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 53 of 230 FirstFirst ... 343515253545563103153 ... LastLast
Results 521 to 530 of 2291

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

  1. #521
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    01-27-15 @ 11:37 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,247

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Beaudreaux View Post
    There is none. No right by which any individual may do so. I've stated that.
    Yes, but some individual WILL actually violate (or threatening to violate) the bigot's body or property in order to coerce him to do business with the protected person. And you seem to be saying that this individual has a right to do so.

    Where does this particular individual acquire the right to do so when we've agreed that no individual has such a right? One can't NOT have the right to do something and also HAVE the right to do something at the same time.

  2. #522
    Preserve Protect Defend
    Beaudreaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Covfefe, NC
    Last Seen
    12-14-17 @ 05:00 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    15,566

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Federalist View Post
    Yes, but some individual WILL actually violate (or threatening to violate) the bigot's body or property in order to coerce him to do business with the protected person. And you seem to be saying that this individual has a right to do so.

    Where does this particular individual acquire the right to do so when we've agreed that no individual has such a right? One can't NOT have the right to do something and also HAVE the right to do something at the same time.
    Man your stretching now. Please don't infer what I said, when what I did say is clearly in print on in this thread.
    Everything in your life is a reflection of a choice you have made. If you want a different result, don't blame someone else, or expect others to make a change, you should stop complaining and make a different choice. Remember, the circumstances of your birth don't determine the outcome of your life.

  3. #523
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:21 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,080

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

    Quote Originally Posted by maquiscat View Post
    Oh no not the "F" word......Freedom! What a horrid idea!
    Ah yes - the treasured right wing Freedom to be a bigot. Sorry but you can put all the glorious shiny lipstick you want on that ugly fat pig and even put it in a Dior gown - but in the end its just still a pig.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  4. #524
    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 Beaudreaux View Post
    For instance, a business is a separate entity, that is granted a license to enter into commerce. Our Constitution grants Congress the right to regulate Commerce in the Commerce Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3). Each state also has the power to regulate commerce as well within its borders. As do local municipalities.
    Actually, the federal government doesn't have the power to regulate business. They have the power to keep trade regular between the states, but they don't have the power to control business activities. The states on the other hand, never granted themselves the power to regulate business either in any of their constitutions, so in effect, no one has the power to regulate business.

  5. #525
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    01-27-15 @ 11:37 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,247

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Beaudreaux View Post
    Man your stretching now. Please don't infer what I said, when what I did say is clearly in print on in this thread.
    I'm not inferring. This is what you said: "No right by which any individual may do so."

    But some individual WILL actually violate (or threatening to violate) the bigot's body or property in order to coerce him to do business with the protected person. Do you think this particular individual has a right to do so, and, if so, how do you reconcile that with your opinion that no individual may do so?

  6. #526
    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 1750Texan View Post
    Selling property[real] and selling a product[goods and services] is not the same.

    There is a differnce in selling my truck[property] on craigslist and having a car lot[property][business][rules, regulations, laws]selling cars to the public.
    sorry no.... everything about you is property.

    James Madison, Property
    29 Mar. 1792Papers 14:266--68
    This term in its particular application means "that dominion which one man claims and exercises over the external things of the world, in exclusion of every other individual."

    In its larger and juster meaning, it embraces every thing to which a man may attach a value and have a right; and which leaves to every one else the like advantage.

    In the former sense, a man's land or merchandize, or money is called his property.

    In the latter sense, a man has a property in his opinions and the free communication of them.

    He has a property of peculiar value in his religious opinions, and in the profession and practice dictated by them.

    He has a property very dear to him in the safety and liberty of his person.

    He has an equal property in the free use of his faculties and free choice of the objects on which to employ them.

    In a word, as a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights.

    Where an excess of power prevails, property of no sort is duly respected. No man is safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties, or his possessions.

    Where there is an excess of liberty, the effect is the same, tho' from an opposite cause.

    Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in the various rights of individuals, as that which the term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own.


    a bigot is a bigot, it does not matter whether you like or hate the bigot, a bigot has...... right to property.

  7. #527
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:21 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,080

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    sorry no.... everything about you is property.

    James Madison, Property
    29 Mar. 1792Papers 14:266--68
    This term in its particular application means "that dominion which one man claims and exercises over the external things of the world, in exclusion of every other individual."

    In its larger and juster meaning, it embraces every thing to which a man may attach a value and have a right; and which leaves to every one else the like advantage.

    In the former sense, a man's land or merchandize, or money is called his property.

    In the latter sense, a man has a property in his opinions and the free communication of them.

    He has a property of peculiar value in his religious opinions, and in the profession and practice dictated by them.

    He has a property very dear to him in the safety and liberty of his person.

    He has an equal property in the free use of his faculties and free choice of the objects on which to employ them.

    In a word, as a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights.

    Where an excess of power prevails, property of no sort is duly respected. No man is safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties, or his possessions.

    Where there is an excess of liberty, the effect is the same, tho' from an opposite cause.

    Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in the various rights of individuals, as that which the term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own.


    a bigot is a bigot, it does not matter whether you like or hate the bigot, a bigot has...... right to property.
    You wonder why librtarians are not renamed as PROPERTYTARIANS?

    Oh wait ........ LIBERTY is a much more appealing shade of lipstick on the pig that mere PROPERTY is.

    Never mind.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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. #528
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,148

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    The collective acts of actual (majority power) racists permeates society.

    Individual whites can be racist, because they have the power to institute the systematic oppression of another race, which is what racism really is.
    No, they can't, because they are not society. They are individuals, and in your system it must be a society that is racist.

    Apparently, also, that society must correlate precisely with the borders of a nation-state. So, for example, a neighborhood of black kids who all hate and regularly abuse the one white kid solely because he is white aren't acting out racism, because that society is contained within a larger society, and so the micro-society that they actually live in somehow doesn't count as a "society" that is capable of being racist.



    I think the standard you are proposing is self-defeating on top of being blatantly at odds with observable reality. I've met plenty of racist black people, racist arab people, racist japanese people, so on and so forth. You could say that for years whites had their racism confirmed and enabled by the state and power broker institutions within our civil society, but to translate that to therefore only whites can be racist is to make leap that cannot be supported and flies in the face of the evidence at hand.

  9. #529
    Kinky
    tres borrachos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    New England
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    39,249

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Beaudreaux View Post
    Okay, I'll play along for just a bit more.

    First, redheads are not a protected class in our laws, but let's pretend they are for your scenario. The protected classes are:

    Race Civil Rights Act of 1964
    Color Civil Rights Act of 1964
    Religion Civil Rights Act of 1964
    National origin Civil Rights Act of 1964
    Age (40 and over) Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967
    Sex Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Civil Rights Act of 1964
    Pregnancy Pregnancy Discrimination Act
    Citizenship Immigration Reform and Control Act
    Familial status Civil Rights Act of 1968 Title VIII: Housing cannot discriminate for having children, with an exception for senior housing
    Disability status Vocational Rehabilitation and Other Rehabilitation Services of 1973 and Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
    Veteran status Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974 and Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act
    Genetic information Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act
    As an individual, I do not have the authority to force anyone to do or not do anything, other than to prevent them from harming me physically or threatening my life or property. No individual does.

    As to the government however, we as a people have established guidelines to conduct ourselves. These guidelines include prohibitions against discrimination of the certain protected classes, in certain public interactions.

    These prohibitions do not restrict private association or non-association. They only affect public association of groups or entities.

    For instance, a business is a separate entity, that is granted a license to enter into commerce. Our Constitution grants Congress the right to regulate Commerce in the Commerce Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3). Each state also has the power to regulate commerce as well within its borders. As do local municipalities.

    Each municipality, state, as well as the Congress, has sets of laws, regulations, statutes, ordinances and rules such as zoning that regulate commerce.

    This has been the way our government and our society has operated since day one.

    Does this clarify my position better?
    Christonacracker, that list encompasses just about everyone in the country. You fall into one of those categories somewhere. I am of Irish and German descent. I would assume (if the laws are FAIR) that both of them qualify for "National Origin".

    If "Religion" is a protected class, why the angst against the people whose religious beliefs tell them that sodomy is a sin (NO, I am not in that number, just thinking aloud).

    Redheads should not be a protected class. Blondes, on the other hand, should. I am blonde.

  10. #530
    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 haymarket View Post
    You wonder why librtarians are not renamed as PROPERTYTARIANS?

    Oh wait ........ LIBERTY is a much more appealing shade of lipstick on the pig that mere PROPERTY is.

    Never mind.
    as it has been stated by me to you before, everything about a person is property.

    OR...are you forgetting the women state they have a right to their bodies, when it comes to abortion.

    you have a funny sense of liberty, believing it should be crushed when it offends you.....I don't think you ever consider how your words, and thoughts of government offend other people....maybe we should crush your right to speech, because people "just don't like what you say"

Posting Permissions

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