• 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

Kal'Stang said:
It's not a play on words at all. Unless you have a different definition of "servant" than I do?
Click to expand...

A different usage was explained to you above. Police serve, but are not servants. Everyone is paid for their efforts, and no one is forced to go into business. So, you guys are continuing to be hyperbolic.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
Why don't people have a right to be treated as an equal? When you discriminate you are not treating someone as an equal but inferior to yourself (general you). Why should someone have a right to treat another person as inferior? The answer is we can't under the Civil Rights Act. People do have rights to protect themselves from being treated as an inferior. It shouldn't matter where that person is being treated as an inferior. It's really that simple. People will take recourse if they feel their rights are violated. Yes, that is their right.
Click to expand...

1: Think about what you are saying here. If people had the right to be treated as an equal then everyone must be paid the same. No one can have a better car than another. Everyone must be accepted into all the highest Universities regardless of grade scores. And so on ad nauseum.

2: People don't have the right to be treated as equals because no one is equal to another.

3: There are 3 seperate Rights outlined which just simply do not allow such or they will be infringed. Are 3 rights being infringed less important than someone being offended at being refused service?
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Boo Radley said:
A different usage was explained to you above. Police serve, but are not servants. Everyone is paid for their efforts, and no one is forced to go into business. So, you guys are continuing to be hyperbolic.
Click to expand...

Actually police are servants. Servants of the people. And people have a right to own and operate a business so long as it doesn't infringe on other peoples rights.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
It's never equal footing when someone can withhold resources from you due to something you can't change. That is called power over a person. That kind of power is illegal.
Click to expand...

As I've said before, it's not equal footing to force someone to sell you their property.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Glen Contrarian said:
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.
Click to expand...

so you saying because the government would uphold a persons right,...........because he discriminated.......thats like a jim crow law?

so in your mind ,you want the government to uphold, a persons ..non-right being discriminated against.

so you favor, a federal law....to violate the rights of the people?
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Kal'Stang said:
1: Think about what you are saying here. If people had the right to be treated as an equal then everyone must be paid the same. No one can have a better car than another. Everyone must be accepted into all the highest Universities regardless of grade scores. And so on ad nauseum.

2: People don't have the right to be treated as equals because no one is equal to another.

3: There are 3 seperate Rights outlined which just simply do not allow such or they will be infringed. Are 3 rights being infringed less important than someone being offended at being refused service?
Click to expand...

That's not at all what I meant. I simply mean treating people like people. You don't send them to the back of the bus because someone feels they are inferior. You don't tell them they can't make a purchase like your other consumers because you feel they are not worthy of your goods.

Also, to suggest that it's only offending someone by not allowing them services is entirely missing the point. You are preventing them from accessing those resources on top of creating a society of exclusion and segregation which creates fear and violence. You are creating a society where people are allowed to deny services based on emotions. The most ironic thing is you are probably going to move people away from privatizing resources because they will fear that they will be deemed less worthy to purchase them and fear they will have to go without, have to pay a premium in order to get it or have to search around for like minded people to allow them access. That's really not very pragmatic at all.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

joG said:
Absolutely! I believe that individuals in power can and will create laws and take away people's rights. I also believe it is essential to keep that constantly in mind. That is what democracy, balance of power and due process are all about. But alone those are not enough. The citizen must always keep a watchful eye out for shenanigans. And one of those that is dangerous is preventing minorities from expressing their opinions.
Click to expand...

how can that be....since the bill of rights.....are restrictions on the federal government ,that they shall make no law, violating the rights of people.

by the way, there is no balance of power in democracy.

i dont know of anyone who is against minorities from expressing their opinions


The Preamble to The Bill of Rights

Congress of the United States
begun and held at the City of New-York, on
Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its [federal] powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.
 
Last edited:
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Kal'Stang said:
As I've said before, it's not equal footing to force someone to sell you their property.
Click to expand...

No one is forcing someone to sell their property.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Kal'Stang said:
Actually police are servants. Servants of the people. And people have a right to own and operate a business so long as it doesn't infringe on other peoples rights.
Click to expand...

No, they serve. They get a pay check and seek to do the job. They way you use servant is in the terms of unwilling, slavish. That is hyperbole. And you do infringe on people rights when you take a class and deny service without justification.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Kal'Stang said:
You already think you know the answer so why should I bother? You've already made up your mind about me without knowing me in the slightest.
Click to expand...

It's a habit of mine...especially since what I said applies every other white I've ever met who said that racism isn't that prevalent anymore (or words to that effect).
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

maquiscat said:
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.
Click to expand...

Yes, in YOUR world, when the cops come pulling a black man out of a white man's place of business because that white man called the cops and said he doesn't allow black people in there, that's not state-enforced racism.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

ernst barkmann said:
i know the government uses injustice..i think we all know that......which is what they are going in these cases.

which is why the founders sought a republican form of government not a democratic one.....which is tyranny, and the left wants.
Click to expand...

I love how someone who uses a Waffen SS soldier as his avatar has set himself up as the sole authority on the constitution of the United States.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

ernst barkmann said:
so you saying because the government would uphold a persons right,...........because he discriminated.......thats like a jim crow law?

so in your mind ,you want the government to uphold, a persons ..non-right being discriminated against.

so you favor, a federal law....to violate the rights of the people?
Click to expand...

Guy, you have a right to be a prejudiced as you want - but you do NOT have a right to discriminate against other people on the basis of how they were born. YOUR freedom ends where the other guy's freedom begins.

Sorry, guy, but that is not a "God-given" human right - that's nothing more than a twist of logic used by racists to excuse their actions.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Wiggen said:
I love how someone who uses a Waffen SS soldier as his avatar has set himself up as the sole authority on the constitution of the United States.
Click to expand...

well i love the idea..you love....thats sweet!
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

ernst barkmann said:
how can that be....since the bill of rights.....are restrictions on the federal government ,that they shall make no law, violating the rights of people.

by the way, there is no balance of power in democracy.

i dont know of anyone who is against minorities from expressing their opinions


The Preamble to The Bill of Rights

Congress of the United States
begun and held at the City of New-York, on
Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its [federal] powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.
Click to expand...

Thank you for answering so nicely. Sorrily I do not quite understand, what you are getting at and do not want to comment without understanding, what you mean. Could you, do you think, put that in language I might understand?
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Glen Contrarian said:
Guy, you have a right to be a prejudiced as you want - but you do NOT have a right to discriminate against other people on the basis of how they were born. YOUR freedom ends where the other guy's freedom begins.

Sorry, guy, but that is not a "God-given" human right - that's nothing more than a twist of logic used by racists to excuse their actions.
Click to expand...

wrong, i am an individual person, not a government i can discriminate if i wish, i don't have to like you sell you trade to deal with you in any way.

you unfortunately, do not believe in the rights of the people........and do not recolonize right to property or association

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

Kal'Stang said:
Apples and oranges. He talks about doing things that discriminate but does not interfere with other peoples rights. You on the other hand talk about violating peoples rights.
Click to expand...

No, you're using a twist of logic to excuse racists violating the rights of other people. You've got a right to be every bit as racist as you want...but you do NOT have a right to stop someone from patronizing a business open to the public based on how they were born. You do NOT have that 'right' - because it's NOT a right. It's an excuse, just like the excuses that humans have used throughout all human history to do wrong to other people.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

joG said:
Thank you for answering so nicely. Sorrily I do not quite understand, what you are getting at and do not want to comment without understanding, what you mean. Could you, do you think, put that in language I might understand?
Click to expand...

ok, for you sir.

the constitution states in the very first line, its grants powers to congress.

the constitution however does not grant any rights to the people, .......the constitution recognizes rights of the people.

the bill of rights, are declaratory and restrictive clauses placed on the federal government, barring them from creating any law which would violate the recognized rights in the Constitution or those rights which have been recognized by the USSC.

right to property and association....... are recognized rights

it is unconstitutional for government to create a law, violating those rights.

laws are constructed to secure rights of the people.........that is the sole purpose we have governments ....nothing more.

since discrimination is not a rights violation[its not a crime], and it does not endanger the health and safety of the public, the government has no authority to act.



democracy places all power into the hands of "the people"...there is no balance.

the founders republican form of government of the Constitution, places power in 3 places, the people, the states, and the electors........that is a balance of power.
 
Last edited:
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

ernst barkmann said:
ok, for you sir.

the constitution states in the very first line, its grants powers to congress.

the constitution however does not grant any rights to the people, .......the constitution recognizes rights of the people.

the bill of rights, are declaratory and restrictive clauses placed on the federal government, barring them from creating any law which would violate the recognized rights in the Constitution or those rights which have been recognized by the USSC.

right to property and association....... are recognized rights

it is unconstitutional for government to create a law, violating those rights.

laws are constructed to secure rights of the people.........that is the sole purpose we have governments ....nothing more.

since discrimination is not a rights violation[its not a crime], and it does not endanger the health and safety of the public, the government has no authority to act.



democracy places all power into the hands of "the people"...there is no balance.

the founders republican form of government of the Constitution, places power in 3 places, the people, the states, and the electors........that is a balance of power.
Click to expand...

Aha. So there is a balance of powers in democracies, is what you are saying.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

joG said:
Aha. So there is a balance of powers in democracies, is what you are saying.
Click to expand...

democracy is a democratic form of government......there is NO balance

the constitution creates a republican form of government........there is balance

article 4
Section. 4.

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Objective Voice said:
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.
Click to expand...

maquiscat said:
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.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

I know that. That's why I used public pools as an example. It works better than trying to use a privately owned restaurant or department store.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Glen Contrarian said:
No, you're using a twist of logic to excuse racists violating the rights of other people. You've got a right to be every bit as racist as you want...but you do NOT have a right to stop someone from patronizing a business open to the public based on how they were born. You do NOT have that 'right' - because it's NOT a right. It's an excuse, just like the excuses that humans have used throughout all human history to do wrong to other people.
Click to expand...

Actually a person does have that right. Via free speech, freedom of association, the right to boycott, and the right to private property.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
That's not at all what I meant. I simply mean treating people like people. You don't send them to the back of the bus because someone feels they are inferior. You don't tell them they can't make a purchase like your other consumers because you feel they are not worthy of your goods.
Click to expand...

The government is not allowed to do that. Private indivduals have that right. For example, if I wish to get married in a catholic church should I be able to sue them if they refuse because I'm not catholic? Happens all the time you know. They do so because they feel that the other person is not worthy. Is inferior. Just an fyi, I was refused to be married to my wife from a church. Not catholic, but christian.

rabbitcaebannog said:
Also, to suggest that it's only offending someone by not allowing them services is entirely missing the point. You are preventing them from accessing those resources on top of creating a society of exclusion and segregation which creates fear and violence. You are creating a society where people are allowed to deny services based on emotions. The most ironic thing is you are probably going to move people away from privatizing resources because they will fear that they will be deemed less worthy to purchase them and fear they will have to go without, have to pay a premium in order to get it or have to search around for like minded people to allow them access. That's really not very pragmatic at all.
Click to expand...

No one is preventing them from accessing resources. There are plenty of Ipods and cell phones, and tv's out there.

As for creating a society of exclusion and fear....that's been around for ages and many of them are fully acceptable. For example schools, do you know how many cliques are in schools that exclude those that do not conform to their way of thinking and beliefs? Even cliques of race. Yet we don't admonish black children to let white children hang out with them. And visa versa. We don't admonish cheerleaders to let the nerds hang out with them. Or the jocks and the goths. Like it or not society naturally segregates itself. And yet...we do not have a society of fear.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
No one is forcing someone to sell their property.
Click to expand...

Sorry? Forcing an owner to sell a product to someone that they are racist against is not forcing them to sell their property? What is it then?
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Boo Radley said:
No, they serve. They get a pay check and seek to do the job. They way you use servant is in the terms of unwilling, slavish. That is hyperbole. And you do infringe on people rights when you take a class and deny service without justification.
Click to expand...

1: No, police are government employees. The government is the servant of the people. Just because you get paid does not mean anything. Both may be temporary in their servitude. But the servitude is still there. Servitude does not have a time limit or lasts forever. And you can't tell me that there are not cops out there that are not prejudiced yet are forced to help those that they are prejudiced against on penalty of losing their jobs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom