Should There Be A Right To Discriminate?

[Telconi]

Not at all. I want people to be able to be fired for their beliefs, along with everything else.

You’ve established it many times, to the point of word for word repetition.

at least we agree on that what I do not agree on is someone being fired for being LGBT or a interracial relationship.

Why should they have to hide it out of fear of losing their job? That makes no sense to me. And you will of course say its forcing them to continue a relationship they dont want to be in or something like that.

So there's nothing wrong with firing people for beliefs per se, you just dont want people to be fired for beliefs you agree with?

[Telconi]

Is it or is it not wrong to force relationships upon those that don’t want them?

In a non business setting yes. The government is not and should not be the thought police.

That's what anti-discrimination laws are though...

[Provost 14]

Yes, freedom of association and all that.

amen. beyond that, however, I see no issue for punishing discrimination.

[Ors Might]

Is it or is it not wrong to force relationships upon those that don’t want them?

In a non business setting yes. The government is not and should not be the thought police.

But they should be the thought police in a business setting?

[Bjonk]

I mean I would like this because I get to know up front and as a gay man:

I sure as hell don't wanna work for no homophobes, especially the ones who don't leave it at the damn door when they leave their house like a normal person cause that shit ain't got business in business. They don't get the honor of my business or employment. Fuck them.

[Telconi]

I mean I would like this because I get to know up front and as a gay man:

I sure as hell don't wanna work for no homophobes, especially the ones who don't leave it at the damn door when they leave their house like a normal person cause that shit ain't got business in business. They don't get the honor of my business or employment. Fuck them.

There's this aspect.

[Galloism]

Just to be clear, a business should be within their rights to fire someone that has reprehensible beliefs?

Well a fair number of those who marched in Charlottesville lost their jobs. So the answer is yes. They are under no obligation to condone it.

So let's say someone is under a belief I deserve to burn in a firey hell.

Can I fire them?

[Bjonk]

Well a fair number of those who marched in Charlottesville lost their jobs. So the answer is yes. They are under no obligation to condone it.

So let's say someone is under a belief I deserve to burn in a firey hell.

Can I fire them?

Yeah if they show it all the damn time.

[Galloism]

So let's say someone is under a belief I deserve to burn in a firey hell.

Can I fire them?

Yeah if they show it all the damn time.

Just by wearing a catholic cross or some rosary beads they show it.

[Katganistan]

A complication is not the color of your skin when you walk in the door.
A complication is broken plumbing, an emergency of some sort -- but you know that, you're simply being obtuse.

I've had hotel reservations cancelled for literally "lol we don't have a room for you, sorry" on the night I was scheduled to check in, at the desk...

And they didn't find reservations in another hotel in the brand, nearby, for you? Because that's what's happened to me.

[Telconi]

I've had hotel reservations cancelled for literally "lol we don't have a room for you, sorry" on the night I was scheduled to check in, at the desk...

And they didn't find reservations in another hotel in the brand, nearby, for you? Because that's what's happened to me.

No

[Katganistan]

Apparently airline companies didn't get the memo.

since when can an airline simply decide yeah we are just going to cancel your reservation because we feel like it or dont like you?

Since never that I've known of. They remove people for a variety of reasons including drunkenness, being disruptive or abusive, or overbooking -- but in the last case they don't cancel the reservation, they put you on a later flight, and usually give you "vouchers" toward a future flight, which I find a bit useless. They also put you up for the night if your flight is going to be delayed until the next day.

In the US, no, restaurants cannot refuse to service people based on race.

Neither can hotels.

What does the right to refuse service really mean? (In the US)

Most people here know that.

What they're arguing about isn't whether those measures/laws exist or not, they're arguing about how those laws are infringing on their personal freedoms and forcing a belief they don't agree with upon them.

They can always found their own nation where they can be bigots in peace -- or move to one more in line with their beliefs.

[Bjonk]

Yeah if they show it all the damn time.

Just by wearing a catholic cross or some rosary beads they show it.

Yeah okay if you generalize all christians like that and you want to do that display it on the door n shit try to stay in business thats fine.

[Ors Might]

Most people here know that.

What they're arguing about isn't whether those measures/laws exist or not, they're arguing about how those laws are infringing on their personal freedoms and forcing a belief they don't agree with upon them.

They can always found their own nation where they can be bigots in peace -- or move to one more in line with their beliefs.

Or change the laws in place.

[Telconi]

Most people here know that.

What they're arguing about isn't whether those measures/laws exist or not, they're arguing about how those laws are infringing on their personal freedoms and forcing a belief they don't agree with upon them.

They can always found their own nation where they can be bigots in peace -- or move to one more in line with their beliefs.

Which is a pissy excuse.

[Katganistan]

since when can an airline simply decide yeah we are just going to cancel your reservation because we feel like it or dont like you?

hmmm

That's not "because we feel like it or we don't like you."
They overbooked and the fact that there was a furor about it in the news and that Dr. Dao received $140 million dollars from United Airlines, and that the airlines was further sued by one of the officers it put in that position, should make it clear they can't do that without repercussions.

I know, I know -- knowing the outcome doesn't fit your narrative, so let's pretend they do have an absolute right to do this and not get punished for it.

Well, now you can't pretend like it isn't legal in some instances anymore.

That was not a case of discrimination. That was United Airlines doing something outrageous because they didn’t think to book seats for their employees on the plane

And they paid for it. So I would question the legality.

That was not a case of discrimination. That was United Airlines doing something outrageous because they didn’t think to book seats for their employees on the plane

The post I was responding to claimed reservations are contracts that cannot be broken. I showed that that's false.

Actually, you didn't, as their $140 million dollar settlement with Dr. Dao and the subsequent lawsuit filed by one of the officers put in that position show.

Yes you have.

The business is at least primarily the property of the business owner. Saying that they can’t discriminate in their business is saying they can’t discriminate in an inherently significant chunk of their interactions.

Oh spare me your fake outrage. You wouldn’t complain if a gym refused to hire a quadriplegic.

How am i saying that they can't discriminate outside their their business?

Thats a absurd example. A quadriplegic is not capable of preforming the duties of the job.

So... those KKK guests I keep asking about... what about them?

Being part of a hate group is not a protected class. I think a hotel could legally refuse service too them.

Why, if they are not disruptive?

If they are, certainly they can call the police and have them escorted from the premises, but why refuse them if they are not being disruptive?

They can always found their own nation where they can be bigots in peace -- or move to one more in line with their beliefs.

Which is a pissy excuse.

Why should a minority of people who don't understand what being in a society means, get to dictate to the majority who would like to just live their lives, that they can't?

Why should a minority of people be able to say, "You're not fit to rent a room/eat here/buy clothes here?

The bigots can go and freely associate with other bigots who have their same belief systems, somewhere else.

[Galloism]

Just by wearing a catholic cross or some rosary beads they show it.

Yeah okay if you generalize all christians like that and you want to do that display it on the door n shit try to stay in business thats fine.

I don't actually. I just want people to have the courage of their convictions.

If you want to have an antidiscrimination law based on religion, be consistent. In addition to protecting Catholics, Orthodox Jews, and Anglicans, it needs to protect Black Hebrew Israelites, The KKK, and Westboro Baptist Church.

If you want a law to protect people based on sexual orientation, be consistent. It not only needs to protect LGBTQ people, but straight people and furries.

If you want a law to protect people based on sex, be consistent. It applies to only to women and intersex, but also to men.

If you want a law to protect people based on race, it not only protects black and Hispanic people, but whites too.

Have the courage of your convictions. Don't try to carve exceptions for the parts you don't like.

[San Lumen]

In a non business setting yes. The government is not and should not be the thought police.

That's what anti-discrimination laws are though...

Telling people they cannot fire someone for being gay or disallow non whites from their premises is being the thought police?

They can always found their own nation where they can be bigots in peace -- or move to one more in line with their beliefs.

Or change the laws in place.

To discrimination is ok whenever we feel like it because of freedom of association?

Lets take out all those wheelchair ramps because they take up space. Who cares if the subway isnt handicapped accessible that elevator on street is ugly.

[Telconi]

That's what anti-discrimination laws are though...

Telling people they cannot fire someone for being gay or disallow non whites from their premises is being the thought police?

Or change the laws in place.

To discrimination is ok whenever we feel like it because of freedom of association?

Lets take out all those wheelchair ramps because they take up space. Who cares if the subway isnt handicapped accessible that elevator on street is ugly.

If we operate on the idea that practice is integral to belief.

[Telconi]

hmmm

That's not "because we feel like it or we don't like you."
They overbooked and the fact that there was a furor about it in the news and that Dr. Dao received $140 million dollars from United Airlines, and that the airlines was further sued by one of the officers it put in that position, should make it clear they can't do that without repercussions.

I know, I know -- knowing the outcome doesn't fit your narrative, so let's pretend they do have an absolute right to do this and not get punished for it.

That was not a case of discrimination. That was United Airlines doing something outrageous because they didn’t think to book seats for their employees on the plane

And they paid for it. So I would question the legality.

The post I was responding to claimed reservations are contracts that cannot be broken. I showed that that's false.

Actually, you didn't, as their $140 million dollar settlement with Dr. Dao and the subsequent lawsuit filed by one of the officers put in that position show.

How am i saying that they can't discriminate outside their their business?

Thats a absurd example. A quadriplegic is not capable of preforming the duties of the job.

Being part of a hate group is not a protected class. I think a hotel could legally refuse service too them.

Why, if they are not disruptive?

If they are, certainly they can call the police and have them escorted from the premises, but why refuse them if they are not being disruptive?

Which is a pissy excuse.

Why should a minority of people who don't understand what being in a society means, get to dictate to the majority who would like to just live their lives, that they can't?

Why should a minority of people be able to say, "You're not fit to rent a room/eat here/buy clothes here?

The bigots can go and freely associate with other bigots who have their same belief systems, somewhere else.

'Society' comment aside, they should get to for the same reason anyone else should get to advocate for any other political belief.

Because they're not a minority of the salient group.

AI could anyone else with any other beliefs, so thus political action is wrong?

[San Lumen]

And they didn't find reservations in another hotel in the brand, nearby, for you? Because that's what's happened to me.

No

well thats what they should have done.

That's not "because we feel like it or we don't like you."
They overbooked and the fact that there was a furor about it in the news and that Dr. Dao received $140 million dollars from United Airlines, and that the airlines was further sued by one of the officers it put in that position, should make it clear they can't do that without repercussions.

I know, I know -- knowing the outcome doesn't fit your narrative, so let's pretend they do have an absolute right to do this and not get punished for it.


And they paid for it. So I would question the legality.


Actually, you didn't, as their $140 million dollar settlement with Dr. Dao and the subsequent lawsuit filed by one of the officers put in that position show.


Why, if they are not disruptive?

If they are, certainly they can call the police and have them escorted from the premises, but why refuse them if they are not being disruptive?


Why should a minority of people who don't understand what being in a society means, get to dictate to the majority who would like to just live their lives, that they can't?

Why should a minority of people be able to say, "You're not fit to rent a room/eat here/buy clothes here?

The bigots can go and freely associate with other bigots who have their same belief systems, somewhere else.

'Society' comment aside, they should get to for the same reason anyone else should get to advocate for any other political belief.

Because they're not a minority of the salient group.

AI could anyone else with any other beliefs, so thus political action is wrong?

Where did anyone say political action is wrong? Should we not have passed the Civil Rights Act and let the free market sort out everything?

[Telconi]

No

well thats what they should have done.

'Society' comment aside, they should get to for the same reason anyone else should get to advocate for any other political belief.

Because they're not a minority of the salient group.

AI could anyone else with any other beliefs, so thus political action is wrong?

Where did anyone say political action is wrong? Should we not have passed the Civil Rights Act and let the free market sort out everything?

Well Kat seems to think that people who would otherwise engage in political action should instead just go make their own country.

Not in the form it was passed.

[San Lumen]

well thats what they should have done.

Where did anyone say political action is wrong? Should we not have passed the Civil Rights Act and let the free market sort out everything?

Well Kat seems to think that people who would otherwise engage in political action should instead just go make their own country.

Not in the form it was passed.

No that isnt what they said. They said that people who want to be bigoted should make their own country where they can be bigots

And how would you change it?

[Telconi]

Well Kat seems to think that people who would otherwise engage in political action should instead just go make their own country.

Not in the form it was passed.

No that isnt what they said. They said that people who want to be bigoted should make their own country where they can be bigots

And how would you change it?

That's not different.

Apply it only to publicly funded services.

[Kowani]

No that isnt what they said. They said that people who want to be bigoted should make their own country where they can be bigots

And how would you change it?

That's not different.

Apply it only to publicly funded services.

At the time, that wouldn’t have solved anything.