• 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!

Its ok for a business owner to refuse to do business with...

I support business refusal to do business with:

  • Total voters
    38
Allowing open discrimination has the tendency to create civil unrest. We look to government to quell such instances in an attempt to keep order. There is no doubt a causative link between discriminative practices (along with other aspects of bigotry) and social unrest. Therefore it is the responsibility of the government to legislate in an attempt to diffuse such future implications of bigotry.

Case in point:
Researchers from the University of Georgia in Athens, the University of California-Davis and Iowa State University in Ames set out to evaluate the psychological adjustment of 714 African-American children. The children and their primary caregivers, usually the mothers, were personally interviewed in the home three times over a five-year period, beginning when the children were 10 to 12 years old. The study is part of a larger, ongoing joint project, the Family and Community Health Study, conducted with support from the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH).

The children were interviewed about any racial discrimination they saw directed towards themselves and those close to them, feelings of depression, engagement in antisocial behavior and extent to which their friends expected and encouraged positive behavior. The children and their mothers were also interviewed about the mothers' parenting practices and the children's school experiences.

The researchers found that children whose experience with racially based insults, name calling and distrust increased as they moved into adolescence were more likely to report symptoms of depression, such as feeling irritable, having difficulty sleeping and having trouble concentrating in school. Boys were also more likely to become involved in antisocial behavior such as fighting and shoplifting.
Click to expand...

Racial discrimination can affect adolescents' development - lead to depression and behavior problems

The negative externalities associated with discrimination are far more costly to society than the benefit being allowed to refuse service based on bigotry.

Remember: Firm creation is based on the goal of maximum profits. Being able to "do whatever i want" has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion unless it pertains to achieving max profit.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
Allowing open discrimination has the tendency to create civil unrest. We look to government to quell such instances in an attempt to keep order. There is no doubt a causative link between discriminative practices (along with other aspects of bigotry) and social unrest. Therefore it is the responsibility of the government to legislate in an attempt to diffuse such future implications of bigotry.
Click to expand...
I don't remember any race riots during the Deny's incident, nor the Walmart incident when that idiot hijacked the P.A. system, if social unrest were a certainty then in those two cases social unrest should have happened.

Case in point:

Racial discrimination can affect adolescents' development - lead to depression and behavior problems

The negative externalities associated with discrimination are far more costly to society than the benefit being allowed to refuse service based on bigotry.

Remember: Firm creation is based on the goal of maximum profits. Being able to "do whatever i want" has absolutely nothing to do with this discussion unless it pertains to achieving max profit.
Click to expand...
Again, externalities are irrelevant when used against a basic right such as private property, else anyone could create any externality for any reason to back any agenda.
 
LaMidRighter said:
I don't remember any race riots during the Deny's incident, nor the Walmart incident when that idiot hijacked the P.A. system, if social unrest were a certainty then in those two cases social unrest should have happened.
Click to expand...

Riots are one thing. The social unrest created by the business practices of Denny's are very real.
Ten Syracuse University students are suing the Denny's restaurant chain for racial discrimination, saying they were denied service, thrown out when they complained and roughed up in the parking lot.

Lawyer Elizabeth OuYang and several plaintiffs charged today that Denny's had failed to make sure all its employees underwent anti-discrimination training as required by the 1994 settlement of a class-action lawsuit.

Denny's spokeswoman Karen Randall said the company was outraged by the incident and was firing some employees and disciplining others. Denny's President John Romandetti expressed "deep regret" in a statement. The lawsuit, filed Wednesday in federal court in …
Click to expand...

Bias Alleged at N.Y. Denny's - The Washington Post | HighBeam Research - FREE trial

Again, externalities are irrelevant when used against a basic right such as private property, else anyone could create any externality for any reason to back any agenda.
Click to expand...

You will have to expand your hypothesis a bit more;)
 
LaMidRighter said:
Such as? 10 Characters.
Click to expand...

The kids were beaten up. Now, you might be in the camp that behaves in the "turn the other cheek" fashion, but i have very little doubt this have negatively effected the "customers". Hate fuels hate. And while we may not be able to eliminate every instance, to sit idly by serves no purpose.... even for the bigots themselves.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
The kids were beaten up. Now, you might be in the camp that behaves in the "turn the other cheek" fashion, but i have very little doubt this have negatively effected the "customers". Hate fuels hate. And while we may not be able to eliminate every instance, to sit idly by serves no purpose.... even for the bigots themselves.
Click to expand...
Okay, the kids were beaten up, what was the immediate threat to public safety, I feel for them of course, but was there a riot or else out of control situation that police couldn't handle. And again, an isolated incident does not a need prove. You have to understand, for a right to be trumped you have got to have a 100% provable case, I'm not seeing it.
 
LaMidRighter said:
Okay, the kids were beaten up, what was the immediate threat to public safety, I feel for them of course, but was there a riot or else out of control situation that police couldn't handle. And again, an isolated incident does not a need prove. You have to understand, for a right to be trumped you have got to have a 100% provable case, I'm not seeing it.
Click to expand...

The police should never have been involved in the first place. Like i said before, there are too many extremes on both ends and these are the ones we have to worry about. Are these kids now part of the same "hate" mindset due to their treatment?

And that is the ****ed up part. You do not really know until **** hits the fan. We have agreed on many aspects of this argument. The only one we do not agree on is the right to operate a business in a bigoted manner.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
The police should never have been involved in the first place. Like i said before, there are too many extremes on both ends and these are the ones we have to worry about.
Click to expand...
I agree in full.
Are these kids now part of the same "hate" mindset due to their treatment?
Click to expand...
An argument could be made for either side, but they were ultimately responsible for their actions.
And that is the ****ed up part. You do not really know until **** hits the fan.
Click to expand...
This is true, and that is why I cannot see it being enough to warrant an encroachment on private property, the uncertainty factor.
We have agreed on many aspects of this argument. The only one we do not agree on is the right to operate a business in a bigoted manner.
Click to expand...
I agree that bigotry is wrong, most sane and rational people should I think. I just don't see it as enough to warrant a rollback of individual rights, that is a very strong litmus test for me.
Click to expand...
 
Goldenboy219 said:
The kids were beaten up. Now, you might be in the camp that behaves in the "turn the other cheek" fashion, but i have very little doubt this have negatively effected the "customers". Hate fuels hate. And while we may not be able to eliminate every instance, to sit idly by serves no purpose.... even for the bigots themselves.
Click to expand...

Well the government can definitely become involved over the assault.
 
Ikari said:
Well the government can definitely become involved over the assault.
Click to expand...

Well thank you captain obvious. The government also got involved and awarded a massive settlement in favor of those who were the victims of a hate crime.

The optimal scenario is for the behavior that escalated the assault to never take place.
 
LaMidRighter said:
I agree in full. An argument could be made for either side, but they were ultimately responsible for their actions. This is true, and that is why I cannot see it being enough to warrant an encroachment on private property, the uncertainty factor. I agree that bigotry is wrong, most sane and rational people should I think. I just don't see it as enough to warrant a rollback of individual rights, that is a very strong litmus test for me.
Click to expand...

All we have been hearing is that there is this fear of government manipulation. I have not seen any hypothetical involving what concerns you have in regards to "government failure". You have agreed that if this is the only purpose being served (bigotry no longer being acceptable in business), you would support it. Since i believe there are currently laws in place in the US that protect against such behavior, what governmental abuses have surfaced as a result of such legislation? What are some serious potential abuses?
 
Goldenboy219 said:
All we have been hearing is that there is this fear of government manipulation. I have not seen any hypothetical involving what concerns you have in regards to "government failure". You have agreed that if this is the only purpose being served (bigotry no longer being acceptable in business), you would support it. Since i believe there are currently laws in place in the US that protect against such behavior, what governmental abuses have surfaced as a result of such legislation? What are some serious potential abuses?
Click to expand...

The abuse IS the legislation.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
Well thank you captain obvious. The government also got involved and awarded a massive settlement in favor of those who were the victims of a hate crime.

The optimal scenario is for the behavior that escalated the assault to never take place.
Click to expand...

The optimal scenario is for humans to not behave like monkeys. But we do, so we'll have to deal with it. You can't start forbidding things because it maybe possible kinda under some circumstances to possibly almost lead to something bad. When something bad happens, you can respond to that. Until then, mind your own bees wax.
 
rivrrat said:
The abuse IS the legislation.
Click to expand...

You have made your opinion quite clear from the get go. Anything else to offer besides, "me me me, mine mine mine"?
 
Ikari said:
The optimal scenario is for humans to not behave like monkeys. But we do, so we'll have to deal with it. You can't start forbidding things because it maybe possible kinda under some circumstances to possibly almost lead to something bad. When something bad happens, you can respond to that. Until then, mind your own bees wax.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about; possibly always leading to something bad? You are arguing the exact same point only from another perspective. That government involvement always leads to something bad.

You can't have it both ways. If so, your argument is negated.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
You have made your opinion quite clear from the get go. Anything else to offer besides, "me me me, mine mine mine"?
Click to expand...

Her opinion is quite clear, I am unsure as to how you misinterpreted it. It's not me, mine. It's rights and liberty.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
What are you talking about; possibly always leading to something bad? You are arguing the exact same point only from another perspective. That government involvement always leads to something bad.

You can't have it both ways. If so, your argument is negated.
Click to expand...

You cannot restrict the individual through government force in the way you describe. The government can ALWAYS be restricted, as it is not an institution which holds rights. You know, this is very standard libertarian understanding. How can you claim "libertarian" and have no concept of rights?
 
Goldenboy219 said:
All we have been hearing is that there is this fear of government manipulation. I have not seen any hypothetical involving what concerns you have in regards to "government failure".
Click to expand...
This depends on which definition of failure you want to go with. Government by it's regulatory nature always fails to accomplish goals, it's sluggish, and not as dynamic and efficient as an individual or business can be at adjusting to changes. Otherwise, if you are defining success as government passing a law that may or may not accomplish it's goals.....most of the time when they fail to do so I'd call that a societal success.
You have agreed that if this is the only purpose being served (bigotry no longer being acceptable in business), you would support it. Since i believe there are currently laws in place in the US that protect against such behavior, what governmental abuses have surfaced as a result of such legislation? What are some serious potential abuses?
Click to expand...
I don't know that abuse exists past the government acting like a non-contributing partner via legislation(I reapeat that constantly because it is a slap in the face) as of right now, but these laws are constantly being added to and to the detriment of not only our basic rights, but even a limitation of being able to efficiently do business at the very end of the process.
Potential abuses are many though, you could have shakedown groups abusing these laws by creating problems, like sending their own members to be a problem customer and then forcing a lawsuit settlement, when you have a lot of businesses tired of this some upheaval can result.....things like that.
 
Ikari said:
Her opinion is quite clear, I am unsure as to how you misinterpreted it. It's not me, mine. It's rights and liberty.
Click to expand...

Then do your best to explain to me how your rights are at all violated if bigotry in business is not legal (which is the reality at the moment)?

If you are going to argue for the right to implement a bigoted business plan, you are going to have to put in a little more effort than "liberty freedom and rights".
 
Goldenboy219 said:
Then do your best to explain to me how your rights are at all violated if bigotry in business is not legal (which is the reality at the moment)?
Click to expand...

My property, my rules. It's called property rights, deal with it.
 
LaMidRighter said:
This depends on which definition of failure you want to go with. Government by it's regulatory nature always fails to accomplish goals, it's sluggish, and not as dynamic and efficient as an individual or business can be at adjusting to changes. Otherwise, if you are defining success as government passing a law that may or may not accomplish it's goals.....most of the time when they fail to do so I'd call that a societal success. I don't know that abuse exists past the government acting like a non-contributing partner via legislation(I reapeat that constantly because it is a slap in the face) as of right now, but these laws are constantly being added to and to the detriment of not only our basic rights, but even a limitation of being able to efficiently do business at the very end of the process.
Click to expand...

Has government overstepped its boundaries in regards to such legislation (anti-discrimination)? If so, what are some examples.

Potential abuses are many though, you could have shakedown groups abusing these laws by creating problems, like sending their own members to be a problem customer and then forcing a lawsuit settlement, when you have a lot of businesses tired of this some upheaval can result.....things like that.
Click to expand...

Being a problem customer is not the same as being a homosexual or black. You will have to expand your theory a bit.
 
Ikari said:
My property, my rules. It's called property rights, deal with it.
Click to expand...

The same childish argument from the peanut gallery.

Unfortunately the law does not agree with you. So deal with it!:2wave:
 
Goldenboy219 said:
The same childish argument from the peanut gallery.

Unfortunately the law does not agree with you. So deal with it!:2wave:
Click to expand...

So you don't understand the concepts of rights, and when you are presented with the idea all you can do is reduce yourself to childish, unintellectual insults and run away ok.

What sort of "libertarian" are you if you have no concept of rights? I mean besides "piss poor".
 
Ikari said:
So you don't understand the concepts of rights, and when you are presented with the idea all you can do is reduce yourself to childish, unintellectual insults and run away ok.
Click to expand...

I understand the concept of rights. All you have stated (along with rivrrat) is mine, me, mine, rights, me, mine, freedom, liberty. Nothing the least bit intellectual. Nothing at all in regards to business operations.

What sort of "libertarian" are you if you have no concept of rights? I mean besides "piss poor".
Click to expand...

The kind who does not get all riled up when a bigot is fined or sued over discriminatory business practices.
 
Goldenboy219 said:
I understand the concept of rights. All you have stated (along with rivrrat) is mine, me, mine, rights, me, mine, freedom, liberty. Nothing the least bit intellectual. Nothing at all in regards to business operations.
Click to expand...
Because it has nothing to do with business operations. And everything to do with personal property rights.

And it has nothing to do with me, since I am not a business owner and never will be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom