• 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

ernst barkmann said:
that's true you have a right to commerce....however you have no right, to exercise that right through me.
Click to expand...

Then it sounds like a throw back to living in a feudal system.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Henrin said:
I didn't consent to engage in trade with them. Both parties need to consent to engage in trade.
Click to expand...

No, if you are selling goods to the public you don't get to decide who is worthy of your business.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
That is exactly what discrimination is though. It is based on emotions.
Click to expand...

that's true, it is based on emotion, that's why it an unconstitutional law.....because it does not protect the rights of people, its government dictating behavior for business owners, which the government has no authority to do...government is not a moral entity.

to tell us how to behave, what to drink, eat, smoke, or who to sleep with.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
No, if you are selling goods to the public you don't get to decide who is worthy of your business.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I still have the right. The government can't remove my rights.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
Then it sounds like a throw back to living in a feudal system.
Click to expand...


if you had a right, to make me do something........then I would be subservient to you.....that is close to being a slave, and an unconstitutional act.

there are no rights , which lay a cost or burden on another citizen.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

ernst barkmann said:
that's true, it is based on emotion, that's why it an unconstitutional law.....because it does not protect the rights of people, its government dictating behavior for business owners, which the government has no authority to do...government is not a moral entity.

to tell us how to behave, what to drink, eat, smoke, or who to sleep with.
Click to expand...

No, I didn't say government should tell you what to drink, eat or smoke.....I just said that if you make an obligation to sell goods/services to the public then you should treat the public as equals. Not really such a hard concept.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
No, I didn't say government should tell you what to drink, eat or smoke.....I just said that if you make an obligation to sell goods/services to the public then you should treat the public as equals. Not really such a hard concept.
Click to expand...

Maybe I want to run a business and not a club. Ever think of that?

Maybe I'm forced to sign the damn business license because otherwise the government won't allow me to use my property as a business.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Federalist said:
No I'm not accusing you personally of doing so. You have clearly stated that you would feel justified only in either patronizing or boycotting the bigoted shopkeeper, not in violating his body or property in order to coerce some desired behavior.

So my question is: Why? Why do you feel you don't have the right to violate his body or property in order to coerce him into doing business with redheads?
Click to expand...

It's not anyone elses' property, so where is the validation for that force? If the denial of service directly violates the rights of another, then there is argument for force. But if not, then there's really not.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

I am not advocating anyone be discriminated against..to me, its a abomination......however as someone who follows constitutional law...I have by my principles when it comes to rights , that I stand by all people's rights...not by people being offended.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Henrin said:
Sorry, but I still have the right. The government can't remove my rights.
Click to expand...

You don't have the right to harm someone. You also don't have the right to discriminate against someone if you are selling goods to the public. Pretty darn simple.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
You don't have the right to harm someone. You also don't have the right to discriminate against someone if you are selling goods to the public. Pretty darn simple.
Click to expand...

What harm am I causing by denying them service again? Btw, if it was legal and I knew someone supported anti-discrimination laws I would charge them triple for everything in my store. Why? Because I don't like them and I will be damned if they get anything from me for cheap.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
No, I didn't say government should tell you what to drink, eat or smoke.....I just said that if you make an obligation to sell goods/services to the public then you should treat the public as equals. Not really such a hard concept.
Click to expand...

Should of, would of, could of. None of which are proper basis for law. Violation of rights is proper basis for law. One has no obligation to sell goods to anyone, even if they have a shop. Of course to remain a business, it is in your interest to sell goods and services, but there's no obligation to do so.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

ernst barkmann said:
if you had a right, to make me do something........then I would be subservient to you.....that is close to being a slave, and an unconstitutional act.

there are no rights , which lay a cost or burden on another citizen.
Click to expand...


That's just ridiculous. What you want is someone to be subservient to you if you are a merchant, as if a merchant is above anyone. I'm just advocating for equal treatment.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

ernst barkmann said:
I am not advocating anyone be discriminated against..to me, its a abomination......however as someone who follows constitutional law...I have by my principles when it comes to rights , that I stand by all people's rights...not by people being offended.
Click to expand...

It's a hard position to take since it means arguing for actions you may dislike quite a lot. But IMO it's proper because it's the only way to maintain freedom.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
That's just ridiculous. What you want is someone to be subservient to you if you are a merchant, as if a merchant is above anyone. I'm just advocating for equal treatment.
Click to expand...

No, you are advocating merchants be slaves to others and not be able to decide on which transactions they consent to or not.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
That's just ridiculous. What you want is someone to be subservient to you if you are a merchant, as if a merchant is above anyone. I'm just advocating for equal treatment.
Click to expand...

No you're not. Your advocating general public ownership of private property and labor.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Ikari said:
It's not anyone elses' property, so where is the validation for that force? If the denial of service directly violates the rights of another, then there is argument for force. But if not, then there's really not.
Click to expand...

Um, that can be debated. If you own a gas station, do you own the gas in the ground? The bottle water that Poland Spring markets?
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Henrin said:
No, you are advocating merchants be slaves to others and not be able to decide on which transactions they consent to or not.
Click to expand...

Some people do not understand the fundamentals of the philosophy they push. The "feel good" stuff often times comes at costs of rights, but it won't be acknowledge. The base of what is being advocated, that private property and labor is not the sole possession of the individual, but of the aggregate public; that's the bottom line. Communist BS.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Ikari said:
No you're not. Your advocating general public ownership of private property and labor.
Click to expand...

No, people are advocating equal protection in the public sphere.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
Um, that can be debated. If you own a gas station, do you own the gas in the ground? The bottle water that Poland Spring markets?
Click to expand...

I would own the gas I bought and paid for that is stored in my station, yes.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
No, I didn't say government should tell you what to drink, eat or smoke.....I just said that if you make an obligation to sell goods/services to the public then you should treat the public as equals. Not really such a hard concept.
Click to expand...

obligation?......I am only bound when I make contract.

rights come before anything......the bill of rights came after the constitution, and it stated government would make no laws infringing on the rights of people..one right being property... mentioned twice in the constitution.

government has no authority by constitutional law, to make a law abolishing my right to property in any way.

in fact the congress according to constitutional law, has no authority period on state or private property, per article 1 section 8 clause 17, and the convention notes, on that clause ..dated sept 5 1787.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

ecofarm said:
No, people are advocating equal protection in the public sphere.
Click to expand...

No, they are advocating ownership of another's property and labor. Equal protection is already there, the rights of the individual are upheld. If the denial of service violates rights, force can be used. But not all denial of service violates rights and when it doesn't, it's game on.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

ernst barkmann said:
I am not advocating anyone be discriminated against..to me, its a abomination......however as someone who follows constitutional law...I have by my principles when it comes to rights , that I stand by all people's rights...not by people being offended.
Click to expand...

So, if someone runs out of gas next to your gas station and you deny them gas because you don't like their race, should they be concerned because they are offended or because they need to get home and want to purchase the gas you sell? If you just want to offend someone wear an offensive shirt but not selling them the gas is unethical to trade.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

ernst barkmann said:
obligation?......I am only bound when I make contract.
Click to expand...

You made a contract when you chose to utilize public resources in the commission of business that you voluntarily declared open to the public.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

ecofarm said:
You made a contract when you chose to utilize public resources in the commission of business that you voluntarily declared open to the public.
Click to expand...

What public resources? Did the public buy the building? Does the public pay the property taxes? Does the public pay for the utilities?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom