsoring the white power event.

He should ABSOLUTELY be allowed to determine whether he will accept the engagement or not.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
1.)Really? Can one also legally discriminate against black power rallies, gay power rallies or christian/jewish/muslim power rallies?
2.)You seem to assert that any discrimination against members of a "protected group" (race, religion or sexual orientation) is taboo
3.)yet since the KKK members are (likely) whites (not a protected group) then it is OK.
Click to expand...

1.)again all you have to do is go by the law, its really easy :shrug:
2.) not me the law and our rights makes ILLEGAL discrimination taboo
3.) actually i said in my first post IF the KKK is a recognized religion in that state, county or municipality then there could be an issue but if not then yes its legal discrimination

if not the KKK is not a age, disability, origin, race/color, gender, religion or in some cases sexual orientation

4.) also whites are 100% a protected group whites have color race and national origin just like all of us, maybe you didnt mean to say it the way you did
like i said seems like a very simple concept to me and if it gets grey courts clear it up
 
shrubnose said:
I seriously doubt that this is actually happening.

Give us some more details, like: who, where,why, what, and how.
Click to expand...


I can tell you a case, where a similar event actually occurred. Except the caterer didn't turn down the work.

About 30+ years ago, I lived in Jacksonville, FL (very redneck) and had never been to a football game. A friend wanted to take me to see a college game Downtown, at the Gator Bowl Stadium. I said, I can see the game better on TV and don't like crowds. He said, we go for the food, drink and excitement. Stadium food can't be that good and he said, all of us rednecks go there for the BBQ, the poor downtown blacks sell in front of their houses. You had to park your car, literally miles away sometime to get in and walk a few blocks past people, with homemade barrel grills, selling BBQ chicken and ribs, on paper plates for a couple bucks. He told me, it was the best BBQ you ever ate, better than southern cooking. He was right.
 
The OP poll raises a good point because I think everyone's instinct is "of course he can refuse." BUT then we get into the absolutes of platitudes to rationalize about it.

The topic of discrimination can get lost in such absolutes leading to freedom being replaced with authoritarianism. Generally, most people will be decent and normal if they are treated decently and nicely.

When we decided to make a spontaneous drive to Key West, not any real timing or destination schedule we didn't make reservations not knowing when we would end or where. However, it was a holiday weekend and as we drove the long length of the Keys every hotel was full. Finally, in Key West after midnight we had to get a very expensive suite at the Mariott. We were going to thus spend the day in Key West, but drive out that night into Miami for a room.

But as we went around Key West on a rented scooter, my wife said she wanted to ask if they had a room at a very colorful, quaint little hotel entirely enclosed by fences and plants. She quickly came out informing they had a room. However, when I went back in with her the owner started hedging not sure how to say what she needed to. Her and I both understood. We hadn't noticed the coded words on the sign. Or maybe I hadn't and my wife had and that caused her to think they might have a room available? Because of the qualifiers, it had vacancies where no other hotel did.

This was a hotel specifically for women - and more specifically lesbian women. More along the lines of a private club, though open to all lesbians. My wife asked to speak to her privately and 10 minutes later we had a room with an exit straight out to the sidewalk, the only request that I not go in the private pool area as the women like to go naked there. However we were welcomed to use the tiny dining room as long as we didn't go thru the pool area to get to it.

Does that hotel "discriminate?" Absolutely. The owner discriminates on both sex and sexual orientation. AND I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. I see no problem with a lesbian woman wanting to set up basically a mini nudist camp hotel for lesbians. I would have no problem with someone doing so for straight couples either. I think women - straight or gay - certain can have their own naked pool area and it would be going overboard to declare it illegal and the woman lose her hotel in a discrimination lawsuit.

I do not like discrimination. But I also do not like the absolutism many want to apply to it.

PS edit... To those who response "but what if everyone..." my response is then we'd deal with the problem. "But what if everyone..." is rarely a persuasive argument to me. Sometimes it comes down to are we all going to equally have no individual rights or unequally all free to be ourselves?
 
Last edited:
grip said:
I can tell you a case, where a similar event actually occurred. Except the caterer didn't turn down the work.

About 30+ years ago, I lived in Jacksonville, FL (very redneck) and had never been to a football game. A friend wanted to take me to see a college game Downtown, at the Gator Bowl Stadium. I said, I can see the game better on TV and don't like crowds. He said, we go for the food, drink and excitement. Stadium food can't be that good and he said, all of us rednecks go there for the BBQ, the poor downtown blacks sell in front of their houses. You had to park your car, literally miles away sometime to get in and walk a few blocks past people, with homemade barrel grills, selling BBQ chicken and ribs, on paper plates for a couple bucks. He told me, it was the best BBQ you ever ate, better than southern cooking. He was right.
Click to expand...

There are a couple places here where African-Americans have set up a trailer and tented picnic tables that sell BBQ. It is THE best BBQ you can buy, miles ahead of the BBQ restaurant.
 
grip said:
I can tell you a case, where a similar event actually occurred. Except the caterer didn't turn down the work.

About 30+ years ago, I lived in Jacksonville, FL (very redneck) and had never been to a football game. A friend wanted to take me to see a college game Downtown, at the Gator Bowl Stadium. I said, I can see the game better on TV and don't like crowds. He said, we go for the food, drink and excitement. Stadium food can't be that good and he said, all of us rednecks go there for the BBQ, the poor downtown blacks sell in front of their houses. You had to park your car, literally miles away sometime to get in and walk a few blocks past people, with homemade barrel grills, selling BBQ chicken and ribs, on paper plates for a couple bucks. He told me, it was the best BBQ you ever ate, better than southern cooking. He was right.
Click to expand...


You all weren't wearing kkk outfits on a way to a rally, do you think that would have made a difference?
 
Zyphlin said:
1. Is the owner discriminating against catering "White Power" events?
Click to expand...

Yes.

2. Is the owner discriminating against white people?
Click to expand...

No.

3. If there is discrimination, is it discrimination that should be legally allowed?
Click to expand...

(Divert and stall for time...)So did you see that Batista went full heel at the SD taping last night?

****, I hate these questions. I think if he was discriminating against white people and not against a political group(ie if he was discriminating against people for what they are, as opposed to what they do), then no. You caught the distinction with your first two questions. On the other hand, it is not an issue I take a strong stance on and I can see both sides. I would also point out the lack of correlation with laws like those under discussion in Arizona. What you describe and those laws are different. Gotta say I am looking forward to reading the rest of the thread and seeing what direction you go with this.
 
A person can always find extremes and then debate "discrimination." For example, where prostitution is legal, could a prostitute not refuse gay sex because that would be gender discrimination? That would make a curious poll question in the sense of reading people doing logic-contortions to explaining how it wouldn't, while also trying to hold onto their anti-discrimination platitude-absolutes.
 
In reference to the analogy,
Politics is politics, but food is food,
and sometimes the Barbeque is THAT GOOD!
 
shrubnose said:
I seriously doubt that this is actually happening.

Give us some more details, like: who, where,why, what, and how.
Click to expand...

I am pretty sure it is a hypothetical...


And a good one.
 
americanwoman said:
The catering choice kind of defeats the purpose of the rally, right? :lol:


I don't think anyone discriminates by denying services to a known hate/terrorist (even if it's not recognized as such) group.
Click to expand...

The Democratic and Republican Party could be correctly be called hate groups too. Often raging hate.
 
americanwoman said:
You all weren't wearing kkk outfits on a way to a rally, do you think that would have made a difference?
Click to expand...

Read your own signature. ;)

At that moment in time, we were all just southerners who liked good food.
 
grip said:
Read your own signature. ;)

At that moment in time, we were all just southerners who liked good food.
Click to expand...

