by San Lumen » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:35 am
by Tornado Queendom » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:41 am
by Tornado Queendom » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:42 am
Grinning Dragon wrote:Yes, freedom of association and all that.
by Estanglia » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:43 am
San Lumen wrote:Recently I have seen comments and heard several politicians say there ought to be a right to discriminate by privately owned business of which the rationale I dont understand
According to some the Civil Rights Act and anti discrimination laws should apply only to government owned business or essential services like a hotel, that it is the owners right to choose who they do business with or who they hire.
Where the constitution is this alleged right?
No one should face discrimination simply because of what they look like or because they are LGBT. Everyone is equal under the law and deserves to be treated equally .
If you want to discriminate then open a private club though I dont think even a business like Costco would be able to get away with only allowing certain groups of people to shop there. If your open to the public you serve all or none at all.
What say you NSG? Should there be a right to discriminate?
Torrocca wrote:"Your honor, it was not mein fault! I didn't order the systematic genocide of millions of people, it was the twenty kilograms of pure-cut Bavarian cocaine that did it!"
by Vaxian Imperium » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:43 am
by Tornado Queendom » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:44 am
Vaxian Imperium wrote:Yes there should be in my opinion.
by San Lumen » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:44 am
Estanglia wrote:San Lumen wrote:Recently I have seen comments and heard several politicians say there ought to be a right to discriminate by privately owned business of which the rationale I dont understand
According to some the Civil Rights Act and anti discrimination laws should apply only to government owned business or essential services like a hotel, that it is the owners right to choose who they do business with or who they hire.
Where the constitution is this alleged right?
A right doesn't need to be in the constitution to be a right.No one should face discrimination simply because of what they look like or because they are LGBT. Everyone is equal under the law and deserves to be treated equally .
If you want to discriminate then open a private club though I dont think even a business like Costco would be able to get away with only allowing certain groups of people to shop there. If your open to the public you serve all or none at all.
What say you NSG? Should there be a right to discriminate?
If your business isn't funded by the government or isn't an essential service, then yes. You should be able to choose who you do and don't serve or hire.
by Vaxian Imperium » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:46 am
San Lumen wrote:Estanglia wrote:
A right doesn't need to be in the constitution to be a right.
If your business isn't funded by the government or isn't an essential service, then yes. You should be able to choose who you do and don't serve or hire.
There needs to be a basis in law. Why has no court ruled this right exists?
Why would a whites only restaurant or only whites need apply be ok?
by Tornado Queendom » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:46 am
San Lumen wrote:Estanglia wrote:
A right doesn't need to be in the constitution to be a right.
If your business isn't funded by the government or isn't an essential service, then yes. You should be able to choose who you do and don't serve or hire.
There needs to be a basis in law. Why has no court ruled this right exists?
Why would a whites only restaurant or only whites need apply be ok?
by The World Capitalist Confederation » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:46 am
by Salcanceacy » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:47 am
by Grinning Dragon » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:47 am
by Hystaria » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:47 am
Kowani wrote:Hystaria. They’re both edgy, but only one of them is a special kind of edgy.
by Estanglia » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:47 am
San Lumen wrote:Estanglia wrote:
A right doesn't need to be in the constitution to be a right.
If your business isn't funded by the government or isn't an essential service, then yes. You should be able to choose who you do and don't serve or hire.
There needs to be a basis in law. Why has no court ruled this right exists?
Why would a whites only restaurant or only whites need apply be ok?
Torrocca wrote:"Your honor, it was not mein fault! I didn't order the systematic genocide of millions of people, it was the twenty kilograms of pure-cut Bavarian cocaine that did it!"
by Ethel mermania » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:48 am
by Tornado Queendom » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:48 am
The World Capitalist Confederation wrote:Not to strawman people, but if you think there should be a right to discriminate, shouldn't there also be a right to murder? A right to steal? A right to arson? All three could be justified in the name of free speech, along with several other crimes that I can't mention because this is PG-13. In fact, murder, theft and arson have a stronger case for free speech: all three have been used as forms of political protest and have a justification for being so.
by The World Capitalist Confederation » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:48 am
Tornado Queendom wrote:San Lumen wrote:
There needs to be a basis in law. Why has no court ruled this right exists?
Why would a whites only restaurant or only whites need apply be ok?
Because it has pushed too far, and an abolition of the discrimination ban would be an excuse for other companies to hire other races as their advantage. Besides, other companies banning discrimination would be perfect for an ad anyways. Also, some people only feel comfort from their own race.
by Tornado Queendom » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:49 am
Hystaria wrote:There should be no law allowing it, or banning.
Allow its existence, until it break another s right of free speech (Dont talk, you [Enter Slur]), but let it existence for free speech.
by Estanglia » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:49 am
The World Capitalist Confederation wrote:Not to strawman people, but if you think there should be a right to discriminate, shouldn't there also be a right to murder? A right to steal? A right to arson? All three could be justified in the name of free speech, along with several other crimes that I can't mention because this is PG-13. In fact, murder, theft and arson have a stronger case for free speech: all three have been used as forms of political protest and have a justification for being so.
Torrocca wrote:"Your honor, it was not mein fault! I didn't order the systematic genocide of millions of people, it was the twenty kilograms of pure-cut Bavarian cocaine that did it!"
by Ifreann » Tue Feb 19, 2019 11:50 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Aadhiris, Daphomir, Eahland, El Lazaro, Kannap, Maximum Imperium Rex, Merriwhether, New Temecula, Ravemath, Rusozak, Spirit of Hope, Statesburg, The Jamesian Republic, The Two Jerseys, The Vooperian Union, Tiami, Verkhoyanska, Yasuragi, Zantalio
Advertisement