• 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

If the transaction itself is the privilege, that holds true for both parties.

Incorrect. One has the property and as such has property rights which includes the selling of said property. Rights will always trump priviledges.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

You are using the term "selective market" incorrectly. Selective marketing refers to marketing. IE advertising. And it is done all the time. Indeed it is a part of the free market idea.

Selective marketing

I was not referring to advertising but if that term is confusing, let's use the term discriminating market.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

So, free market is just an illusion.

What you're discussing is antithetical to free markets. You're closer to conscription and indentured servitude.

Free market comprises voluntary bilateral contracts. If one side doesn't agree, the contract is null. That's a free market.

Your compulsory crap is the opposite. Thank you for playing.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Incorrect. One has the property and as such has property rights which includes the selling of said property. Rights will always trump priviledges.

One's making a transaction with that property. Selling= transaction.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

What you're discussing is antithetical to free markets. You're closer to conscription and indentured servitude.

Free market comprises voluntary bilateral contracts. If one side doesn't agree, the contract is null. That's a free market.

Your compulsory crap is the opposite. Thank you for playing.

No, it's not crap when someone is being prevented from participation due to his attributes. That is NOT a free market.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

No, it's not crap when someone is being prevented from participation due to his attributes. That is NOT a free market.

The word you're looking for is "fair". It's not "fair". It's very much free.

You do know what the word "free" means in this case, right?
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

And what you're not getting is that YES, those cops beat him in violation of his rights...yet here you are advocating taking away their RIGHT to freedom FROM discrimination...which took minorities in general and blacks in particular centuries to win. Do you really think they wouldn't riot about losing that right, that freedom?

If you do, you really don't know people half so well as you seem to think.

Bold: Didn't I already say that the cops violated that guys rights? How can I not be getting that when I agreed that they violated his rights? As for what rights they violated, I don't recall them being charged with violating "the black guys right to not be discriminated against". Could you point it out to me please?

I notice that once again you (and others) have refused to show proof that people have a right to not be discriminated against.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

The word you're looking for is "fair". It's not "fair". It's very much free.

You do know what the word "free" means in this case, right?

It would only be free for the owner of property and not the consumer. It should be deemed a discriminatory market for the consumer.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

It would only be free for the owner of property and not the consumer. It should be deemed a discriminatory market for the consumer.

"Should be deemed" is not phrasology I've seen in any of my economic textbooks.

It's still free. Period.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

I was not referring to advertising but if that term is confusing, let's use the term discriminating market.

You are missing the point. Discrimination happens all the time in the free market. It is part and parcel of the free market. Just like everything else in the world there are negatives and positives.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

I notice that once again you (and others) have refused to show proof that people have a right to not be discriminated against.

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

"Should be deemed" is not phrasology I've seen in any of my economic textbooks.

It's still free. Period.

It's only free to the property owner and not the consumer. Let's be honest.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

You are missing the point. Discrimination happens all the time in the free market. It is part and parcel of the free market. Just like everything else in the world there are negatives and positives.

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

It's only free to the property owner and not the consumer. Let's be honest.

It's still free because it's not subject to intervention, nor regulation from the government.

You're still confusing those four-letter F words. I'd expand your vocabulary.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati


Oh I wish you had asked me that.

I'm often online at McDonalds next to seniors drinking discounted coffee.

I could name so many that I'd surpass the character limit for a post.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

It's still free because it's not subject to intervention, nor regulation from the government.

You're still confusing those four-letter F words. I'd expand your vocabulary.

Okay, so freedom only means from government intervention and not from human right's violation. Sounds repressive to human rights.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

One's making a transaction with that property. Selling= transaction.

What you are disregarding here is property rights. Those property rights trump privledges. Which means the owner of the property gets to dictate who he/she sells his property to in any transaction..which is a priviledge...which is trumped by property rights. Remember, the owner of the property also has the right to NOT sell his/her property at any given moment. This right has existed since people first started bartering. The owner of the property got to dicate whether the sell was going to happen or not.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Oh I wish you had asked me that.

I'm often online at McDonalds next to seniors drinking discounted coffee.

I could name so many that I'd surpass the character limit for a post.

Okay, so prices and discounts can be decided freely, how about selling to certain people while limiting certain people from making a transaction due to race?
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Okay, so freedom only means from government intervention and not from human right's violation. Sounds repressive to human rights.

For economic purposes, for the most part - yes.

The problem we're having here is that I'm basing my argument on logic, rationale, and economic principle. You're basing it on emotional appeal.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Okay, so prices and discounts can be decided freely, how about selling to certain people while limiting certain people from making a transaction due to race?

Still free. Unfair and a prick move - but still free.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

For economic purposes, for the most part - yes.

The problem we're having here is that I'm basing my argument on logic, rationale, and economic principle. You're basing it on emotional appeal.

Why is it logical to limit a person from making a purchase due to race?
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Being a Constitutional right is an opinion.

No, actually its not. If it was a Constitutional right then it would be in the Constitution in some form or another. It's not.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Why is it logical to limit a person from making a purchase due to race?

It's logical to not impede another's choices. I don't enforce morality on others.
 
Back
Top Bottom