- 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
re: SCOTUS Says You Don't Have To Bake That Gay Cake
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:04 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:04 pm to SlowFlowPro
SFP, do you want to have a debate about Libertarianism vs. the existence of a government?
Libertarianism has devolved into anarchism in recent years, and I’m, rightly, not a big fan.
Libertarianism has devolved into anarchism in recent years, and I’m, rightly, not a big fan.
5
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:05 pm to BBONDS25
In an actual just society, the ruling would have been more broad
"any non government entity enjoys the full right to discriminate when doing business"
And actually simple common sense tells us this. Who in their rights minds believes that you don't have a right to choose your customers, that customers have a right to force you to work for them?
"any non government entity enjoys the full right to discriminate when doing business"
And actually simple common sense tells us this. Who in their rights minds believes that you don't have a right to choose your customers, that customers have a right to force you to work for them?
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:06 pm to FT
And. Here. We. Go.
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:06 pm to FT
quote:
Libertarianism has devolved into anarchism in recent years, and I’m, rightly, not a big fan.
Libertarianism and anarchism are 2 different political ideologies. Hence why there are 2 different names for it.
I don't think every self identified libertarian is necessarily a purist but would like to see us move in a more libertarian direction. Mainly on issues regarding personal freedom.
If you'd care to tell us why you are against expanding personal freedoms I'd love to hear your arguments.
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:07 pm to FT
quote:well you're a dishonest totalitarian piece of shite so that shouldn't be terribly surprising
Libertarianism has devolved into anarchism in recent years, and I’m, rightly, not a big fan
Of course you list all of those other things as being things you're okay with because you can hide behind the bullshite fricking protected classes that you and your ilk have created which makes it's so the government only protects some people
Your history of dishonesty on this board as well established
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:08 pm to Powerman
quote:
I don't think every self identified libertarian is necessarily a purist but would like to see us move in a more libertarian direction. Mainly on issues regarding personal freedom
Besides
Libertarian bad therefore totalitarian good
Is a pretty stupid fricking concept
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:08 pm to FT
quote:
Libertarianism has devolved into anarchism in recent years,
Says who?
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:09 pm to Powerman
From where we are currently, which personal freedoms would you like to expand?
I imagine we agree, broadly, on the war on drugs. I also suspect we agree on speech.
I imagine we agree, broadly, on the war on drugs. I also suspect we agree on speech.
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:09 pm to FT
quote:
SFP, do you want to have a debate about Libertarianism vs. the existence of a government?
in the context of forcing people to engage in commerce? sure
quote:
Libertarianism has devolved into anarchism in recent years, and I’m, rightly, not a big fan.
you can use whatever shades of grey and terminology you wish, but if you're arguing for more government and less freedom, in any context, you're gonna have a bad time
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:10 pm to ShortyRob
Calm down, shorty. We’re talking policy, as I’ve said I wanted to do and have continued doing.
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:12 pm to FT
quote:
Calm down, shorty. We’re talking policy, as I’ve said I wanted to do and have continued doing
Yeah. Sure
You're taking the position that you oppose being able to refuse service.......EVER
Which is very convenient as a construct since you know the government is only going to apply that against groups you don't like.
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:13 pm to SlowFlowPro
I can’t imagine I’ll have a bad time at all. If you’re a Ron Paul libertarian, we disgree to the same extent I disagree with Rand Paul. That is to say, a great deal on legislation but not entirely on how government should exist.
If you’re an anarchist, this will take a couple of minutes.
If you’re an anarchist, this will take a couple of minutes.
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:14 pm to ShortyRob
I don’t know anything like that. This thread is celebrating the opposite, and it was a government ruling that made it so.
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:15 pm to FT
quote:
I imagine we agree, broadly, on the war on drugs. I also suspect we agree on speech.
Yes, we would agree on those.
I'd also grant more freedom to business owners as we're discussing here. No one should be forced to make custom products for people. I'm not such a libertarian purist that I think that businesses should be able to discriminate against people for no reason however. Even though I doubt most would these days because it's bad for business.
With one exception. People should be able to discriminate based on age. If I operate a fine dining restaurant and I don't want your stupid kids in it that should be allowable.
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:19 pm to FT
quote:
I don’t know anything like that
You know as well as i do that the people YOU support will NEVER allow a situation where THEY aren't allowed to discriminate while simultaneously preventing others from doing so.
At least start with honesty.
AND this was specifically because people YOU support were doing just that.
Of course you want the principle to be "discrimination not ok" because your government has already built a wall around SOME people
This is a rare loss on that front
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:20 pm to CorporateTiger
quote:Is every losing case a frivolous one?
If it is based on nothing more than the attorney’s wishful thinking about the opinion, yes it is
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:21 pm to Salmon
quote:
"narrow" perfectly describes the ruling
It probably does if you read the opinion or are an attorney, but the general public reading the title, "Supreme Court Narrowly Rules" is going to assume that the VOTE was narrow not the scope.
The wording of the title is disingenuous.
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:21 pm to crazycubes
FINALLY, there is some f*cking SANITY in this world.
To the Libtards -- SUCK IT UP, YOU FILTHY F*CKING SCUMBAGS!
To the Libtards -- SUCK IT UP, YOU FILTHY F*CKING SCUMBAGS!
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:22 pm to Powerman
quote:
No one should be forced to make custom products for people. I'm not such a libertarian purist that I think that businesses should be able to discriminate against people for no reason however.
This is me
Although i would support 100% freedom to choose one's customers if we could eliminate protected classes
FT claims he supports zero discrimination but this is a lie given that he supports the ideology/party that wishes to institutionalize it and HAS institutionalized it
Posted on 6/4/18 at 12:22 pm to Powerman
Dress codes and some reasonable age limits for high scale restaurants is fine. You’d probably need a law to enforce it, and reasonable judges to see it through.
Page 12 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News