Would you invite a Muslim to eat at your house? Would you still do it if they were dressed like this(minus the gun)

image.jpg
 
Redress said:
****, I hate these questions. I think if he was discriminating against white people and not against a political group(ie if he was discriminating against people for what they are, as opposed to what they do), then no. You caught the distinction with your first two questions. On the other hand, it is not an issue I take a strong stance on and I can see both sides. I would also point out the lack of correlation with laws like those under discussion in Arizona. What you describe and those laws are different. Gotta say I am looking forward to reading the rest of the thread and seeing what direction you go with this.
Click to expand...

Since people are (naturally) tieing this to Arizona, I'll explain what caused me to think about this in a very generalized way...but I'd like to actually try to keep the discussion on the hypothetical as opposed to becoming another topic fully focused on Arizona (since there's already dozens of those on it).

Something I read today put forward an interesting notion to me regarding some things happening in Arizona (which I'm admittedly not very well versed on). Essentially, pondering the difference between refusing service to a GAY person for being gay because you have a religious issue with it...and refusing service to an EVENT because it's something you have a religious issues with.

Essentially, that there's a bit of a grey area between discriminating against a person for their orientation, and discriminating against an event or action. And because this is such a wedge issue, and like all wedge issues both sides get deeply entrenched and are afraid of any middle ground for fear of losing an inch, that grey area doesn't really get talked about.

That's kind of what led me to this notion.

Undoubtably, if someone walked into a shop and wants to buy some BBQ something and they went "No, I don't sell to white people" that'd be a problem.

And undoubtably, if someone walked into a shop and wants to buy catering services for an event celebrating Charley Mansen and they went "No, I don't want to sell my services to such an event" that there'd probably not be a problem.

HOWEVER...I do think you get into a grey area when you're talking about an event that's tied to a protected status. On one hand, the Business Owner has rights as to what he does with his time and energy and what things his business's name and product will be attached to. On the other hand, the basis for his disagreement is tied in some fashion or degree to the protected class.

It's a sticky issue that I think is missed out on a significant and legitimate discussion because discrimination issues are such an emotional wedge in nature that people are afraid of even exploring.

As it comes to Arizona...do I think a person should be able to discriminate against a customer because they're gay and that's against their religion? No. Do I think they should be able to discriminate against an event because the events purpose is against their religion? I have a bit harder time coming down definitively on that one.

For my example....

Black business owner refuses to sell his BBQ to a a white guy. Problem.

Black business owner refuses to cater a motorcycle rally of a white guy because he has an issue with white people. Problem.

Black business owner refuses to cater a motorcycle rally of a white guy because he has an issue with motorcycles after his son died on one? No problem.

Black business owner refuses to cater a white power rally of a white guy because he has an issue with white power rallys? A lot harder for me to say "problem".
 
Zyphlin said:
Since people are (naturally) tieing this to Arizona, I'll explain what caused me to think about this in a very generalized way...but I'd like to actually try to keep the discussion on the hypothetical as opposed to becoming another topic fully focused on Arizona (since there's already dozens of those on it).

Something I read today put forward an interesting notion to me regarding some things happening in Arizona (which I'm admittedly not very well versed on). Essentially, pondering the difference between refusing service to a GAY person for being gay because you have a religious issue with it...and refusing service to an EVENT because it's something you have a religious issues with.

Essentially, that there's a bit of a grey area between discriminating against a person for their orientation, and discriminating against an event or action. And because this is such a wedge issue, and like all wedge issues both sides get deeply entrenched and are afraid of any middle ground for fear of losing an inch, that grey area doesn't really get talked about.

That's kind of what led me to this notion.

Undoubtably, if someone walked into a shop and wants to buy some BBQ something and they went "No, I don't sell to white people" that'd be a problem.

And undoubtably, if someone walked into a shop and wants to buy catering services for an event celebrating Charley Mansen and they went "No, I don't want to sell my services to such an event" that there'd probably not be a problem.

HOWEVER...I do think you get into a grey area when you're talking about an event that's tied to a protected status. On one hand, the Business Owner has rights as to what he does with his time and energy and what things his business's name and product will be attached to. On the other hand, the basis for his disagreement is tied in some fashion or degree to the protected class.

It's a sticky issue that I think is missed out on a significant and legitimate discussion because discrimination issues are such an emotional wedge in nature that people are afraid of even exploring.

As it comes to Arizona...do I think a person should be able to discriminate against a customer because they're gay and that's against their religion? No. Do I think they should be able to discriminate against an event because the events purpose is against their religion? I have a bit harder time coming down definitively on that one.

For my example....

Black business owner refuses to sell his BBQ to a a white guy. Problem.

Black business owner refuses to cater a motorcycle rally of a white guy because he has an issue with white people. Problem.

Black business owner refuses to cater a motorcycle rally of a white guy because he has an issue with motorcycles after his son died on one? No problem.

Black business owner refuses to cater a white power rally of a white guy because he has an issue with white power rallys? A lot harder for me to say "problem".
Click to expand...

Being a business owner in AZ for whom this kind of thing is likely to have an impact let me give you another example:

I prepare taxes and represent people who are in trouble with the IRS. Arizona doesn't recognize same sex marriages but the IRS does. This presents a situation where a gay couple married in California but now living in AZ will have to file a joint federal return and separate AZ returns. Since this could, potentially, cause problems in the various systems and even cause a conflict of interest between my clients and myself (circumstances on one party may have a negative impact on the other) I have a stack of paperwork I will need signed. I could simply refuse to do the returns but, if I did that and they claimed that I was discriminating just because they were homosexual where does that leave me?

Now, granted, this particular bill wouldn't be any help to me but the question of what is and what isn't discrimination is nowhere near as cut and dried as some would like to make it out to be. Furthermore, all the public emotional turmoil over this kind of stuff creates an environment where someone could very easily be acting quite legitimately in the interests of ALL parties involved yet still get hung out to dry due to the hypersensitivity we're experiencing.
 
Zyphlin said:
Since people are (naturally) tieing this to Arizona, I'll explain what caused me to think about this in a very generalized way...but I'd like to actually try to keep the discussion on the hypothetical as opposed to becoming another topic fully focused on Arizona (since there's already dozens of those on it).
Click to expand...
That's fine but I do get a last word on that..

Something I read today put forward an interesting notion to me regarding some things happening in Arizona (which I'm admittedly not very well versed on). Essentially, pondering the difference between refusing service to a GAY person for being gay because you have a religious issue with it...and refusing service to an EVENT because it's something you have a religious issues with.
Click to expand...

The person, no. An event you disagree with, fine.
Essentially, that there's a bit of a grey area between discriminating against a person for their orientation, and discriminating against an event or action. And because this is such a wedge issue, and like all wedge issues both sides get deeply entrenched and are afraid of any middle ground for fear of losing an inch, that grey area doesn't really get talked about.
Click to expand...

To me it is not all that gray, but I do agree that in most issues there is some gray area. It is why you get called a RINO and I get called a fake liberal. We both think about that gray area and see both sides.

That's kind of what led me to this notion.

Undoubtably, if someone walked into a shop and wants to buy some BBQ something and they went "No, I don't sell to white people" that'd be a problem.
Click to expand...

We have people on the board advocating that as a right.
And undoubtably, if someone walked into a shop and wants to buy catering services for an event celebrating Charley Mansen and they went "No, I don't want to sell my services to such an event" that there'd probably not be a problem.
Click to expand...

I can think of some who might have a problem with an owner saying that. Trivial point I admit...

HOWEVER...I do think you get into a grey area when you're talking about an event that's tied to a protected status. On one hand, the Business Owner has rights as to what he does with his time and energy and what things his business's name and product will be attached to. On the other hand, the basis for his disagreement is tied in some fashion or degree to the protected class.

It's a sticky issue that I think is missed out on a significant and legitimate discussion because discrimination issues are such an emotional wedge in nature that people are afraid of even exploring.
Click to expand...

Some have mentioned a bakery refusing to cater a same sex wedding. I will use that as an example here. To my mind, businesses should be allowed to do that because it is not discriminating against gay people per se, but against an event they disapprove of. While they may disaprove of it based on the fact the people getting married are gay, that is one of those impossible to prove things.

As it comes to Arizona...do I think a person should be able to discriminate against a customer because they're gay and that's against their religion? No. Do I think they should be able to discriminate against an event because the events purpose is against their religion? I have a bit harder time coming down definitively on that one.
Click to expand...

Are you familiar with the history of the bill and where it comes from? It comes from here originally, 1993...Religious Freedom Restoration Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. I thought you might find some of the history interesting.

For my example....

Black business owner refuses to sell his BBQ to a a white guy. Problem.

Black business owner refuses to cater a motorcycle rally of a white guy because he has an issue with white people. Problem.

Black business owner refuses to cater a motorcycle rally of a white guy because he has an issue with motorcycles after his son died on one? No problem.

Black business owner refuses to cater a white power rally of a white guy because he has an issue with white power rallys? A lot harder for me to say "problem".
Click to expand...

How do you tell your second and third one apart? That to me is an important part of the issue.
 
Zyphlin said:
A black man owns a barbeque joint and caters for events regularly; christmas parties, birthdays, weddings, etc.

A local KKK outfit is having an annual "White Power" Rally and cookout and actually seeks to hire said black man to cater their event.

The business owner, realizing that the event he'd be catering is a "White Power Rally", doesn't want the groups business and refuses to cater the event.

A few questions here...

1. Is the owner discriminating against catering "White Power" events?

2. Is the owner discriminating against white people?

3. If there is discrimination, is it discrimination that should be legally allowed?
Click to expand...

Forget discriminating. Just make the price sky high.
 
He's not discriminating at all. He has a choice who he caters to and who he doesn't. Now if he refused to provide service to any white person, ever, that would be a different matter, but he can refuse to do business with the KKK if he wants and that's not discrimination. Of course, you don't provide that as an option in your biased poll.
 
Yes to all three.

It is absolutely discrimination. And it absolutely should be legal.
 
Lachean said:
I am certain this business owner would allow service to white people who are not members of the KKK, and has in the afformentioned events he regularly caters for. He is not denying service based on race (or age/sex) he's denying service for what they say and have a history of which is violence.
Click to expand...

Regardless, if the end result is refusal to serve white people, or any other specific group, it is discrimination in the result of his policies and he is liable.
 
Zyphlin said:
1. Is the owner discriminating against catering "White Power" events?
Click to expand...

Yes, however that discrimination is not illegal.

Zyphlin said:
2. Is the owner discriminating against white people?
Click to expand...

No. Since the owner doesn't provide catering to "White Power" events held by blacks, white, reds, or yellows - not it's not discrimination based on race.

Unlike a bakery that offers wedding cakes to anyone except for same-sex couples is discrimination based on the sexual orientation of the couple.

Zyphlin said:
3. If there is discrimination, is it discrimination that should be legally allowed?
Click to expand...

It's not discrimination since that is not an event offered to anyone. Under the law discrimination occurs when the service is offered to some but not others based on classes identified in the States Public Accommodation laws. "White Supremest" political activities do not qualify as a race, religion, sex, age, or sexual orientation.


(I just read the OP, now I'll go back and see what others have said, I just wanted to document my initial thoughts.)

>>>>
 
Zyphlin said:
A black man owns a barbeque joint and caters for events regularly; christmas parties, birthdays, weddings, etc.

A local KKK outfit is having an annual "White Power" Rally and cookout and actually seeks to hire said black man to cater their event.

The business owner, realizing that the event he'd be catering is a "White Power Rally", doesn't want the groups business and refuses to cater the event.

A few questions here...

1. Is the owner discriminating against catering "White Power" events?

2. Is the owner discriminating against white people?

3. If there is discrimination, is it discrimination that should be legally allowed?
Click to expand...

It personally think by refusing the cater the event, the owner is in fact discriminating. That said, I do not agree with the "refuse to associate" culture of political correctness in America. I think the way to win hearts is by showing people unconditional love and acceptance. Love the person (or people) that will then open a door to change their attitudes.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom