View Poll Results: What's More Important - the "Right" to Discriminate, or Freedom From Discrimination?

Voters
115. You may not vote on this poll
  • The Right to Discriminate

    38 33.04%
  • Freedom From Discrimination

    77 66.96%
Page 127 of 230 FirstFirst ... 2777117125126127128129137177227 ... LastLast
Results 1,261 to 1,270 of 2291

Thread: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discrimination?

  1. #1261
    Sage
    rabbitcaebannog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Last Seen
    12-09-17 @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,918

    Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    But you're not treating people as equals. You are favoring consumers over the people that own a business and their right to freedom of association.
    It protects consumers not favors them.

  2. #1262
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,888
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    There is a law which is the civil rights law.
    Yes, and its just a federal law, it's called the Civil Rights Act. A law which has no valid basis in the Constitution as there is nothing in the Constitution which allows the government to force people to serve others. In fact, as I've said before it directly prohibits it. Both in the 13th and 14th Amendments.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  3. #1263
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    It protects consumers not favors them.
    No, it does. It ignores the desires of business owners to not commence in commerce, so that the consumer can get what they desire.
    Last edited by Henrin; 04-25-14 at 01:44 AM.

  4. #1264
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,888
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    It protects consumers not favors them.
    In this case the word "protect" is just another word for "favors". Note post 1259.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  5. #1265
    Maquis Admiral
    maquiscat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,011

    Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    Having a business doesn't give one a license to do whatever he pleases.
    Of course not. Obviously he can't just kill anyone. That's a violation of the other person's rights. Nor can he take from them anything they already had. Again a rights violation. However, no one has a right to do business with him. They have to right to seek to do business with him as he has the right to seek to do business with whomever he wishes.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDemSocialist View Post
    No one has "the right to discriminate".. Discrimination is inherently anti-free
    Oh really? So I have no right to say that no one can enter my house purely on the basis of their skin color?

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    Yeah, the interest is to trade...that is where the association ends.
    Very good. Freedom of association includes in it the freedom to not associate with them. Ergo, one can choose to trade with one individual and not with another, for what ever reason.

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    Oh, your (general you) right to be a bigot is a 'natural right' compared to their right to be of a different race, creed, religion etc....is that not a 'natural' right?
    Where in hell do you get a right to be a different race? It's not like that's a choice. Religion and creed, yeah, purely chosen. Race...not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    This is exactly why some "members-only" clubs/organizations/associations exist...exclusive membership at the exclusion of others who don't meet eligibility requirements. And if sex, race, marital status, income/education level, religion, etc., etc. are prerequisites for membership, I don't think most people would have a problem with not including those who wouldn't otherwise qualify. Of course, it's a different story when a facility that any reasonable person knows should be open to the public as you've stated and certain people are kept out, i.e., public swimming pool or a dinner on Route 66.
    By definition it is a public pool and thus owned by a government entity of some level, which automatically means no discrimination. Government doesn't have rights like people have.

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    If businesses are allowed to discriminate, then the allowance of that discrimination must be backed by the force of law...which effectively makes it Jim Crow in all but name. You can deny it all you want...but that, sir, is a fact.
    Get it straight. Jim Crows laws forced discrimination. As a business owner, I could not let blacks sit at my lunch counter with whites even if I wanted to. Jim Crow laws were also a violation of private property rights and freedom of association.

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    And everybody sometimes wants to punch the other guy in the face sometimes, too...but that doesn't make it right or acceptable to actually do it.
    Ah and there is the crux. Simply because something isn't right or acceptable, it does not automatically follow that it should be illegal. It would not be right or acceptable for me to say to a overweight woman that she "...is a fat ugly cow who needs to be put so far out to pasture that no one has to be subjected to her hideous features." And yet there is no law that prevents my saying that. It's part and parcel of my freedom of speech.

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    So, are you saying if I dislike serving a cranky person I'm suddenly a servant? I must be a slave then because I served plenty a cranky person in my life. I didn't run around telling people I was a slave though because I understood 98% of the time it had nothing to do with me just like the attributes of another person has nothing to do with me. I'm only a slave to my own prejudices and not a slave to another person wanting to do business with me.
    It starts with are you the business owner? Otherwise, yes you are a servant to the owner while you are on the clock. If you are the owner, did you choose to serve the man despite your dislike for the cranky person? If so, then there is no problem because you choose to do so. However, if you would normally choose to not serve such a person and the law said that you could not make that choice then yes you have once again become a servant, in the context that Kal'Stang and the others have been saying.

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    Really, I need to show you that people can get into legal problems if they refuse service based on someone's attributes? A quick google search can give you cases. Denny's has been in hot water for such violations before as well as several other chains.
    Existence of a law does not automatically mean that a right isn't violated. Are you telling us that the rights of blacks were not violated when they were legally slaves? Are you telling us that the rights of blacks were not violated when the law prevented them from voting? I'm going out on a limb and saying that indeed these laws were violating the rights of blacks.

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    It couldn't be federal law if it was unconstitutional.
    ROFLMFAO!!!! How many laws were on the books for years, even centuries, that were later ruled unconstitutional? Really?
    Bi, Poly, Switch. I'm not indecisive, I'm greedy!

  6. #1266
    Sage
    rabbitcaebannog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Last Seen
    12-09-17 @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,918

    Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    Yes, and its just a federal law, it's called the Civil Rights Act. A law which has no valid basis in the Constitution as there is nothing in the Constitution which allows the government to force people to serve others. In fact, as I've said before it directly prohibits it. Both in the 13th and 14th Amendments.
    It protects people from being treated unequal due to their attributes. It does not promote servitude. The word servitude is being misused.

  7. #1267
    Sage
    rabbitcaebannog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Last Seen
    12-09-17 @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,918

    Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

    Quote Originally Posted by Kal'Stang View Post
    In this case the word "protect" is just another word for "favors". Note post 1259.
    No, protect does not mean favors.

  8. #1268
    Sage
    rabbitcaebannog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Last Seen
    12-09-17 @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,918

    Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    No, it does. It ignores the desires of business owners to not commence in commerce, so that the consumer can get what they desire.
    A business owner is not a King or a lord whose desires should trump every other human being.

  9. #1269
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    A business owner is not a King or a lord whose desires should trump every other human being.
    Respecting both parties right to either accept or refuse being involved in commerce is not making one superior to the other.

  10. #1270
    Sage
    rabbitcaebannog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Last Seen
    12-09-17 @ 08:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,918

    Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    Respecting both parties right to either accept or refuse being involved in commerce is not making one superior to the other.
    Refusing to allow another person a business transaction due to their race etc... is allowing them to be superior over another.

Posting Permissions

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