• 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!

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

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


  • Total voters
    93
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

I don't think that, you said that.



Full Definition of PERMEATE

intransitive verb

: to diffuse through or penetrate something

transitive verb

1: to spread or diffuse through <a room permeated with tobacco smoke>
2: to pass through the pores or interstices of



Not every white needs to be a racist for it to permeate society. It does so because of the racists that exist (within the majority power, of course) and due to past policies that resonate even today.

Your strawman is stupid.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

It needn't be wholly white, it (the community) need only not be against you. One black person being a bigot against you is not the same as discrimination against you throughout society everywhere you go and everything you do.

I think you copied and pasted your previous post.

Again, nonsense. If you that everybody is discriminating against you, then you are apt to see discrimination everywhere.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Not every white needs to be a racist for it to permeate society. It does so because of the racists that exist (within the majority power, of course) and due to past policies that resonate even today.

Your strawman is stupid.

It isn't a strawman. I'm asking you serious questions and not trying to have a fight with you.

I would like to see if you could please explain to me in as much detail as this medium will allow, and with factual data and not anecdotal evidence, that discrimination exists on a societal level.

Remember, were talking about discrimination, not racism.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

The question is too vague, IMO.

'Freedom from discrimination'? How? By force or by simple evolution?

And there is no way to end discrimination by force...you can only force it underground. You cannot force people to change their attitudes/feelings...just force them to act like they are not prejudiced.

And if humanity evolved beyond discrimination...then the freedom to discriminate would be irrelevant.


Personally, I believe in free speech and freedom of expression above almost all else.

If you don't like the racist pig that runs the deli down the street...just don't go to it. Economic boycott.

But forcing him by law to not exhibit prejudicial tendencies/policies is edging toward a police state, IMO. And all it will probably do is make him more resentful and bitter and possibly more prejudicial.

You cannot force someone to stop hating...you can only hope he will evolve out of that hate. And the latter comes from freedom and education...not physical and/or emotional repression.

Sure, you have to protect people from violence and life-or-death situations due to discrimination. But virtually all other aspects of discrimination should be allowed...talking about it openly is the key to ending it; not shoving it under the rug and hoping it will go away.
 
Last edited:
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

If the the man didn't pay last time I think you could take the position that government-enforced discrimination was okay.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Not every white needs to be a racist for it to permeate society. It does so because of the racists that exist (within the majority power, of course) and due to past policies that resonate even today.

Your strawman is stupid.

If racism held down the black population before civil rights laws then exactly how was the unemployment rate during the Coolidge administration as low as 1.8 percent? That includes whites and blacks, so please, explain to me exactly how that is possible if blacks were discriminated out of the market to such a great degree?

You might not have figured it out yet, but your claim is entirely without merit.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

It isn't a strawman. I'm asking you serious questions and not trying to have a fight with you.

I would like to see if you could please explain to me in as much detail as this medium will allow, and with factual data and not anecdotal evidence, that discrimination exists on a societal level.

Remember, were talking about discrimination, not racism.

When unjust discrimination against a race is perpetuated by the majority power, it is racism.

You're denying racism exists in the US. You're denying racism permeates society. Obviously, I cannot help you.
 
Last edited:
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

When unjust discrimination against a race is perpetuated by the majority power, it is racism.

You're denying racism exists in the US. You're denying racism permeates society. Obviously, I cannot help you.

Discrimination and racism are two different things. And, you know that.

Of course racism exists. There are racists of every color and hew.

What this thread is discussing, what I have been discussing and what you were discussing up until now, is discrimination.

I would like to see if you could please explain to me in as much detail as this medium will allow, and with factual data and not anecdotal evidence, that discrimination exists on a societal level.

Remember, were talking about discrimination, not racism.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Which is more important: the "right" to discriminate, or freedom from discrimination?

Remember, you can't have both. If a business refuses to serve someone because he's black, and he refuses to leave and the business calls the cops to enforce their "right"...it is at that moment that we have government-enforced racism.

Is that really what we want?

i answered "freedom from discrimination" which is the right to not to be illegally discriminated against because based on your op I understood what you were actually asking.

But technically we dont have either of the rights you mentioned in blanket form, its much more defined than that.


Illegal discrimination is definitely crap and like the majority of most americans im glad we fight against it.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

There are racists of every color and hew.

No, there are not. Racism, in its full meaning to include scope, power dynamics and historical impacts, can only exist among the majority power. Bigotry by minorities is meaningless at a societal level and thereby does not qualify as racism, as there is no opportunity for systematic oppression.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

I'll just put this here for reading purposes for our members. It's a pretty good primer for Freedom Not To Associate from a law school.

The Freedom Not to Associate

For fun, answer the questions on the right of the page.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

No, there are not. Racism, in its full meaning to include scope, power dynamics and historical impacts, can only exist among the majority power. Bigotry by minorities is meaningless at a societal level and thereby does not qualify as racism, as there is no opportunity for systematic oppression.

I would like to see if you could please explain to me in as much detail as this medium will allow, and with factual data and not anecdotal evidence, that discrimination exists on a societal level.

Remember, were talking about discrimination, not racism.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Which is more important: the "right" to discriminate, or freedom from discrimination?

Remember, you can't have both. If a business refuses to serve someone because he's black, and he refuses to leave and the business calls the cops to enforce their "right"...it is at that moment that we have government-enforced racism.

Is that really what we want?

Do we really want a society that prevents freely voiced opinion? And isn't it discriminatory to give someone a place in a university in preference to another, who is much better at such work simply because the person comes from a minority?
Should a gay woman be treated first in an emergency room simply because she is gay?
I guess it's a matter of one's point of view.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

I would like to see if you could please explain to me in as much detail as this medium will allow, and with factual data and not anecdotal evidence, that discrimination exists on a societal level.

Remember, were talking about discrimination, not racism.

I'm talking about racism (real racism, by the majority, not white people crying like little babies about crap with no impact at the societal level). I don't know what you're talking about. From what I can tell, you're denying that real racism exists.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

I'm talking about racism (real racism, by the majority, not white people crying like little babies about crap with no impact at the societal level). I don't know what you're talking about. From what I can tell, you're denying that real racism exists.

I'm not, and haven't been.

Getting back to our original discussion:

I would like to see if you could please explain to me in as much detail as this medium will allow, and with factual data and not anecdotal evidence, that discrimination exists on a societal level.

Remember, were talking about discrimination, not racism.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

I'm not, and haven't been.

Getting back to our original discussion:

I would like to see if you could please explain to me in as much detail as this medium will allow, and with factual data and not anecdotal evidence, that discrimination exists on a societal level.

Remember, were talking about discrimination, not racism.

Our original discussion was regarding racism (real racism). I don't know where you lost track of the topic and my repeated and explicit references to unjust discrimination against a race by the majority power.

Remember, we're talking about real racism and not whites crying about socially meaningless bigotry.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Our original discussion was regarding racism (real racism). I don't know where you lost track of the topic and my repeated and explicit references to unjust discrimination against a race by the majority power.

Remember, we're talking about real racism and not whites crying about socially meaningless bigotry.

Yes, only white people can be racist. If blacks are racist it's just meaningless bigotry. :lamo
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Yes, only white people can be racist. If blacks are racist it's just meaningless bigotry. :lamo

Meaningless at a societal level and therefore not racists nor racism.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Meaningless at a societal level and therefore not racists nor racism.

:lamo You have to be trolling.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

:lamo You have to be trolling.

No, you're displaying ignorance.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

No, you're displaying ignorance.

Yeah, I'm the one doing that. Why don't you post more about how blacks can't be racist. It's almost as funny as you claiming the free market is a right.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Our original discussion was regarding racism (real racism). I don't know where you lost track of the topic and my repeated and explicit references to unjust discrimination against a race by the majority power.

Remember, we're talking about real racism and not whites crying about socially meaningless bigotry.

No, not really. It was about discrimination. Here's a short recap before it was sidetracked into the topic of racism:

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.
Although I agree with your premise, your statement is not wholly true.

I myself have been discriminated against; in South Miami for not being Latino, in NYC for not being - black/Italian/Jewish/a northerner. And many other instances as well.

Discrimination has no place in our society when it comes to social interaction related to commerce or public services. Each of us has the right to freedom of association which also means non-association, but that is in our private lives, not in public interactions.

JMHO
You must have missed the part about "on a societal level". You see, a white person can move and get away from any pockets of unjust discrimination against them - blacks CANNOT. That's the difference.

Of course bigotry by minorities is just as bad on an individual level, and I condemn them, but it is meaningless on a societal level.
Your term "societal level" is defined by the sub-group, not the entirety.

Your statement that "white people can move" and "blacks cannot" is baffling to me. Especially when discussed in the context of your entire post. Could you please describe to me an accurate and realistic explanation of why and how society has prevented or restricted blacks from moving? And if your inference was that whites can move away from discrimination and blacks cannot, the truth is no one can, not just blacks. Discrimination is part of the human condition. People associate with like people. That is nature. Associating with people that are similar in likes, culture and lifestyles is discrimination and happens on more than just racial lines. Rich people live around other rich people. Doctors join the same clubs. Workers join unions and prevent senior management from joining.

Discrimination is part of the freedom to associate, on an individual level.

The only time that that individual right is limited, is when it is no longer an individual doing the discriminating. Such as business or a group that is open to the general public.

Private organizations still have the right to discriminate. For instance, a community group can discriminate against people outside the community and not allow them to join the group. A private club can discriminate against people that do not meet their membership criteria.

But to get back to the ridiculous statement that whites can move away from discrimination, that is just not accurate and is logically flawed, as I've explained.
It's not an inference, it's an obvious fact. Discrimination against blacks permeates society, discrimination against whites exists only in isolated pockets and events.

I cannot believe the concept is beyond you.
For your premise to hold up, ALL white people would have to be propagating this discrimination for it to permeate society as a whole. I find that unlikely at least, and unprovable at most. And for the second of your assertions to be factual, blacks would have to be isolated from society as a whole and not be allowed coexist in society which seems also unprovable.

Care to prove it for me? Factually and not anecdotally? I can agree with you that anecdotal insistence's exist on both sides, but not factual societal discrimination as was the case in 1950.
Bullcrap.
Fine. Prove it's bullcrap. I'm willing to change my mind. Are you?

And here's where it got side tracked...

It's totally ridiculous for you to believe that every single white person must be a racist in order for racism to permeate society. It's stupid on its face. Just think for a minute and I'm sure the idiocy of that claim will dawn upon you.

My original question to you still stands:

I would like to see if you could please explain to me in as much detail as this medium will allow, and with factual data and not anecdotal evidence, that discrimination exists on a societal level.

Remember, were talking about discrimination, not racism.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Remember, were talking about discrimination, not racism.

Remember, I'm not gonna remind you of the topic every single post. The discrimination in question is racism. Has been for every single post I've made this thread.

If you didn't understand that, too bad. Reread my posts with that in mind.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Remember, I'm not gonna remind you of the topic every single post. The discrimination in question is racism.

rac•ism
ˈrāˌsizəm/
noun
noun: racism
the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.

dis•crim•i•na•tion
disˌkriməˈnāSHən/
noun
noun: discrimination; plural noun: discriminations
the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex.

My original question to you still stands:

I would like to see if you could please explain to me in as much detail as this medium will allow, and with factual data and not anecdotal evidence, that discrimination exists on a societal level.

Remember, were talking about discrimination, not racism.

For your edification on this subject: Racism can lead to discrimination, but discrimination does not lead to racism.

Racism is a thought, discrimination is an act.

Racism can also lead to outward prejudices, antagonism and the like, but none of them can lead to racism.

Discrimination is a broad term. In our conversation we were discussing discrimination that originated from racism and other forms of bigotry. But the question I asked you was not limited to racism. You yourself attempted to limit it to that, and I refused.

Again...

My original question to you still stands:

I would like to see if you could please explain to me in as much detail as this medium will allow, and with factual data and not anecdotal evidence, that discrimination exists on a societal level.

Remember, were talking about discrimination, not racism.
 
Last edited:
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rac•ism
ˈrāˌsizəm/
noun
noun: racism
the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.

dis•crim•i•na•tion
disˌkriməˈnāSHən/
noun
noun: discrimination; plural noun: discriminations
the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex.

My original question to you still stands:

I would like to see if you could please explain to me in as much detail as this medium will allow, and with factual data and not anecdotal evidence, that discrimination exists on a societal level.

Remember, were talking about discrimination, not racism.


Sorry you misunderstood. Better luck next time.
 
Back
Top Bottom