• 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

There is no such thing as a right to discriminate, or the freedom to not be discriminated against. There are only property rights and the property owner's ability to choose who he sells his property to. That, of course, does not protect him from the consequences of his choices. If his customers see him as bigoted and stop buying from him, that's a consequence of his actions and one he has to deal with. So I don't really like either answer because nobody really has the "right" to discriminate. Go ahead, discriminate I could care less. As a gay woman myself, if I were to see a "No Homos" sign up in a store window my absolute last thought would be "the government needs to force them to serve me." My thought, instead, would be to blast them to all their customers and boycott their services. If you're going to be a bigot and not serve blacks or gays, be prepared for the full force of societal anger and outrage of which I will be at the head of. I may not want government intervening, but that doesn't mean I'm okay with it.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
Knock yourself out. Don't let me stop you from discriminating but if you own a business, you can put that hatred aside to sell your goods to 'people'.
Click to expand...

Picking who you commence in commerce with is your right, so no, I don't see any reason to tell people to put aside their reasons for not doing so.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

TeleKat said:
There is no such thing as a right to discriminate, or the freedom to not be discriminated against. There are only property rights and the property owner's ability to choose who he sells his property to. That, of course, does not protect him from the consequences of his choices. If his customers see him as bigoted and stop buying from him, that's a consequence of his actions and one he has to deal with. So I don't really like either answer because nobody really has the "right" to discriminate. Go ahead, discriminate I could care less. As a gay woman myself, if I were to see a "No Homos" sign up in a store window my absolute last thought would be "the government needs to force them to serve me." My thought, instead, would be to blast them to all their customers and boycott their services. If you're going to be a bigot and not serve blacks or gays, be prepared for the full force of societal anger and outrage of which I will be at the head of. I may not want government intervening, but that doesn't mean I'm okay with it.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but the laws are already on the books and it does more good than harm. There are plenty of places that would love to discriminate.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Henrin said:
How do you have the freedom to make choices in your life towards your own person and your property if you can't discriminate? The real harm of these laws is that they fundamentally violate the sovereignty of people.
Click to expand...
You have that right, in your private business or private life, just not if you're a public business.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

TeleKat said:
There is no such thing as a right to discriminate, or the freedom to not be discriminated against. There are only property rights and the property owner's ability to choose who he sells his property to. That, of course, does not protect him from the consequences of his choices. If his customers see him as bigoted and stop buying from him, that's a consequence of his actions and one he has to deal with. So I don't really like either answer because nobody really has the "right" to discriminate. Go ahead, discriminate I could care less. As a gay woman myself, if I were to see a "No Homos" sign up in a store window my absolute last thought would be "the government needs to force them to serve me." My thought, instead, would be to blast them to all their customers and boycott their services. If you're going to be a bigot and not serve blacks or gays, be prepared for the full force of societal anger and outrage of which I will be at the head of. I may not want government intervening, but that doesn't mean I'm okay with it.
Click to expand...

What do you mean you'd rather solve the problem through informed consumerism and intelligent interaction!!!?? Don't you see, only the government can save us!
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

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

Generally, the only places where one has a right to discriminate is in one's home (or other non-public property) or in a private membership club
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Henrin said:
Picking who you commence in commerce with is your right, so no, I don't see any reason to tell people to put aside their reasons for not doing so.
Click to expand...

No, it's not. Can an ER doctor turn you away if you were sick or dying because he hates your religion? No, he can't as any person selling a good or service cannot.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
No, it's not. Can an ER doctor turn you away if you were sick or dying because he hates your religion? No, he can't as any person selling a good or service cannot.
Click to expand...

I think there's reasonable exception for emergency services wherein one's life is truly on the line, as refusal of service will in fact infringe upon right. But if you're talking about a cupcake...that's a bit different than emergency surgery.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Ikari said:
I think there's reasonable exception for emergency services wherein one's life is truly on the line, as refusal of service will in fact infringe upon right. But if you're talking about a cupcake...that's a bit different than emergency surgery.
Click to expand...

Why? If a person is low on gas and is near the only gas station in town that says 'No Blacks Allowed' and your black, that would be fine?
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
No, it's not. Can an ER doctor turn you away if you were sick or dying because he hates your religion? No, he can't as any person selling a good or service cannot.
Click to expand...

Of course. He owns his labor and because of that he can very much deny whomever he feels like his service.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Summerwind said:
You have that right, in your private business or private life, just not if you're a public business.
Click to expand...

No, in all cases whatsoever.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Henrin said:
Of course. He owns his labor and because of that he can very much deny whomever he feels like his service.
Click to expand...

And this is why we have laws ladies and gentlemen.:smash:
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
Why? If a person is low on gas and is near the only gas station in town that says 'No Blacks Allowed' and your black, that would be fine?
Click to expand...

Depends on the situation. Likely that wouldn't happen as consumerism would keep those places out of business. But again, a cupcake is not an emergency appendectomy.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
And this is why we have laws ladies and gentlemen.:smash:
Click to expand...

Because we need people to be slaves? :lol:
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Ikari said:
Depends on the situation. Likely that wouldn't happen as consumerism would keep those places out of business. But again, a cupcake is not an emergency appendectomy.
Click to expand...

No, it's not but what does that say to people? Imagine a child wanting a simple drink at a water fountain and being denied because he/she is black. It happened and could easily happen again if we took those laws off the books.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Glen Contrarian said:
The problem with that concept is, it doesn't work. It simply. does. not. work.

Why? Business A says "no blacks"...so no blacks (and a significant amount of whites) don't go in there...but enough whites who are either racist or somehow want to defend their brand of libertarianism go in there to keep it afloat. This WOULD happen in the Deep South, because there's more than enough white racists (like those in my own family) who would keep that business afloat.

So racist Business A stays afloat. The blacks get ticked off and open racist Business B that says "no whites". All of a sudden more whites go to whites-only...and more blacks go to blacks-only...and it spirals downhill from there. And we're back to a capitalistic form of Jim Crow.

Not only that, but black person C decides he's going to refuse to leave racist Business A...and so racist Business A calls the cops who wind up forcibly removing black person C...and all of a sudden we have not only government-ENFORCED racism, but race riots just like those we had in the 1960's...except for now the blacks have a LOT more guns than they did then.

Is that really, truly where you want to go? You can dream all day about how you think it OUGHTA be...but there's a big difference between the way things oughta be...and the way things would be.
Click to expand...

People either have the freedom to believe what they want and to act upon their believes or they do not. What others believe or want is not important, freedom for the individual is. Why should a person, white, black or other ever want to go someplace they are not welcomed. Your black person C is obviously a socialist thinking asshole and not only should be removed, but should be shot for trying to force his views on others and take away a persons freedom of expression.

No, the police are not enforcing racism, they would be enforcing trespass laws.

Government does not exist to enforce on person beliefs upon another, it exists to protect the freedoms of every individual, regardless of their beliefs.

You're correct about the difference in the way things should be and the way they are. After all, Socialist types, like progressives, should never been allowed to force their views on others.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
No, it's not but what does that say to people? Imagine a child wanting a simple drink at a water fountain and being denied because he/she is black. It happened and could easily happen again if we took those laws off the books.
Click to expand...

Well you're going to have to be responsible and consume in a way that discourages those practices. If a man owns a bakery, that's his bakery. If he makes a cupcake, that's his cupcake. Why do you assume ownership of other people's property and labor?
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Ikari said:
Well you're going to have to be responsible and consume in a way that discourages those practices. If a man owns a bakery, that's his bakery. If he makes a cupcake, that's his cupcake. Why do you assume ownership of other people's property and labor?
Click to expand...

That's not assuming ownership. That is a leap. He still gets to keep the money for his labor and if he wants to express his hatred, he is free to contribute that money to any hate group he likes.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

ecofarm said:
The reason some do not care about freedom from unjust discrimination is they're white and suffer no such threat on a societal level. The world ends at their nose.
Click to expand...

That's probably true . Guilty as charged.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
That's not assuming ownership. That is a leap. He still gets to keep the money for his labor and if he wants to express his hatred, he is free to contribute that money to any hate group he likes.
Click to expand...

It is assuming ownership, because you are demanding it and using the guns of government to obtain it. You are taking command of his labor and telling him what he can and cannot use it for. He owns a place, you assume access to it. He owns a cupcake, you assume ownership of it. You make demands and restrictions on property and labor and assume ownership of it. It's the only way to justify using the force of government against a man that wouldn't give you his cupcake in the first place. You're entitled to that cupcake, it's yours, and if he doesn't give it to you, well by gods you can use the guns of government to force him. That's the thought process. You should understand the ramifications of the philosophy you propose.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Ikari said:
What do you mean you'd rather solve the problem through informed consumerism and intelligent interaction!!!?? Don't you see, only the government can save us!
Click to expand...

That would make some measure of sense if we could imagine that men are more than capable of being rationale and doing the right thing. As they cannot, the only thing men understand is law and the boot of the State.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

MaggieD said:
No. It is at that point that we have a government-enforced right not to be discriminated against.

If you are serving the public, you do not have (and should not have) the right to discriminate. What you do in your home, on the sidewalk, in your car, at establishments other than your own public business/organization is completely up to you. Choose to associate, not to associate, to call names, to defend . . . whatever. But when you have a business or organization that serves the public? Your right to discriminate in your business or organization is over-ridden by my right not to be discriminated against.
Click to expand...

You don't have a right to have people accept or like or serve you even if they are in business. I discriminate in my business who I am going to serve and who I don't. For one I don't serve gang members or those I perceive to be gang members. They can sue all they want. They will NEVER be served by me or my business. My not serving you does nothing to any of your rights. Your forcing me to serve you infringes on my freedom to associate. Unless the business entity is a government made one such as a public corporation no business should cater to those they don't desire to. Its obvious as to why a government should be allowed to have its workers discriminate.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Fiddytree said:
That would make some measure of sense if we could imagine that men are more than capable of being rationale and doing the right thing. As they cannot, the only thing men understand is law and the boot of the State.
Click to expand...

Mmmm, so people can't rule themselves, thus we must have aggressive, forceful government make people behave the way you define to be right. Nice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom