• 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!

Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451:959]

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Racial, religious etc. discrimination harms society and vulnerable people. In small towns, isolated and rural areas, just one or two discriminatory businesses could keep a significant portion of the population from getting a job, shopping, getting a place to live etc. without leaving town. Even in a more urban environment, discrimination can force poor people to unnecessary waste time and money searching for a business that will accept their money in exchange for goods or services. Businesses have the ability to oppress people in their daily lives as much or more than government, especially in these days of a handful of mega-corporations, malls and big box retail dominating retail and services. Addressing government discrimination while allowing business discrimination requires tolerating discrimination and the hardship and oppression it will impose on unpopular minorities and society as a whole.

The business owner who doesn't like serving a customer because of their race, religion, gender etc is harmed much less when forced to serve that person than the would-be customer who has to find another place that will serve him/her is harmed. When a person can't get a job or a home because of race, religion, gender etc discrimination they suffer far more than the employer or landlord will suffer from being forced to treat that person as an equal.

There is widespread consensus that there is no right to not be offended. That is the only so-called "right" infringed upon when a business is "forced" to serve someone with the wrong skin color or accent. I believe most people would agree that the right to be treated as an equal human being who is judged by his/her behavior, not by an irrational prejudice, is more important than the "right" to not be offended. The "forced to work like a serf" argument is nonsense. No one is required by anti-discrimination laws to provide a good or service that they are not already willingly providing to everyone else (except the person with the "wrong' skin color) who uses that business.

Anti-discrimination laws secure individual's right to be treated as an equal human being who is judged by his/her behavior, not by an irrational prejudice. They prevent the harm from business discrimination against potential employees, employees and customers, which significantly outweighs the harm from being "forced" to tolerate undesirable races, religions etc in one's business.

In addition, society as a whole is harmed by the impact of discrimination based on prejudice and hate. Discrimination harms society by maintaining an impoverished underclass living with all the ill effects of poverty and oppression, effects which can impact everyone in the form of blight, large numbers of beggars, disease, crime, violence, rebellion and revenge.

Past experiences and the experiences of other places show us what happens when discrimination is allowed. Jim Crow laws existed during my lifetime and the negative effects from them still impacts life today. I don't believe that such discrimination will be as rare as claimed. These days it is as likely to be directed at Muslims and gays as blacks, but the tendency to ignorantly, irrationally and/or arbitrarily discriminate has not been sufficiently eliminated yet. For evidence, just look at all the racism and bigotry expressed on this forum and other public fora.

Precisely and very well said. Thank you.

We all suffer when we don't protect the vulnerable and we all benefit when we maintain an environment of equality and fairness.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Jesus Gip what's your fricken point?!

That saying that stuff happened because "she was gay" is an assumption.

You know - kinda like the black guy who interviews and doesn't get the job. You know the first thing he thinks. Always.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Anti-discrimination laws secure individual's right to be treated as an equal human being who is judged by his/her behavior, not by an irrational prejudice.

No such right exists.

They prevent the harm from business discrimination against potential employees, employees and customers, which significantly outweighs the harm from being "forced" to tolerate undesirable races, religions etc in one's business.

Not doing business with someone causes them no harm, it just doesn't prevent it as it could have.

Furthermore, voluntary arrangements end and there is nothing wrong with that.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Precisely and very well said. Thank you.

We all suffer when we don't protect the vulnerable and we all benefit when we maintain an environment of equality and fairness.

Can you explain how imposing your will on someone to make them do your will is equality? I'll wait..
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

That saying that stuff happened because "she was gay" is an assumption.

You know - kinda like the black guy who interviews and doesn't get the job. You know the first thing he thinks. Always.

No, that's your assumption. The woman stated that it was made clear to her in each instance why she was chosen to have her tires slashed. It's amazing how easily you leap to the assumption that her claims were false.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

No, that's your assumption. The woman stated that it was made clear to her in each instance why she was chosen to have her tires slashed. It's amazing how easily you leap to the assumption that her claims were false.

They were yelling "DYKE!" at her with each plunge of the knife or something? That's pretty brazen.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Wrong. Phoenix is a 517 square mile city.

Not very small. Population 1.489 Million (2012) It is the 6th largest city in population in the US. NY, LA, Chicago, Houston, Philadelphia, Phoenix.

Los Angeles is a 503 square mile city.

Chicago is a 234 square mile city

Seattle is 142 square miles.

Miami is 35.68 square miles

Pittsburgh is 58.3 square miles

Philadelphia is 142.6 miles

Detroit is 142.9 miles
I'm talking about the city center.....which is why I said Phoenix is more of "suburb"....there really isn't much of a city center.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Racial, religious etc. discrimination harms society and vulnerable people. In small towns, isolated and rural areas, just one or two discriminatory businesses could keep a significant portion of the population from getting a job, shopping, getting a place to live etc. without leaving town. Even in a more urban environment, discrimination can force poor people to unnecessary waste time and money searching for a business that will accept their money in exchange for goods or services. Businesses have the ability to oppress people in their daily lives as much or more than government, especially in these days of a handful of mega-corporations, malls and big box retail dominating retail and services. Addressing government discrimination while allowing business discrimination requires tolerating discrimination and the hardship and oppression it will impose on unpopular minorities and society as a whole.
how is not selling someone a burger a form of oppression. Yeah, if you don't like the businesses in a town, then move. You don't have a right to another persons property. I agree that government shouldn't be allowed to discriminate. But private businesses should be allowed to serve who they want. A government is a servant of the people. Other people are not your servants. Make sense?


The business owner who doesn't like serving a customer because of their race, religion, gender etc is harmed much less when forced to serve that person than the would-be customer who has to find another place that will serve him/her is harmed. When a person can't get a job or a home because of race, religion, gender etc discrimination they suffer far more than the employer or landlord will suffer from being forced to treat that person as an equal.
awful lot of "force" there. Must be a statist.

Anyhow, you don't have a right to anyone's property. Maybe it's time to stop relying on a single person or business. If one business won't serve gays, there is surely another that will. If not, then gays should put their money together and start their own business.


There is widespread consensus that there is no right to not be offended. That is the only so-called "right" infringed upon when a business is "forced" to serve someone with the wrong skin color or accent. I believe most people would agree that the right to be treated as an equal human being who is judged by his/her behavior, not by an irrational prejudice, is more important than the "right" to not be offended. The "forced to work like a serf" argument is nonsense. No one is required by anti-discrimination laws to provide a good or service that they are not already willingly providing to everyone else (except the person with the "wrong' skin color) who uses that business.
you do have a right to equal protection under the law. You don't have a right to another persons labor or property.


Anti-discrimination laws secure individual's right to be treated as an equal human being who is judged by his/her behavior, not by an irrational prejudice. They prevent the harm from business discrimination against potential employees, employees and customers, which significantly outweighs the harm from being "forced" to tolerate undesirable races, religions etc in one's business.
fact remains, forcing another person to serve you is slavery.


In addition, society as a whole is harmed by the impact of discrimination based on prejudice and hate. Discrimination harms society by maintaining an impoverished underclass living with all the ill effects of poverty and oppression, effects which can impact everyone in the form of blight, large numbers of beggars, disease, crime, violence, rebellion and revenge.
so you're saying everyone will be in poverty if I don't sell you a hamburger? This gets better and better.


Past experiences and the experiences of other places show us what happens when discrimination is allowed. Jim Crow laws existed during my lifetime and the negative effects from them still impacts life today. I don't believe that such discrimination will be as rare as claimed. These days it is as likely to be directed at Muslims and gays as blacks, but the tendency to ignorantly, irrationally and/or arbitrarily discriminate has not been sufficiently eliminated yet. For evidence, just look at all the racism and bigotry expressed on this forum and other public fora.
Jim Crow laws are government actions. Not private business policies.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

It should be any minute now....that the bigots that want to discriminate against gays start crying persecution and violation of their first amendment rights when people start boycotting them and exposing their bigotry.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

It should be any minute now....that the bigots that want to discriminate against gays start crying persecution and violation of their first amendment rights when people start boycotting them and exposing their bigotry.

That's pretty retarded. You aren't entitled to anyone's money.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Racial, religious etc. discrimination harms society and vulnerable people.

If we pretend that this is a true statement, then the same can be said about Flag Burning and other unpopular speech. The same can be said about how some religious groups are perceived by the public.

Here's how I think society is harmed. Unpopular speech doesn't go away simply because you ban it. Unpopular religions don't go away because you ban them. People's ideas about religions and race and sex don't get erased because you ban the expression of those ideas, and rights to free association are a form of speech.

Forcing people who want to burn the Flag to instead salute the Flag doesn't make everything alright. Forcing Muslims to pretend that they are Baptists doesn't make everything alright. Forcing a Christian baker to bake a wedding cake for two homosexual men doesn't make the baker's beliefs go away, that coercion doesn't make him more tolerant, in fact, I would argue that it could make his intolerance burn hotter for now he has to contend with liberal totalitarians running roughshod over his human rights and forcing him to pretend something he doesn't feel.

This liberal totalitarianism is what is harming society.

In small towns, isolated and rural areas, just one or two discriminatory businesses could keep a significant portion of the population from getting a job, shopping, getting a place to live etc. without leaving town. Even in a more urban environment, discrimination can force poor people to unnecessary waste time and money searching for a business that will accept their money in exchange for goods or services.

You point to some possible real world harms. There is no denying that these could arise. How though do these harms justify stripping other people of their human rights? I frankly don't see the logic in that formulation.

To put this in more concrete terms, over the course of history 80% of women have had children compared to only 40% of men. Some men have reproduced with multiple women and most men have reproduced with no women. That's a harm to men, isn't it? It's not "fair" that so many men throughout history, and even today, don't get the chance to be fathers. Is the solution to this "harm" that we FORCE women to reproduce more "fairly" and "equitably" by assigning women partners to insure a more evenly matched pairing?

Fixing some harms for one groups of people shouldn't entail violating the human rights of other people.

Businesses have the ability to oppress people in their daily lives as much or more than government, especially in these days of a handful of mega-corporations, malls and big box retail dominating retail and services.

And individuals have even more power than corporations. It was individuals who brought down South African Apartheid by exerting pressure as individuals in the marketplace and then onto corporations and government. Corporations were more than happy to do business with South Africa until the pressure from people became too much to bear.

The business owner who doesn't like serving a customer because of their race, religion, gender etc is harmed much less when forced to serve that person than the would-be customer who has to find another place that will serve him/her is harmed.

Says you. The problem with your "says you" strategy is that it's none of your damn business to try to balance harms here. On the one side we have inconvenience and hurt feelings and on the other side we have violation of human rights and potential oppression of human rights.

It's funny how you don't apply this same logic to abortion issues. The woman's right to abort is not up to vote by strangers deciding for her how the harms balance out between her and her fetus and the father and other people in her life and society. Why don't you make the argument that her right to control her own body is not supreme?

Anti-discrimination laws secure individual's right to be treated as an equal human being who is judged by his/her behavior, not by an irrational prejudice.

1.) Right to be treated . .. human rights run into problems in formulation when they are dependent on forcing action onto others. You have a right to believe in the god of your choice and that right isn't dependent on me to do anything. You have a right to free speech and you can say what you believe and that right doesn't force me to listen to you. Your "right" to be treated "equally" though is different, now your "right" compels me, a free citizen, to act in some particular manner when I would rather not. Your right to be treated equally is not a right because it violates other people's actual human rights.

2 a.) It's not up to you to judge whether a belief is rational or irrational; and
2 b) Are you implying that a "rational" prejudice voids this imaginary right to be treated equally?
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Property rights and the right to ones own labor only bothers those that want to impose their will on others.
Yea, like those who oppose abortion. ****ing evangelical bigots just cant keep out of other people's lives.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Yea, like those who oppose abortion. ****ing evangelical bigots just cant keep out of other people's lives.

Abortion is a completely different non related topic.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Yea, like those who oppose abortion. ****ing evangelical bigots just cant keep out of other people's lives.

Did you take the wrong exit? This isn't the abortion forum and this thread isn't about abortion.

Look, it's cool, just don't drive the next time you get drunk.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

I'm not understanding why you're so hostile to Christians and why you are similarly hostile to human rights.
Christians are not the problem. Bigots are ans they exist in every walk of life, but it is especially hypocritical when relf righteous self proclaimed Christians spread hate instead of love.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Why not? That doesnt hurt anyone. Now killing every black person that comes in the store is something to be dealt with seriously. Not selling a black person a carton of milk isnt an actbof violence nor does it victimize anyone.

Unless you are a black person and believe that as an American citizen you have the right to go into any establishment open for business and buy whatever it is they are selling. I know this is a radical concept, bordering on Marxism, for those of you on the Far Right. For the rest of us, it seems a pretty basic right of living in the United States.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Abortion is a completely different non related topic.

Everything is always different to you folks on the Far Right when it's your ox being gored.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Unless you are a black person and believe that as an American citizen you have the right to go into any establishment open for business and buy whatever it is they are selling. I know this is a radical concept, bordering on Marxism, for those of you on the Far Right. For the rest of us, it seems a pretty basic right of living in the United States.

I'm not on the far right.

And even if I was black, I wouldn't feel I had the right to walk onto anyone's property am deman their service.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

I'm not on the far right.

And even if I was black, I wouldn't feel I had the right to walk onto anyone's property am deman their service.

You are a libertarian. That is the very definition of Far Right.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Unless you are a black person and believe that as an American citizen you have the right to go into any establishment open for business and buy whatever it is they are selling.

Yes, sometimes people are wrong and believe people are here on this earth to serve them. It happens.

I know this is a radical concept, bordering on Marxism, for those of you on the Far Right. For the rest of us, it seems a pretty basic right of living in the United States.

Yeah, throughout history people thought forcing other people into service for them was a human right.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Unless you are a black person and believe that as an American citizen you have the right to go into any establishment open for business and buy whatever it is they are selling.

Unless you're a Star-Trek uniform wearing nerd and believe that you, as an American citizen, have the right to date any woman you choose and it would be wrong and discriminatory on the part of these women to judge you for who you are and discriminate against you by refusing to date you. Their hatred of men who wear Star-Trek uniforms, not to mention Star-Trek approved jammies, is an irrational hatred that society shouldn't tolerate.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

You are a libertarian. That is the very definition of Far Right.

No it isn't. "Extremely conservative" would be the definition of far right.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Did you take the wrong exit?
Why because I recognized how far and wide religious bigots spread their influence?

This isn't the abortion forum and this thread isn't about abortion.
Nobody said it is.

Look, it's cool, just don't drive the next time you get drunk.
Yea it is cool, now take your advice and shove it. BTW, did I strike a nerve?
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Unless you are a black person and believe that as an American citizen you have the right to go into any establishment open for business and buy whatever it is they are selling. I know this is a radical concept, bordering on Marxism, for those of you on the Far Right. For the rest of us, it seems a pretty basic right of living in the United States.

Maybe the folks YOU hang around with mistakenly think that, but the rest of us not so much. There are plenty of businesses not open to the general public. Hey, you know CostCo? It requires a membership.
 
Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Why because I recognized how far and wide religious bigots spread their influence?

Nobody said it is.

Yea it is cool, now take your advice and shove it. BTW, did I strike a nerve?

Abortion has nothing to do with this topic and it would be great if you would recognize that.
 
Back
Top Bottom