Behold the dream.
Advertisement

by Genivaria » Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:58 pm

by Telconi » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:01 pm
Senkaku wrote:Telconi wrote:
Who said anything about shooting?
A's opposed to your meme of everybody having a conical white hat hidden away just waiting for there to be no equal accommodation laws so they can go out and get them colored folks.
I fail to see what's so outrageous about suggesting that discrimination would once again become problematic if we repealed those laws. It was a problem before, and society hasn't suddenly transformed into a magical place where everyone fuckin' sings Kumbaya and holds hands yet, so it'd probably be a problem after they got repealed again. It already pops up even with the law in place (see: this incident and zillions like it). Unless you're suggesting racism, sexism, religious intolerance, homophobia, and general ignorance have all literally been solved completely?
Even if you don't care about people being denied service or treated as second-class citizens, or if you think "the market shall provide" and create new businesses where excluded people can exclude their excluders instead, you should be concerned about the fracturing effect that would have on society. American society is already atomized enough as it is.
Anyways- we made the laws for a damn good reason, I see no reason to take them off the books besides some whiny-ass people wanting to be able to stick it to groups they don't like under the guise of the free market (as usual).

by The East Marches II » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:05 pm

by Neanderthaland » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:08 pm

by Genivaria » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:09 pm

by Telconi » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:12 pm
Neanderthaland wrote:Telconi wrote:
Oh heavens! A bad Yelp review! Do people seriously look on Yelp for reviews before decoding where to buy a damn coffee?
I mean, it's not like false allegations from right-wing propaganda mills have ever gotten anyone shot before...

by Telconi » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:13 pm

by Rusozak » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:15 pm
Neanderthaland wrote:Telconi wrote:
Oh heavens! A bad Yelp review! Do people seriously look on Yelp for reviews before decoding where to buy a damn coffee?
I mean, it's not like false allegations from right-wing propaganda mills have ever gotten anyone shot before...

by Thermodolia » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:16 pm

by Telconi » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:16 pm
Rusozak wrote:
That's probably why the larger, more credible news sources are refusing to get involved. It'd just be fanning the flames, even if they made it clear there was no proof yet.
On an unrelated note, can we all agree as a nation to stop calling conspiracies and scandals something-gate?

by Telconi » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:17 pm

by Omnonia » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:17 pm
Telconi wrote:Wait, allowing people to freely associate is "fracturing" but using the police to force them together is a good thing?

by Genivaria » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:29 pm



by Telconi » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:38 pm

by Greater USA » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:42 pm

by Senkaku » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:49 pm
Greater USA wrote:Businesses have a right to serve and deny service on their own whim. Period.
I'd boycott any baker that refuses to make products for gay people. But I don't think they should be coerced under threat of lawsuit to do so. That violates personal liberty.

by Infected Mushroom » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:50 pm
San Lumen wrote:Infected Mushroom wrote:
Because of commercial freedom, freedom of contract, principles of free market (voluntary transactions).
So long as the government is obligated to serve everyone equally, there's no risk of going back to the 1960s. Today's businesses (the vast majority) value profit above all else anyways.
And you know this how? Go take a visit to the South sometime. Racism is still very prevalent there. If they had the opportunity i bet many of them would exclude non whites.
If you have a business you serve all or none at all. If you want to discriminate open a private club.

by Neutraligon » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:50 pm
Greater USA wrote:Businesses have a right to serve and deny service on their own whim. Period.
I'd boycott any baker that refuses to make products for gay people. But I don't think they should be coerced under threat of lawsuit to do so. That violates personal liberty.

by Infected Mushroom » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:51 pm
Neutraligon wrote:Greater USA wrote:Businesses have a right to serve and deny service on their own whim. Period.
I'd boycott any baker that refuses to make products for gay people. But I don't think they should be coerced under threat of lawsuit to do so. That violates personal liberty.
Then they should not have opened the type of business they did. if they wished to pick and choose their customers they should have made a club, which allows them to sell products, have a brick and mortar store, and choose exactly to whom they sell.

by Telconi » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:56 pm
Neutraligon wrote:Greater USA wrote:Businesses have a right to serve and deny service on their own whim. Period.
I'd boycott any baker that refuses to make products for gay people. But I don't think they should be coerced under threat of lawsuit to do so. That violates personal liberty.
Then they should not have opened the type of business they did. if they wished to pick and choose their customers they should have made a club, which allows them to sell products, have a brick and mortar store, and choose exactly to whom they sell.

by Infected Mushroom » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:58 pm
Telconi wrote:Neutraligon wrote:Then they should not have opened the type of business they did. if they wished to pick and choose their customers they should have made a club, which allows them to sell products, have a brick and mortar store, and choose exactly to whom they sell.
You can have your liberty, you must just jump through fourteen million hoops to get it...

by Greater USA » Mon Oct 09, 2017 10:59 pm
Neutraligon wrote:Greater USA wrote:Businesses have a right to serve and deny service on their own whim. Period.
I'd boycott any baker that refuses to make products for gay people. But I don't think they should be coerced under threat of lawsuit to do so. That violates personal liberty.
Then they should not have opened the type of business they did. if they wished to pick and choose their customers they should have made a club, which allows them to sell products, have a brick and mortar store, and choose exactly to whom they sell.

by Infected Mushroom » Mon Oct 09, 2017 11:00 pm
Neutraligon wrote:Greater USA wrote:Businesses have a right to serve and deny service on their own whim. Period.
I'd boycott any baker that refuses to make products for gay people. But I don't think they should be coerced under threat of lawsuit to do so. That violates personal liberty.
Then they should not have opened the type of business they did. if they wished to pick and choose their customers they should have made a club, which allows them to sell products, have a brick and mortar store, and choose exactly to whom they sell.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Fractalnavel, Vistulange
Advertisement