• 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!

Two black men arrested at Philly Starbucks for trespassing

SheWolf said:
Starbucks Ceos are meeting for a face to face apology with the men. If they tried to press charges, they would get double the scruinty.
Click to expand...

Which is why the CEO, upper management did not press charges. That does not change the fact that they could do so, especially if other information came out. Pressing charges would have been very bad PR regardless of how technically legally able they could have been in pressing those charges.
 
americanwoman said:
That's your opinion.
Click to expand...

That's not merely "my opinion". It is a principle, one that many people agree with. Pray-tell, why do you think the government gets to meddle in private people's affairs? Why is it any of the government's business whether people want to be racist or not?

Other people have decided not to stand for racists.
Click to expand...

"That's your opinion." See? I can play this game, too.
 
Wan said:
That's not merely "my opinion". It is a principle, one that many people agree with. Pray-tell, why do you think the government gets to meddle in private people's affairs? Why is it any of the government's business whether people want to be racist or not?



"That's your opinion." See? I can play this game, too.
Click to expand...

It's not an opinion - there are actual anti-discrimination laws in place that show as a fact other people have decided not to stand for racists. Try to play again.
 
americanwoman said:
It's not an opinion - there are actual anti-discrimination laws in place that show as a fact other people have decided not to stand for racists. Try to play again.
Click to expand...

You didn't answer my questions.

Why do you think the government gets to meddle in private people's affairs? Why is it any of the government's business whether people want to be racist or not?
 
Wan said:
You didn't answer my questions.

Why do you think the government gets to meddle in private people's affairs? Why is it any of the government's business whether people want to be racist or not?
Click to expand...

The government doesn't meddle in private peoples affairs. You are free to be a racist all you want in your own private life. Use the computer you are on to look up anti-discrimination laws.
 
Wan said:
You didn't answer my questions.

Why do you think the government gets to meddle in private people's affairs? Why is it any of the government's business whether people want to be racist or not?
Click to expand...

The term you're looking for is "public accommodation laws" and is the reason we've seen a sharp drop in "no coloreds" signs in front of restaurants. You should Google it so you're not so baffled and demand we explain it to you.
 
americanwoman said:
The government doesn't meddle in private peoples affairs.
Click to expand...

The government telling people not to be racist is meddling in private people's affairs. How I act around and how I treat other people are strictly my own private business.

What is your definition of "private business", anyway? I just want to make sure we are on the same page.


You are free to be a racist all you want in your own private life.
Click to expand...

The Constitution does not say people can only be racist in their own private life, and this is good enough for me. It means people can be racist in public, too.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
The term you're looking for is "public accommodation laws" and is the reason we've seen a sharp drop in "no coloreds" signs in front of restaurants. You should Google it so you're not so baffled and demand we explain it to you.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the condescension. But you still did not prove to me why the government gets to meddle in private people's businesses by passing these public accommodation laws. You told me about the existence of these laws, however you have yet to prove that these laws are just. But before we go on, I just want to ask you what your definition of "private business" is. Just want to make sure we are on the same page.

Also, seeing a sharp drop in "no coloureds" signs is not necessarily a good thing.
 
Last edited:
Wan said:
Thanks for the condescension. But you still did not prove to me why the government gets to meddle in private people's businesses by passing these public accommodation laws. You told me about the existence of these laws, however you have yet to prove that these laws are just. But before we go on, I just want to ask you what your definition of "private business" is. Just want to make sure we are on the same page.

Also, seeing a sharp drop in "no coloureds" signs is not necessarily a good thing.
Click to expand...

I don't have to explain **** to you past what I already did. You asked why the government gets to do this and I told you why. It's obvious that the drop in "no coloreds" signs greatly bothers you so no amount of explaining or reasoning with you will be productive.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
I don't have to explain **** to you past what I already did. You asked why the government gets to do this and I told you why. It's obvious that the drop in "no coloreds" signs greatly bothers you so no amount of explaining or reasoning with you will be productive.
Click to expand...

You didn't tell me jack. You only proved to me that these laws exist. You did not prove that these laws are just.
 
Wan said:
You didn't tell me jack. You only proved to me that these laws exist. You did not prove that these laws are just.
Click to expand...

I answered your question WHY, it's not my job to try to convince an immoral racist why the rest of society isn't as racist as him. If you open a business to the public in the US you have to open it to the public. If you want to say "no Jews or blacks" you can be a private business that hand picks his clientele. You're not a victim, just a racist.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
I answered your question WHY,
Click to expand...

You only think you did. But the fact is you didn't. Apparently, you think telling me about the existence of public accommodation laws amounts to proving that they are just.

it's not my job to try to convince an immoral racist why the rest of society isn't as racist as him.
Click to expand...

I am actually a minority.

If you open a business to the public in the US you have to open it to the public. If you want to say "no Jews or blacks" you can be a private business that hand picks his clientele.
Click to expand...

I don't think this is true. But then again, I am not an American, so you could be right. However, based on my passing knowledge about your country, I think a business like that would encounter so much public outcry, it'd fail. And if it doesn't, it will very likely be shut down by the government.

You're not a victim, just a racist.
Click to expand...

I am not white. You and people like you like to apply social pressure to cow people into falling in line, though. Just call someone "racist" till he does things your way, right?
 
Acadia said:
Nope. Starbucks isn't a full, table-service dining establishment. No one seats you and the SOP isn't to sit, be greeter by a server, receive a menu, order and dine/drink. Lots of customers order to go. That's why you purchase THEN get access to the bathroom.
Please, if you're black, white or purple with green polka dots, you should know this.
Unless you think the rules don't apply to you, of course.
Click to expand...

And if that policy is only enforced against specific ethnic or demographic groups it is being used in a racist/bigoted manner. Had it been enforced equally there would be no issue. But as it appears at least in this case it was not being enforced equally.
 
Wan said:
You only think you did. But the fact is you didn't. Apparently, you think telling me about the existence of public accommodation laws amounts to proving that they are just.



I am actually a minority.



I don't think this is true. But then again, I am not an American, so you could be right. However, based on my passing knowledge about your country, I think a business like that would encounter so much public outcry, it'd fail. And if it doesn't, it will very likely be shut down by the government.



I am not white. You and people like you like to apply social pressure to cow people into falling in line, though. Just call someone "racist" till he does things your way, right?
Click to expand...

If you're not even an American then stfu and realize we're not racist ****s here. Be glad you don't live in a land where races coexist, the horror.
 
roguenuke said:
Which is why the CEO, upper management did not press charges. That does not change the fact that they could do so, especially if other information came out. Pressing charges would have been very bad PR regardless of how technically legally able they could have been in pressing those charges.
Click to expand...

DA said no. They could not press charges; not their choice anyway. The men were asked to leave for a fake reason. The grounds for trespass were "black".

the district attorney's office declined to press charges due to a "lack of evidence that a crime was committed."
Click to expand...

http://6abc.com/what-a-witness-says-happened-during-phila-starbucks-arrests/3342444/


Enough victim blaming.
 
Last edited:
RabidAlpaca said:
If you're not even an American then stfu and realize we're not racist ****s here. Be glad you don't live in a land where races coexist, the horror.
Click to expand...

Where I live, which is Canada, it's very multi-cultural. There are all types of races where I live.
 
Wan said:
Where I live, which is Canada, it's very multi-cultural. There are all types of races where I live.
Click to expand...

Guess what, there are public accommodation laws in Canada too. If you'd like to remold the world into one where one race dominates the others I suggest you move or get a time machine.
 
ecofarm said:
DA said no. They could not press charges; not their choice anyway. The men were asked to leave for a fake reason. The grounds for trespass were "black".



http://6abc.com/what-a-witness-says-happened-during-phila-starbucks-arrests/3342444/


Enough victim blaming.
Click to expand...

"The Philadelphia Starbucks store where the arrest occurred has a rule in place that customers can only use restrooms if they purchase something. Such rules would allow Starbucks to ask people to leave — under federal law, businesses like Starbucks can refuse service for reasons other than discrimination." Want to Use the Starbucks Bathroom? These Are Your Rights | Time
 
PirateMk1 said:
I have been asked to leave. Once. I left. Those guys were ASKED politely to leave, several times they REFUSED. As far as I am concerned those guys were douche bags and EARNED their arrest.
Click to expand...

They were being abused. Getting the cops involved was smart.
 
RabidAlpaca said:
Guess what, there are public accommodation laws in Canada too. If you'd like to remold the world into one where one race dominates the others I suggest you move or get a time machine.
Click to expand...

Let's say you open up a coffee shop and it becomes just as successful as your average Starbucks. Over time you notice a lot of people coming in and using your restroom and sitting around taking up tables and not purchasing anything. Sometimes there are paying customers who open the door, see the place packed, and leave because there's no space. Would this be fine with you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom