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 164 of 230 FirstFirst ... 64114154162163164165166174214 ... LastLast
Results 1,631 to 1,640 of 2291

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

  1. #1631
    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
    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.
    You keep saying that if people have a right to not be discriminated against then the person who discriminates right is being violated. That could easily be said about a women's right not to be sexually harassed. Isn't that taking away someone's right to sexually harass that women? Your flaw is saying that discrimination isn't a human rights violation.

  2. #1632
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Last Seen
    05-31-17 @ 01:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,050

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    The reason some do not care about freedom from unjust discrimination is they're white and suffer no such threat on a societal level. The world ends at their nose.
    Seems like a silly response, frankly.
    It is a matter of practicality. All people probably discriminate. "Smart" businesses discriminate but are smart enough to not publicly admit to discriminating against a protected class. It benefits an open society to have people honestly express their views and not hide them.
    Powerful groups have gotten the political support to their cause and have their people included in civil rights statutes while the less powerful groups have not and can legally be discriminated against.
    2 examples. My father was accused of being an communist during the Red Scare and was discriminated against. Perfectly legal since communists did not have the political clout to get themselves in on some civil rights legislation. My brother has been refused entry into a store for years because of some fear that he may make some employees uncomfortable. Of course this is probably legal discrimination as well although since he is on psychiatric care perhaps this discrimination may be illegal under ADA. Other people are refused entry to stores based on body odor or "creepy" behavior. This is legal since "creepiness" is not a protected class. Some people are refused entry because of offensive language on shirts or tattoos. Completely legal.
    There is something offensive in allowing discrimination in some cases but not in the case of more politically powerful groups.

    And there is something offensive in knowing that the "smart" businesses are able to discriminate as long as they are "smart" enough to make up legal reasons while the more open and honest businesses get punished for their honesty and their beliefs that contrast with current social norms.

    EDIT: Just found another example. Chase Bank is refusing to serve people who work in the porn industry. Legal discrimination since porn performers don't have the political clout to get special government rights.
    Last edited by Eric7216; 04-28-14 at 02:33 AM.

  3. #1633
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,504
    Blog Entries
    2

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

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    You keep saying that if people have a right to not be discriminated against then the person who discriminates right is being violated. That could easily be said about a women's right not to be sexually harassed. Isn't that taking away someone's right to sexually harass that women? Your flaw is saying that discrimination isn't a human rights violation.
    The one who discriminates may indeed be a scumbag on moral grounds. But he or she is doing absolutely nothing to the person he/she discriminates against if it is only the discriminator's person or property involved. He/she requires no contribution or participation by the other person. The one who sexually molests another is absolutely requiring contribution or participation by the other. And therein is the difference.

    Should you be able to discriminate against one you believe to be a child molester. A person who consider corrupt, unethical, immoral, a detriment to society? I think we all would agree that in such cases anybody ought to be able to refuse service to anybody. The problem comes, however, in determining who it is okay to discriminate against and who it is not. Who should be authorized to determine that? And the issue is whether one person can be forced to serve another with his own person or property or whether liberty requires that to be sacrosanct.
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

  4. #1634
    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
    32,857
    Blog Entries
    1

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

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    You keep saying that if people have a right to not be discriminated against then the person who discriminates right is being violated. That could easily be said about a women's right not to be sexually harassed. Isn't that taking away someone's right to sexually harass that women? Your flaw is saying that discrimination isn't a human rights violation.
    As I said before, a womans right to not be sexually harrassed stems from her right to property (herself) and her right to be secure. Sexual harrassment is not discrimination. It is a violation of property and security. As such no one has a right to sexually harrass anyone. Your "right" to not be discriminated against does not stem from any right. You're making a very bad analogy.
    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. #1635
    Maquis Admiral
    maquiscat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,955

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Glen Contrarian View Post
    Discrimination on the basis of skin color IS racism.
    Discrimination isn't limited to skin color as the criteria. You are the one who is focusing only on skin color. BTW if a white person denied another white person because their skin was too pale, would that be racism?

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    I agree. He can withdraw the sale if he doesn't want to sell it and keep it or decide to sell it at a later time.
    You obviously disagree because by the above statement any reason can be the basis of withdraw of sale, which includes all the so called protected classes. As you proved with your response two posts later.

    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.
    I need to point out here that the "sexual" part of sexual harassment is irrelevant. Harassment is the rights violation and it doesn't matter whether it is sexual or not. You are using the term sexual to add an emotional appeal fallacy to the context
    Bi, Poly, Switch. I'm not indecisive, I'm greedy!

  6. #1636
    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: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

    Quote Originally Posted by rabbitcaebannog View Post
    You do know that property owners, when you work for them, consider you their property, on and off their property. That is what we are dealing with. These people think their rights trump all others.
    yes, i have heard of some companies, they try to assert that because you work for them, act as if they can control your actions, away from work [like telling you, you cant smoke even at home].....if you make no contract to such activity, then they really have no legal standing.

    however look it from a different angle also...i have heard of people who have made comments about a subject,...which has nothing to do with their company they work for..........and outside forces, such as individuals and organizations try to get the person fired because of those comments....in other words......people who have no natural right or legal rights trying to use force /coercion on a business to take action against that person.

  7. #1637
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:00 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,733

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

    This thread should be mandatory reading for anyone in a position of power in the Republican party who may have a voice in who will be their 2016 nominee. When you see all the complicated and convoluted mental gymnastics predicated on axioms and beliefs that the justifiers of discrimination have to go through to even pretend to make a point while screaming loudly to anyone who will hear that they are NOT defending bigotry - and consider they can take all the space and time they need to do it - now project such a discussion with its quick sound bites and attack ads in the middle of a Ron Paul presidential campaign if he gets the GOP nod - and you can see what a major train wreck it would be.
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  8. #1638
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,504
    Blog Entries
    2

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

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    This thread should be mandatory reading for anyone in a position of power in the Republican party who may have a voice in who will be their 2016 nominee. When you see all the complicated and convoluted mental gymnastics predicated on axioms and beliefs that the justifiers of discrimination have to go through to even pretend to make a point while screaming loudly to anyone who will hear that they are NOT defending bigotry - and consider they can take all the space and time they need to do it - now project such a discussion with its quick sound bites and attack ads in the middle of a Ron Paul presidential campaign if he gets the GOP nod - and you can see what a major train wreck it would be.
    There are no mental gymnastics involved. It does not matter what we think personally of another person's values or morals. The issue is not whether discrimination is good or bad or whether we should or should not promote it or justify it or condone it.The issue is whether liberty is a fundamental unalienable right or not so long as nobody else's rights are violated. If it is not, then anybody can be forced to make his person and his property available to whomever the law decrees is entitled to it. If it is, then a person's right to his own person and property is sacrosanct and that would include the ability to be discriminatory as the person chooses.Nobody here is justifying or approving discrimination against others for ANY reason. I'm pretty sure all of us would say it would be immoral to refuse to accommodate those who come to our place of business for no other reason than race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, etc. But setting issues of morality involved in discrimination aside, it is also immoral to force another person to serve another with his/her person or property against his/her will.
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

  9. #1639
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:00 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,733

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

    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl View Post
    There are no mental gymnastics involved. It does not matter what we think personally of another person's values or morals. The issue is not whether discrimination is good or bad or whether we should or should not promote it or justify it or condone it.The issue is whether liberty is a fundamental unalienable right or not so long as nobody else's rights are violated. If it is not, then anybody can be forced to make his person and his property available to whomever the law decrees is entitled to it. If it is, then a person's right to his own person and property is sacrosanct and that would include the ability to be discriminatory as the person chooses.Nobody here is justifying or approving discrimination against others for ANY reason. I'm pretty sure all of us would say it would be immoral to refuse to accommodate those who come to our place of business for no other reason than race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, etc. But setting issues of morality involved in discrimination aside, it is also immoral to force another person to serve another with his/her person or property against his/her will.
    You missed the point. Tell us how Rand Paul or someone similar who has opposed the civil rights laws that are on the books could combat the charge that he is supporting discrimination or even racism - even in the holy name of the great god LIBERTY?
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  10. #1640
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,504
    Blog Entries
    2

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

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    You missed the point. Tell us how Rand Paul or someone similar who has opposed the civil rights laws that are on the books could combat the charge that he is supporting discrimination or even racism - even in the holy name of the great god LIBERTY?
    I don't speak for Rand Paul though I think he probably only opposes civil rights laws that violate other rights that he believes essential for a free people. So you'll have to ask him why he holds the opinions that he holds. That is not for me to say.

    And no, I am not missing the point. The point is whether the right to discriminate is more important than a right to be free from discrimination. If we do not have a right to discriminate in who shall have rights to our person and property, wouldn't you agree that would then actually have no rights at all, but only permission to do whatever the authorities allow us to do?
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

Posting Permissions

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