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 163 of 230 FirstFirst ... 63113153161162163164165173213 ... LastLast
Results 1,621 to 1,630 of 2291

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

  1. #1621
    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
    Now I'm going to put this as a direct question to you since you have continueally avoided responding to it.

    Do you believe that one persons Rights end where another persons Rights begin? Yes? Or no?
    Yes I sure do.

  2. #1622
    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
    32,856
    Blog Entries
    1

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

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    Yes I sure do.
    Then you just agreed that the consumers rights ended at the owners property rights. You also just agreed that the consumers right to association ended where the property owners right to association begins. You also just agreed that the consumers so called "right" (there really isn't one but i'll let you have it for this instance) to not be discriminated against ended where the property owners rights began with both his property and his right to association.

    For this very reason there is no such thing as a "Right to not be discriminated against". All Rights can be exercised. You cannot exercise a right to not be discriminated against without violating other peoples rights.
    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. #1623
    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
    Then you just agreed that the consumers rights ended at the owners property rights. You also just agreed that the consumers right to association ended where the property owners right to association begins. You also just agreed that the consumers so called "right" (there really isn't one but i'll let you have it for this instance) to not be discriminated against ended where the property owners rights began with both his property and his right to association.

    For this very reason there is no such thing as a "Right to not be discriminated against". All Rights can be exercised. You cannot exercise a right to not be discriminated against without violating other peoples rights.
    No, that is not what I said. That is what you said. I say no individual has a right to trump another individuals liberty based on discrimination and that applies to all individuals including property owners.

  4. #1624
    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
    32,856
    Blog Entries
    1

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

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    No, that is not what I said. That is what you said. I say no individual has a right to trump another individuals liberty based on discrimination and that applies to all individuals including property owners.
    You're right. That is not what you said. But that is the consequence of agreeing that one persons rights end where another persons rights began.

    But lets go ahead and address your attempt at twisting the word "Liberty" to try and support your arguement. There is a reason that I posted the definition of "liberties" along with the link of where I got it from.

    The definition of liberties makes two very important distinctions that directly relate to our conversation.

    1: The first distinction is that it lists "Rights" as part of its discription. You cannot have any liberty if there are no Rights. That statement should be self evident and as such needs no explanation. And as you just agreed, one persons rights end where another persons rights begin.

    2: The second distinction that it made is that of privilege. A privilege is something that is allowed to some people but not others. Or if you wish I'll also post the pertinant definition here....

    a right or benefit that is given to some people and not to others
    Mirriam-Webster ~ privilege

    And of course as everyone knows, rights trump privileges any day of the week, month, or year. As such the property owners rights cannot be violated by a privilege. And again, you just agreed that a right ends where another persons rights begin. So that part of the definition does not help you either.

    All this explained, it is obvious that a persons "liberties" will still not be able to violate the property owners rights to their property or to association.
    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. #1625
    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
    You're right. That is not what you said. But that is the consequence of agreeing that one persons rights end where another persons rights began.

    But lets go ahead and address your attempt at twisting the word "Liberty" to try and support your arguement. There is a reason that I posted the definition of "liberties" along with the link of where I got it from.

    The definition of liberties makes two very important distinctions that directly relate to our conversation.

    1: The first distinction is that it lists "Rights" as part of its discription. You cannot have any liberty if there are no Rights. That statement should be self evident and as such needs no explanation. And as you just agreed, one persons rights end where another persons rights begin.

    2: The second distinction that it made is that of privilege. A privilege is something that is allowed to some people but not others. Or if you wish I'll also post the pertinant definition here....



    Mirriam-Webster ~ privilege

    And of course as everyone knows, rights trump privileges any day of the week, month, or year. As such the property owners rights cannot be violated by a privilege. And again, you just agreed that a right ends where another persons rights begin. So that part of the definition does not help you either.

    All this explained, it is obvious that a persons "liberties" will still not be able to violate the property owners rights to their property or to association.
    Does my employer have a right to sexual harass me if he owns the property? How about a merchant who owns a business? Is sexually harassing someone a right or a privilege? How about the act of discriminating someone? Is that a right or a privilege? The answer to both questions is those acts are neither. You are infringing on another person's right. It shouldn't matter if you are accessing public resources are private or employed by a public place or private. The accessing of goods and services is irrelevant. The act of discrimination is the violation as is the act of sexual harassment. Otherwise, what you create is oppression if we allow certain people the right to violate other people.

  6. #1626
    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
    32,856
    Blog Entries
    1

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

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    Does my employer have a right to sexual harass me if he owns the property?
    Nope, that violates her right to her property...which is herself. And it violates her right to be secure.

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    How about a merchant who owns a business? Is sexually harassing someone a right or a privilege?
    Same as above.

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    How about the act of discriminating someone? Is that a right or a privilege?
    Doesn't matter if its a right or a privilege. Rights trump privileges and rights end at another persons rights. But for the record, it's a privilege.

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    The answer to both questions is those acts are neither. You are infringing on another person's right. It shouldn't matter if you are accessing public resources are private or employed by a public place or private. The accessing of goods and services is irrelevant. The act of discrimination is the violation as is the act of sexual harassment. Otherwise, what you create is oppression if we allow certain people the right to violate other people.
    There is no right to not be discriminated against. I've already told you why. Rights must be able to be exercised or they do not exist (in fact I challenge you to point out one single right that exists in the Constitution that cannot be exercised). As you cannot exercise a "right to not be discriminated against" without violating another persons right it in effect does not exist. And it does matter if you are accessing private resources because those private resources are owned by an individual that has rights to those resources where the consumer does not have a right to those resources. As for the oppression statement...no ones right is being violated...because there is no right to not be discriminated against.
    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

  7. #1627
    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
    Nope, that violates her right to her property...which is herself. And it violates her right to be secure.



    Same as above.



    Doesn't matter if its a right or a privilege. Rights trump privileges and rights end at another persons rights. But for the record, it's a privilege.



    There is no right to not be discriminated against. I've already told you why. Rights must be able to be exercised or they do not exist (in fact I challenge you to point out one single right that exists in the Constitution that cannot be exercised). As you cannot exercise a "right to not be discriminated against" without violating another persons right it in effect does not exist. And it does matter if you are accessing private resources because those private resources are owned by an individual that has rights to those resources where the consumer does not have a right to those resources. As for the oppression statement...no ones right is being violated...because there is no right to not be discriminated against.
    Your whole argument falls apart because discrimination is a human right violation just like sexual harassment.

  8. #1628
    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
    32,856
    Blog Entries
    1

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

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    Your whole argument falls apart because discrimination is a human right violation just like sexual harassment.
    As you agreed to above, one persons right ends where another persons right begins. As such I point you to post 1622.

    Anyways...

    If my arguement had fallen apart then you could defend your stance as easily as I have defended mine. Instead you are reduced to basically just making statements and not arguements. Making such a statement with no arguement points or addressing or disproving points in an arguement is the equivalent of saying "NUH UH!"
    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

  9. #1629
    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
    As you agreed to above, one persons right ends where another persons right begins. As such I point you to post 1622.

    Anyways...

    If my arguement had fallen apart then you could defend your stance as easily as I have defended mine. Instead you are reduced to basically just making statements and not arguements. Making such a statement with no arguement points or addressing or disproving points in an arguement is the equivalent of saying "NUH UH!"
    No, in debate it is logical to point out flaws in another's argument. I did present an argument on more than one post on this thread. You just disagree with the premise that like sexual harassment, discrimination is a violation to a human right. Yes, one person's right ends where another person's begins.

  10. #1630
    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
    32,856
    Blog Entries
    1

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

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    No, in debate it is logical to point out flaws in another's argument. I did present an argument on more than one post on this thread. You just disagree with the premise that like sexual harassment, discrimination is a violation to a human right. Yes, one person's right ends where another person's begins.
    Bold: But you didn't point out any flaws. You just made a statement that did not even address anything that I said in that post.

    As for the rest....2 problems here.

    1: A right is a right is a right. Doesn't matter if you call it a "human" right or not. It is still a right. This is the third time that you have attempted to use a different word or phrase in conjunction with your arguement that there is a right to not be discriminated against. Why is that? Is it perhaps because there is no right to not be discriminated against? If there was then surely you would have been able to use the correct word or phrase the first time... or even the second...but the third? That should tell you that your arguements are falling.

    2: There is no right to not be discriminated against. I have shown you why. Repeatedly. But I'll phrase it again. You cannot exercise a right to not be discriminated against without violating another persons right. As such there is no right to not be discriminated against because you cannot legally violate another persons right.
    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

Posting Permissions

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