- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Defend the Position: Where do Civil Rights and Freedom of Business Association connect?
Posted on 9/12/17 at 4:01 am
Posted on 9/12/17 at 4:01 am
Equipping Flame-retardant shield.
I am not saying that Trump is racist. Personally, I have no issues with Trump's presidency.
However, I believe that this stance, if true, is short-sighted and will potentially lead to more problems if not handled with care.
"Supposedly" Trump wants to make LGBTQ signs legal for businesses
This is something from the youtube comment section you should consider ( although the response to it was fairly good as well)
I am not saying that Trump is racist. Personally, I have no issues with Trump's presidency.
However, I believe that this stance, if true, is short-sighted and will potentially lead to more problems if not handled with care.
"Supposedly" Trump wants to make LGBTQ signs legal for businesses
quote:
This case has never been about the cake. It’s about whether anyone in America can be turned away from a business because of who they are. It’s about whether the Constitution gives businesses the right to discriminate whenever they want to.
This is something from the youtube comment section you should consider ( although the response to it was fairly good as well)
quote:
All the people making the "Buisness should be allowed to discriminate" arguments are forgetting two things
1.) Some parts of the country would in unison shut down minority and LGBT people overnight without a shred of guilt. People would be fired immediately and services would be refused...
entire hick towns would just (censored) people overnight and probably have a drink to celebrate about it. This isn't just a big city thing where there are alternative options, some of us LGBT and minority people live in (censored) backwoods holes where we have no choice but to do business with the people who are there...
and no not all of us can "Just leave" you do realize that moving costs a lot of money right? You do realize that some LGBT people are 14 and can't legally do a (censored) thing on their own right? Some people would literally be stuck in a (censored) that refuses to offer any services to them ever under any circumstances.
2.) Boycotts don't always work ( and maybe never work ). Sure a business that discriminates might not ever become the next Walmart, but they (censored) well could stay afloat without the gay dollar or the Black dollar and there are plenty of people who would happily be like, "I know they are racist, but I really think their cake is good and I can't just not eat it."
Seriously we know that large corporations exploit the (censored) out of 3rd world children and people, but do we boycott them? (censored) no, because we will always value our Nike shoes over human rights.?
This post was edited on 9/12/17 at 4:05 am
11
Posted on 9/12/17 at 4:10 am to volod
The government (save the military) shouldn't be allowed to discriminate, nor should work under government contract; private business should be allowed to do whatever the hell they want... don't like what they do then exercise your 1A right to bitch on social media, or to the news, or form a picket line on public property nearest the business. That's how all of this is supposed to work. No need to cry about civil rights or the like.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 4:12 am to volod
Yet you didn't post the response.
There is protection for racial discrimination.
There is not for sexual orientation.
it is time to stop doing things by any means necessary and do things the right way. Change the law.
There is protection for racial discrimination.
There is not for sexual orientation.
it is time to stop doing things by any means necessary and do things the right way. Change the law.
This post was edited on 9/12/17 at 4:17 am
Posted on 9/12/17 at 4:17 am to volod
quote:
Boycotts don't always work ( and maybe never work ). Sure a business that discriminates might not ever become the next Walmart, but they (censored) well could stay afloat without the gay dollar or the Black dollar and there are plenty of people who would happily be like, "I know they are racist, but I really think their cake is good and I can't just not eat it."
Go to your bathroom and look at your shampoo bottle. Look at all of your wife's makeup. The vast majority of them will claim that they are not tested on animals.
Know why that is?
It is NOT because the government outlawed it.
It is because non-government groups like the ASPCA and PETA and so on all raised hell and ostracized these companies that test on animals and all of the soccer moms across the nation chose not to purchase their products. When these "evil corporations" saw that their bottom line could be affected they changed their habits to be in line with the ideals of the general public. I say again - That's how this is supposed to work. No need to add government involvement.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 7:49 am to volod
So his position is that because some people are negatively impacted by freedom, we shouldn't have it?
Anyone could have denied service because someone was gay but the homosexuals targeted a bakery that was surrounded by a dozen other bakeries that would have accommodated their request. And it wasn't even that they denied service generally, but a designed wedding cake.
Boycotts work, especially with the advent of social media where messages spread like wild fire and individuals act fast to donate time and money to help those in need and protest unfair practices.
Anyone could have denied service because someone was gay but the homosexuals targeted a bakery that was surrounded by a dozen other bakeries that would have accommodated their request. And it wasn't even that they denied service generally, but a designed wedding cake.
Boycotts work, especially with the advent of social media where messages spread like wild fire and individuals act fast to donate time and money to help those in need and protest unfair practices.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 8:06 am to volod
The real answer is there is no defense. It is patently unconstitutional to force anyone to work for another person.
Also, there is the matter of unequal protection to consider. There are only a handful of reasons why it is illegal to discriminate, all other discrimination is perfectly legal. Meaning the law provides unequal protection - which, of course, violates the 14th Amendment.
Also, there is the matter of unequal protection to consider. There are only a handful of reasons why it is illegal to discriminate, all other discrimination is perfectly legal. Meaning the law provides unequal protection - which, of course, violates the 14th Amendment.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 8:13 am to volod
quote:
1.) Some parts of the country would in unison shut down minority and LGBT people overnight without a shred of guilt. People would be fired immediately and services would be refused...
entire hick towns would just (censored) people overnight and probably have a drink to celebrate about it. This isn't just a big city thing where there are alternative options, some of us LGBT and minority people live in (censored) backwoods holes where we have no choice but to do business with the people who are there...
and no not all of us can "Just leave" you do realize that moving costs a lot of money right? You do realize that some LGBT people are 14 and can't legally do a (censored) thing on their own right? Some people would literally be stuck in a (censored) that refuses to offer any services to them ever under any circumstances.
in these arguments, why do they always leave out the fact that this would affect normal white people too?
quote:
2.) Boycotts don't always work ( and maybe never work ). Sure a business that discriminates might not ever become the next Walmart, but they (censored) well could stay afloat without the gay dollar or the Black dollar and there are plenty of people who would happily be like, "I know they are racist, but I really think their cake is good and I can't just not eat it."
Not sure I even understand the point of this statement.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 8:16 am to SlapahoeTribe
quote:
The government (save the military) shouldn't be allowed to discriminate, nor should work under government contract; private business should be allowed to do whatever the hell they want... don't like what they do then exercise your 1A right to bitch on social media, or to the news, or form a picket line on public property nearest the business. That's how all of this is supposed to work. No need to cry about civil rights or the like.
I agree with this.
Government should set the example, but not make the requirement.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 10:35 am to volod
Just out of curiosity, how does a business determine an LGBT person to deny them service? One day the left might start seeing people as people, and not segregated groups and labels.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 10:40 am to 9th life
I get the government not discriminating because they work for everyone in this country, but there is a distinction between what the government is allowed to do vs. what private citizens are allowed to do that is given in the Constitution. It enumerates and protects our rights from infringement by the government first and foremost. Citizens should be free to associate with who they want to associate with but the government is held to a different standard.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 11:51 am to Dale51
quote:
So what?
2. So what
Because people deserve to be treated fairly in everyday life.
You can't use location as a justification because unless you have job in another city, you are stuck where you are.
Trust me. I would love a system where open minded people could live together and those who are anti race and anti gay could have their own communities far away from each.
But reality is that won't happen because of financial and governmental reasons.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 11:53 am to volod
quote:
Because people deserve to be treated fairly in everyday life.
Forcing people to do business with others is fair?
Posted on 9/12/17 at 11:56 am to volod
The cake issue was always stupid, because it involved custom work. Any custom vendor should be able to pick and choose the work they want to do.
That's completely different than a store refusing to sell a bag of chips to someone
That's completely different than a store refusing to sell a bag of chips to someone
Posted on 9/12/17 at 12:00 pm to Salmon
quote:
hick towns
quote:
backwoods holes
And this person is talking about bigotry and prejudice?
Posted on 9/12/17 at 2:17 pm to volod
quote:Yet oddly it was perfectly acceptable when this happened to "alt-right" groups.
1.) Some parts of the country would in unison shut down minority and LGBT people overnight without a shred of guilt.
Or when YouTube bans people they don't agree with.
The only difference is they don't have the honesty to put up a sign. But the action... is the same.
quote:The horror! Should YouTube be ruined for demonetizing people? Should twitter be ruined for banning people?
Sure a business that discriminates might not ever become the next Walmart, but they (censored) well could stay afloat without the gay dollar or the Black dollar
Posted on 9/12/17 at 2:41 pm to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
The cake issue was always stupid, because it involved custom work. Any custom vendor should be able to pick and choose the work they want to do.
That's completely different than a store refusing to sell a bag of chips to someone
Exactly.
I would add, this also has nothing to do with Freedom of Religion. It's about Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press. If a printer doesn't want to do a flyer for a church event, they should have that right too. If the Baker loses, then Twitter should have to reinstate Milo's certification. Fair is fair.
It's all part of the cost of Freedom.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 3:00 pm to volod
quote:
It’s about whether the Constitution gives businesses the right to discriminate whenever they want to.
That's a horribly framed question. Rights limit government action; they aren't gifts bestowed by the government.
The correct way to phrase this question is "does the federal government have to power to force private business to serve certain persons?"
This post was edited on 9/12/17 at 3:03 pm
Posted on 9/12/17 at 3:02 pm to volod
quote:
Because people deserve to be treated fairly in everyday life.
What does this even mean? That's patently false.
Posted on 9/12/17 at 3:16 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Forcing people to do business with others is fair?
Sure. Not all opinions are valuable or should be respected. I don't have a problem with a baker refusing to design a cake in a specific way (E.g. a chocolate icing penis cake). But, refusing to bake that person a general cake because you know they are LGBT should be illegal.
It is the government's responsibility and right to regulate both interstate and intrastate commerce.. between that and necessary/proper it's a done deal.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News