Freedom - ? (1 Viewer)

Libre

been around a little
Local time
Today, 01:06
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
660
Sorry if you missed the point with the car analogy. And why do you make statements like the kidney thing? For a person who seems to want to be considerate of others you can be really condescending...?
Condescending? Moi?

EDIT:
joking.

kidney thing? Because somebody said you used to be able to sell your blood and now you can only donate it, and now there's less blood to go around and that's a bad thing. Selling a kidney on ebay is a natural extension of the same concept as selling your blood. One way of discovering the flaws in a system or plan is to stress it - take it to its conclusion - and that allows you to find the weakest points.
I'm sorry if I seem condescending. I can't disagree with you and many others have told me that so you're probably right.
 
Last edited:

Galaxiom

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 19:06
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
12,849
I suspect they put an end to selling blood because the "quality" of the donors such an arrangement tended to attract and what substances might be in the donated blood.
 

Mile-O

Back once again...
Local time
Today, 08:06
Joined
Dec 10, 2002
Messages
11,316
Shouldn't I be able to sell my goods to whom I please?

Who is the I when it comes to selling goods? Is it a person who works within a business enforcing their own beliefs or is it, under laws of corporate personhood, the business itself with its terms and conditions made clear? As the primary driver for a business is making money for its shareholders, one has to ask whether discrimination against customers - especially in a climate of social media backlashes - is going to effect the generation of wealth.

We have had some similar things in the UK. A Christian couple who run a bed & breakfast are taking their right to religion over equality (!) to the European court as they have no chance of that right in the UK alone. They advertised their beds were 'for married couples'. (And in a country where equal marriage is recognised, the word couple does not discriminate on the gender of the pair.)

Also ongoing is the case of a Northern Irish bakery who refused to make a 'gay cake'. Case also going through the courts.
 

KenHigg

Registered User
Local time
Today, 04:06
Joined
Jun 9, 2004
Messages
13,327
What will they do if they still refuse to make the cake, shut them down?
 

KenHigg

Registered User
Local time
Today, 04:06
Joined
Jun 9, 2004
Messages
13,327
Condescending? Moi?

EDIT:
joking.

kidney thing? Because somebody said you used to be able to sell your blood and now you can only donate it, and now there's less blood to go around and that's a bad thing. Selling a kidney on ebay is a natural extension of the same concept as selling your blood. One way of discovering the flaws in a system or plan is to stress it - take it to its conclusion - and that allows you to find the weakest points.
I'm sorry if I seem condescending. I can't disagree with you and many others have told me that so you're probably right.

I see, so it had nothing to do with the topic, you were just trying to make the point of how narrow minded I seem to be.

Got to go Libre, thanks for the lively discussion. Not getting much done here at work the last couple of days hanging out in the forum...
 

Mile-O

Back once again...
Local time
Today, 08:06
Joined
Dec 10, 2002
Messages
11,316
What will they do if they still refuse to make the cake, shut them down?

No, but if they are punished with a fine then the business may suffer, especially if it's a substantial amount and they can't afford it. Negative coverage may also affect sales. But that's how the capitalist cookie crumbles.
 

Libre

been around a little
Local time
Today, 01:06
Joined
May 3, 2007
Messages
660
I see, so it had nothing to do with the topic, you were just trying to make the point of how narrow minded I seem to be.

The topic was freedom. I made some remarks about the inadvisability of allowing the freedom to sell one's body parts, after someone else made some remarks about the freedom to sell one's blood. If you don't see the connections here, then you don't need me to make the point of how narrow minded you seem to be - you're making the point admirably yourself.
 

KenHigg

Registered User
Local time
Today, 04:06
Joined
Jun 9, 2004
Messages
13,327
Perhaps we are both a bit more narrow minded than we care to admit. You jumped right into the thread with a wise crack instead of offering a resonable response like mile-o. I'm guessing I probably gored your sacred cow, like maybe you are gay?

I wonder what really happened at the cake store? Did they want some something on the cake that was offensive to normal people? Were the owners really rude to them and that started the snowball rolling? Why didn't they just flip off the owners and go elsewhere?, etc....
 

Brianwarnock

Retired
Local time
Today, 08:06
Joined
Jun 2, 2003
Messages
12,701
The answers to your questions are in the link provided.

Homosexuals etc should not be discriminated against, but that etc includes religious belief and where a conflict occurs civil persons will seek a solution, however it appears that the homosexual community goes out of its way to challenge the religious.

Just incase you don't know I am not religious, but I respect their right to their beliefs even if some are ridiculous .
I await the day the homosexuals challenge the Islamists.

Brian
 

KenHigg

Registered User
Local time
Today, 04:06
Joined
Jun 9, 2004
Messages
13,327
Link - Oh, duh. Thanks Brian

I'm kind of at a loss as to why a person has to be part of a group before the qualify as 'should not be discriminated against'?
 

Galaxiom

Super Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 19:06
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
12,849
it appears that the homosexual community goes out of its way to challenge the religious.

Religion has always made a point of challenging homosexuals. Stone them to death it says in the Bible.

Religion needs to be challenged.
 

Vassago

Former Staff Turned AWF Retiree
Local time
Today, 04:06
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
4,751
Actually, as a private business, you would already have the right to refuse service to anyone you please. You don't have to give a reason. Just refuse to do so.

The biggest problem is when you work for a publicly provided service, such as at a tax office or as a police officer. You no longer have the right to refuse service because those same people are paying you for that service. Some people just don't understand the difference.
 

Vassago

Former Staff Turned AWF Retiree
Local time
Today, 04:06
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
4,751
Religion has always made a point of challenging homosexuals. Stone them to death it says in the Bible.

Religion needs to be challenged.

The Bible also says a woman should be stoned to death if they are not a virgin at the time of wedlock.

Anyone in favor for following this one?
 

Vassago

Former Staff Turned AWF Retiree
Local time
Today, 04:06
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
4,751
I like the quote I saw earlier today...

Tollerance is both doing your job as a PUBLIC servant by marrying two people and being ok with a PRIVATE business who won't make a cake for your wedding.

It's really not that complicated.
 

Frothingslosh

Premier Pale Stale Ale
Local time
Today, 04:06
Joined
Oct 17, 2012
Messages
3,276
Now that the thought of having this discussion again for the umpteenth time doesn't make me want to scream, let me try this again.

I like the quote I saw earlier today...

Tollerance is both doing your job as a PUBLIC servant by marrying two people and being ok with a PRIVATE business who won't make a cake for your wedding.

It's really not that complicated.

Yes, it really is. How about if they decide they won't serve black folks? What about women?

"No Mexicans allowed"?
"No Catholics allowed"?
"No cripples allowed"?
"No Jews/Atheists/Muslims allowed"?

You claim people will show their dislike by not patronizing the store, yet at the same time the Right whines about the 'Leftist tyranny' when people call for boycotts. (Mind you, these same conservatives aren't shy about calling for pro-LGBT businesses to be shut down.)

If you allow business to discriminate based on irrational hatred of a group, you will wind up with us going back to the 50's, with 'No negroes' signs everywhere, except it'll start with 'no queers' rather than 'no negroes'. The hatred of blacks wouldn't take long to re-surface, however, and then it would be just like the 50's again. Anyone who says racism is dead in America is either lying or clueless. When I lived in Virginia, people badmouthed "niggers" openly and constantly, and I ran into the same during my unfortunate period working in Atlanta. Hell, my own family here in Michigan, with only 3 exceptions, hate black people with a passion, and the sentiment is very widespread in the town where I grew up - which is ten miles from Pontiac and maybe 25 from Detroit.

Allowing people to legally discriminate solely based on bigotry will inevitably result in us backsliding to the pre-Civil Rights era tyranny of the minority by the majority.

And honestly, if that isn't enough to sway you, and you still fall back on "rights", let me point out that the entire "why can't I pick and choose who I sell to" argument is based on the flawed argument that store-owner rights are more important than customer rights. If you argue you have the right to sell to only those who meet your birth standards, does the customer not have the right to expect equal treatment and service? Do they not have the right to shop where they want without someone deciding they don't deserve to purchase a hot dog because they have the wrong color skin or are holding the hand of the wrong sex?

It's important to keep in mind that Americans have proven through our history that given the chance to discriminate, we WILL turn unpopular minorities into second-class citizens through disenfranchisement (both as citizens and people) as well as terror.
 
Last edited:

KenHigg

Registered User
Local time
Today, 04:06
Joined
Jun 9, 2004
Messages
13,327
Seems that by making the statements like 'Americans this or that', you would be making the same kind of mistake that some white people do when they say ‘blacks this or that’ - ?
 

Frothingslosh

Premier Pale Stale Ale
Local time
Today, 04:06
Joined
Oct 17, 2012
Messages
3,276
Seems that by making the statements like 'Americans this or that', you would be making the same kind of mistake that some white people do when they say ‘blacks this or that’ - ?

Valid point, save that I can pull my examples from newspaper and encyclopedia articles. Little things like pre-Segregation south, the fight (and amazingly disturbing advertisements) over giving women the right to vote, our treatment of Chinese and Irish immigrants in the 1800's and 1900's, our absolutely unforgivable treatment of the Native Americans, or even things like the Indiana 'right to discriminate' law or the bill being passed through the Oklahoma legislature (it was already passed by their House) restricting marriage to people of faith. Not to mention all the studies on racism, the glass ceiliing, and other effects of bigotry that have been done. (The main reason I haven't done so here that I am at work and really can't spend the time digging up articles and linking them - that has to be done after work.)

Edit: My father had an 1870's textbook in his collection that described Native Americans as subhuman monsters only interested in killing white men and raping white women, in basically those words. I wish I could get you a name, but my sister (the executor of the estate) has filed that under 'taking that takes too much money out of [her] pocket' and donated it to a local museum instead of letting me claim it. :mad:
 
Last edited:

Frothingslosh

Premier Pale Stale Ale
Local time
Today, 04:06
Joined
Oct 17, 2012
Messages
3,276
Also, there is a decidedly different feel to a statement like that when it's make by someone included in the group than when made by an outsider.
 

KenHigg

Registered User
Local time
Today, 04:06
Joined
Jun 9, 2004
Messages
13,327
Valid point, save that I can pull my examples from newspaper and encyclopedia articles. Little things like pre-Segregation south, the fight (and amazingly disturbing advertisements) over giving women the right to vote, our treatment of Chinese and Irish immigrants in the 1800's and 1900's, our absolutely unforgivable treatment of the Native Americans, or even things like the Indiana 'right to discriminate' law or the bill being passed through the Oklahoma legislature (it was already passed by their House) restricting marriage to people of faith. Not to mention all the studies on racism, the glass ceiliing, and other effects of bigotry that have been done. (The main reason I haven't done so here that I am at work and really can't spend the time digging up articles and linking them - that has to be done after work.)

Edit: My father had an 1870's textbook in his collection that described Native Americans as subhuman monsters only interested in killing white men and raping white women, in basically those words. I wish I could get you a name, but my sister (the executor of the estate) has filed that under 'taking that takes too much money out of [her] pocket' and donated it to a local museum instead of letting me claim it. :mad:

Hum... Still, not being nice is not unique to Americans. Maybe if we insert 'People in general'...

And instead of passing judgement so fast on the Native American thing perhaps it would benefit us to try and understand the mindset of the people(s) that wrote it. Perhaps some numerous settlers had their family members slain by 'Native Americans' in the area, etc. If so I suspect I may have the same opinion. Wouldn't you?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom