• 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

Ikari said:
No, they are advocating ownership of another's property and labor.
Click to expand...

Not at all. People are advocating equal protection in the public sphere.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Ikari said:
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.
Click to expand...

with liberty comes many things a person does not like.....
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Ikari said:
What public resources? Did the public buy the building? Does the public pay the property taxes? Does the public pay for the utilities?
Click to expand...

You know the road that leads to the business? You didn't build that.
 
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...

The tanks in a gas stations are filled with gas that was bought by the gas station owners, so yes, that gas is the property of the owners of the gas station. How did you think the gas station acquired the gas exactly?
 
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...

how did I do that...I obtain a tax i.d. number for tax purposes.

I get regulated by government to see if I maintain health and safety standards, ..when did I contract, to not be rude or offend?
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Ikari said:
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.
Click to expand...

Yes, equal protection is already there and needed as seen by some attitudes.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

ecofarm said:
You know the road that leads to the business? You didn't build that.
Click to expand...

Sure didn't, but sure as hell paid for it. By that logic, my own house would be "public sphere" because it's on a road. But it's not, so we know that argument is crap. What else you got? Fire Department? Police? Also paid for by taxes, public is not providing anything more than the individual has already bought.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
Yes, equal protection is already there and needed as seen by some attitudes.
Click to expand...

Indeed it is, the rights of the individual must be upheld else we lose the Republic. Grandiose use of government force against individuals not violating rights is a great way to endorse tyranny over a people.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Henrin said:
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.
Click to expand...

What harm? People need services to live in our society and we mostly depend on purchasing them. People could be denied all kinds of necessary services if we allowed discrimination.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
What harm? People need services to live in our society and we mostly depend on purchasing them. People could be denied all kinds of necessary services if we allowed discrimination.
Click to expand...

If you can prove a rights violation, you can argue for force. But it's a case by case basis. Just because denying emergency care would infringe upon the rights of the individual doesn't mean that being denied a cupcake does.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
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.
Click to expand...

in my mind that would depend, goes not selling them gas, cause them physical harm, put them in danger, cause lost of life?

these things have to be considered.

example: a private hospital cannot refuse service, because it could cause lost of life, harm to a person....these are part of health and safety to the public.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Ikari said:
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.
Click to expand...

Any kind of business one does is an obligation they make. If one decides to serve the public, then their obligation is to serve the public.
 
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...

To sell goods to the public is being a slave?
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
Any kind of business one does is an obligation they make. If one decides to serve the public, then their obligation is to serve the public.
Click to expand...

A private business owner is not a public servant. They are not obligated to serve the public at large. When you sign a lease, it comes with no obligation to serve everybody. It comes with the obligation to pay your lease.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
To sell goods to the public is being a slave?
Click to expand...

If you assume ownership of their property and labor, yes. Because that means they do not own their property and labor, not in full at least.
 
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...

Public ownership would mean any profit being made would go back to the public. It does not mean treating people like equals.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

How about this.

You own a place of business, and an individual comes in who stinks to high heavens.

Do you have a right to ask him to leave, or do you have to serve him because otherwise it would be to discriminate against stinky people?
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
Public ownership would mean any profit being made would go back to the public. It does not mean treating people like equals.
Click to expand...

No, public ownership would mean that the public had authority over another's property and labor and may direct it. Which is what you're advocating.

Really, you need to at least understand that which you are advocating.
 
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...

can you explain how I am making you subservient to me.....since you came to me, your own my property, your wanting something from me....and you have the ability to walk out of by business at any time.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Ikari said:
I would own the gas I bought and paid for that is stored in my station, yes.
Click to expand...

I actually know someone who owns a gas station and they would disagree with you. They depend on making transaction to pay back those that supply the gas and hope to make a small profit, because the gas supplier gets paid for his gas.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Ikari said:
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.
Click to expand...

I don't know if you ever heard some on the left claim property like lakes , which a property owner pays taxes on, are not his but the public's.

and they claim they can cross your property at any time, and use the lake your paying for thru taxes, which is on your land.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
I actually know someone who owns a gas station and they would disagree with you. They depend on making transaction to pay back those that supply the gas and hope to make a small profit, because the gas supplier gets paid for his gas.
Click to expand...

They are more than free to disagree, and as I have stated before it is in the general interest of a business to do commerce. But it's still their gas. So moving goal posts doesn't really do anything here.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

ernst barkmann said:
I don't know if you ever heard some on the left claim property like lakes , which a property owner pays taxes on, are not his but the public's.

and they claim they can cross your property at any time, and use the lake your paying for thru taxes, which is on your land.
Click to expand...

Lots of people like to feel entitled to your stuff. Usually it's because they're too lazy to get their own stuff.
 
Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

rabbitcaebannog said:
Yeah, like a merchant making a transaction with people they may discriminate against.
Click to expand...

that's true we agree, for once......but that is the price of liberty..

I know you have been offended by things people say, however they have a right to say them.

free speech is the ability to say things other do not like, if we all agreed in our speech, there would be no need for a right to free speech.

liberty allows us to be offensive to others.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom