It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A Person HAS the Right to Discriminate...the Government Does Not

page: 3
14
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 05:23 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

You can tell them no! Thats what i've been telling you, that you're perfectly justified to tell them no. I was under the impression that you're arguing that you have a right to tell them no AND belittle them after telling them no, which I disagree with. So what is the argument here?




posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 05:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Slanter
a reply to: Metallicus

But that doesn't extend to being verbally attacked against their will? because all these arguments aren't people upset because they can't refuse service to a group of people, the right to refuse service has never been the issue because it's never changed. These are people that are upset that they can't be abusive AFTER they've refused service.





Wow, that's a leap of logic.



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 05:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: MystikMushroom

BULLSNIP!

We don't have Rights because of the government or because of men, we have governments to defend the sanctity of our God-given rights from the violations and intrusions of man.


We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed


The forefathers didn't agree that we "have" those rights, they observed that God had granted all men those rights and that any government based outside of the same was a pile of crap, doomed to failure.


You mean those forefathers that owned slaves said that god granted all men those rights.

They must have been godless heathens making an inside joke in that case.



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 05:27 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

All I know is that in my business, we serve everyone and anyone, and treat all our customers exactly the same, despite BS to the contrary from certain sectors. We only pass up work we physically cannot achieve, or lack the expertise for. Heavy duty safe cracking for example takes decades of practice to be really good at, so we pass that sort of work on to other providers of locksmithing services.

You know what I do not agree with in the least? Swinging. You know the kind I mean. BDSM parties and wife swapping and all that. And yet, if the local swingers club called me up and said "Hey T.B., listen, Margaret is on the crucifix just now, but the locks holding her up there have seized, and she's been up there four eight hours...do you think you could come spring her out of there?" guess what? Round I will go, and from her lofty prison shall Margaret be released, with no extra charge than I would charge anyone else for the precise same mechanical service. I will be uncomfortable as all hell while I am at it, but you know whose problem that is? It's my problem.

Of course, even if it were not legally wrong to discriminate in business, I would not do it anyway, because even in the event that I really do not like something about my customers lifestyle, it is not them that I have the problem with, and because I am a decent human being, I do not form negative opinions of people based in things they have no control over, like their sexual orientation, their religious belief (not a choice. It's more of a calling for those in the know) and so on.

The only time I have ever barred anyone from my place of business, they have either been abusive toward myself or toward my mother, or have made threats against our business. We NEVER discriminate against our customers on any pretext, because we are not fascist scumbags with an attitude problem the size of a continent.



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 05:27 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Did a booming voice from the sky personally tell those men that they have these "rights"? No man has the authority to speak on behalf of "God" as to what rights this deity has, or hasn't granted people.

If you run over a pedestrian and are thrown in jail, your "right" to liberty and the pursuit to happiness are taken away. The people in our society make and enforce the laws in society. The laws of our society dictate the "rights" of the people.

Humans have lived far longer as tribal hunter gatherers than they have in organized, structured society.

Indeed, man created government to secure rights. Man decided that more could be achieved if we all agreed to some "ground rules", and thus first codes of conduct were established in pre-history.

Later governments came after that, economies too -- things like taxes (which you hate) ... and all the wonderful marvels of the industrial age as well were made possible by creating a social contract stating that people have certain "rights" that must be observed and respected by all that fall under the social contract of the society.

You only have "rights" if others acknowledge them. I can claim I have the right to use anyone's car. Is anyone going to respect that? You can claim you have the right to take a dying man's land without his consent, is anyone going to seriously respect that?

Alcohol was illegal, now it's legal again. Women couldn't vote, now they do. Slavery was legal, but now it isn't. Our society's progress is predicated on human moral reasoning, not "rights" handed down to us by a deity.

I'm sure you'll claim that man cannot be a moral law bringer, that only "God" can -- but I ask you this: who was the moral law-giver to the Native Americans? The Sumerians? The African tribes of 20,000 years ago? Did all of those people have free speech? Did all of those people have life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness upheld for them? Why not? Was God napping?

Our "rights" emerged as natural boundaries to secure ourselves from harm. Our "rights" come from us.



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 05:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: TrueBrit
I am NOT defending the beliefs I am saying people shouldn't FORCE other people to do what THEY think it right. You either are okay with forcing your beliefs on others or you are not.

I will NEVER force another human being to do something against their will.

You guys are supporting Authoritarianism.


This becomes a bit of a problem when someone has to leave a city or state in order to find businesses friendly to whatever lifestyle they're living that is being readily discriminated against; because unfortunately, it's rarely if ever just, "you can't eat here, in this one establishment". The discriminatory mindset will so permeate a place that it can become unsafe to live there if you don't keep the "societal norm".

I'd frankly, love to see a society that isn't so far up its own ass with its opinions that regulating personal discrimination isn't even a discussion.

But if personal liberty and rights stop where someone else's starts then what we have are two people personal rights in a sumo match.

If we're talking specifically about being able to refuse baking a gay cake, sure; that's a business operators right. If we're talking specifically about forcing transgendered a into one restroom or the other based on what genitals they were born with and may or may not still have, starts in on the rights of the person using the bathroom; gray areas galore and that's the problem right? If it's my business isn't it my bathroom?



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 05:32 PM
link   
a reply to: In4ormant

You have the right to certain, limited protection from things you find morally wrong, as an employee. Charging customers huge markups on products is, unfortunately, not one of the things an employee can protect themselves from.

However, if those things are an intrinsic part of the job, you also have the right, as an employee, to find other work which will not expose you to morally objectionable things.



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 05:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Slanter
a reply to: ketsuko

You can tell them no! Thats what i've been telling you, that you're perfectly justified to tell them no. I was under the impression that you're arguing that you have a right to tell them no AND belittle them after telling them no, which I disagree with. So what is the argument here?


The argument is that I have the right to refuse service, but for some people, being refused is evidence of discrimination. Since I know everyone is dancing around the whole wedding cake issue, I'll suck it up and go there.

Order a cake from me. Fine. Order an anniversary cake, retirement cake, birthday cake ... all fine. I don't care who you are, who you sleep with.

Now, for some people ... ask me to make a divorce cake? No. Ask me to bake an abortion cake? No. Ask me specifically for a gay wedding cake? No. This isn't because I don't want you to celebrate your events and be happy. It's because I don't want to participate because they are wrong for me to take part in, and like it or not, even baking the cake is participating.

It isn't about who the customer is as much as it is about who I am and what my faith dictates. It's a bit like asking a Jew in a Kosher deli to serve you non-Kosher foods. They can't do it and you wouldn't insult them by asking, and you wouldn't sue them for not having it in stock no matter how much it might upset you that they aren't catering to your own personal cultural tastes and dietary needs.

I don't want to verbally abuse anyone, although if simply saying I can't because my faith forbids is abuse ... you haven't truly experienced the worst that mankind can dish out.



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 05:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
A HUMAN has the right to do whatever they want whenever they want provided it doesn't harm another person or their property. Now, this doesn't mean they might not get their feelings hurt because I don't care about that or what someone 'feels' I am talking in terms of what I believe is right and wrong.


You don't get to determine what's considered harm to someone else.


originally posted by: Metallicus
If a person wishes to interact with another person they have the right to do that or not at their discretion. They SHOULD NOT be REQUIRED to interact with anyone against their will. If you don't agree with the behavior YOU have the right to NOT SHOP or frequent their establishment or business. This way NO ONE is being forced to do anything against their will and you have the ability to discourage the demerit behavior by applying or not applying your dollars.


If MY tax dollars are going towards the infrastructure that's allowing you to do business, I don't give a damned about your opinion, keep it to yourself.


originally posted by: Metallicus
This is my pragmatic view of how life SHOULD be...certainly not how it is right now. I believe that personal liberty is the most important thing...more important than society and more important than the Government.


This is in contradiction with the definition of `society`. You are free to purchase an island and live alone.


originally posted by: Metallicus
You might say that if you are doing business then the Government can dictate what you do and I would strongly disagree. The Government should stay out of all transactions between consenting adults. If people want to buy and sell drugs then I don't believe it should be illegal if the two parties are in agreement.


I agree with this to some extent.


originally posted by: Metallicus
The problem as I see it is we have become to used to letting Government dictate our daily lives and allowing them to be involved in our transactions and commerce. They need to stay out of our lives and stick to the common defense.


I agree with this to some extent.


originally posted by: Metallicus
Anyway, I don't care if I am unpopular I simply believe that personal freedom is more important than your society.


That island is always an option



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 05:36 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

A kosher deli does not stock or have access to supply chains which include non kosher products. The difference being, that cakes are cakes. Their shape is irrelevant.



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 05:38 PM
link   
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Lack of belief in God is a relatively new thing, dude. All of the cultures you listed were recipients of their own Creator's bestowed rights.

Man screws thing up... Prohibition, Taxes, slavery are all examples of just how badly man screws up.



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 05:40 PM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

And that is your choice with your business. I respect that.

In the caterer example I cited, I live in an area that is fairly religious. Even if I were inclined to cater the porn shoot, I would have trouble from the office business around. Maybe I don't want to be judgmental, but I can't guarantee that future potential clients won't be. I have to make the decision partially based on that as well as my own inclinations which wouldn't lead me toward wanting to cater a porn shoot in the first place.

I may not be into the idea of shutting down porn, but I don't like it much myself. Let people do what they are going to do, but don't ask me to participate in what I don't agree with. And certainly don't tell me that I'm going to be forced into it just because I want to be my own business owner.

This is why the subject of the thread is important. We can all only achieve and attain respect for one another when we stop trying to force each other to behave in ways against our personal inclinations and beliefs.



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 05:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus


A HUMAN has the right to do whatever they want whenever they want provided it doesn't harm another person or their property.


Personally, I wouldn't use the word "harm" in this case, as censoring someone's speech doesn't necessarily harm them, not to mention, the unscrupulous opponents will use it against the rest of your arguments. It would be better stated that "a human has a right to do whatever they want provided it doesn't impede the rights of others".

As for the business scenario, in a free society an individual has the freedom to associate, and may conduct business or not with whomever he pleases.
edit on 31-3-2016 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 05:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: ketsuko

A kosher deli does not stock or have access to supply chains which include non kosher products. The difference being, that cakes are cakes. Their shape is irrelevant.


Their purpose is not.

But hey, someone who does not believe in a gay wedding would not have access to gay wedding cake toppers.
edit on 31-3-2016 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)

edit on 31-3-2016 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 05:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Lack of belief in God is a relatively new thing, dude. All of the cultures you listed were recipients of their own Creator's bestowed rights.


History of Atheism: Wiki

It's been around longer than Christianity, dude.

Disbelieve it or not, ancient history suggests that atheism is as natural to humans as religionn



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 05:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: schuyler

I don't think the OP is so much about whether or not we can now, but how it should be. The law should not discriminate, and quite frankly, anti-discrimination laws do discriminate because they clearly do not list every single category of person that should be protected from discrimination which is to say everyone should be or none should be as all should be treated the same under the law.

So if the law singles out some, it discriminates and is (or should be) invalid.


Name one person NOT protected by race (whites are included), sex (males are included), religion (Christians are included), sexual orientation (heterosexuals are included), and gender identity (male, female and Trans are included).

So where EXACTLY is someone not included?



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 05:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: IslandOfMisfitToys

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: schuyler

I don't think the OP is so much about whether or not we can now, but how it should be. The law should not discriminate, and quite frankly, anti-discrimination laws do discriminate because they clearly do not list every single category of person that should be protected from discrimination which is to say everyone should be or none should be as all should be treated the same under the law.

So if the law singles out some, it discriminates and is (or should be) invalid.


Name one person NOT protected by race (whites are included), sex (males are included), religion (Christians are included), sexual orientation (heterosexuals are included), and gender identity (male, female and Trans are included).

So where EXACTLY is someone not included?


If it comes down to two people, and one is a majority group while the other is a protected minority, which one wins? Which one is thus discriminated against and why?
edit on 31-3-2016 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 05:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

What you don’t understand is that society also has certain rights based on its needs to run orderly as much as possible.

You THINK you advocate freedom but your philosophy is founded on a terrible misunderstanding about societal reality. The fact is a society is an entity as much as a human being is and its rights are prescribed in laws that attempt to foster peace, justice and truth so it can not fall into anarchy.

For example, if you as an individual wanted to put some additive in the reservoir for what you think is good for you then the society has the right to restrict that freedom you think you have.

Discrimination against people is a prescription for societal disruption as much as the society would be disrupted by the additive you put in the reservoir.

This is only an analogy for the larger aspect of laws that attempt to make society operate smoothly for all.

This is true because society is something we all share in---it’s a common bond of sharing

Its clear such discrimination is not only unfair, unjust, and immoral the virtues we try to cultivate, but also disruptive to the organ of society








edit on 31-3-2016 by Willtell because: (no reason given)

edit on 31-3-2016 by Willtell because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 05:51 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

I am a Christian.

My faith says that I must not involve myself with necromancy and witchcraft. If I go to a customers house to open a lock, and it happens to be on a spell book which contains necromantic spells, utterances which call forth the spirits of the dead, am I involved with witchcraft if I open the lock?

Nope. I would be if I sat there and read some spells and spoke them, chatted with the spirit of Elvis and shared a cigar with Churchills ghost, but if all I am doing is my job, I am not involved with anything beyond the tip of my pick set. That is not just how I see it, but an actual, physical fact.

If I am at the studio while porn is being shot, and all I do is pop the lock on the drinks cooler, then guess what? Unless I got sweaty under some scantily clad lady on film, I was not involved in the shooting of some porno movie. Again, this is not just a matter of how I see things, but the physical fact of what is, and what is not involvement in a thing.



posted on Mar, 31 2016 @ 05:52 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Yea, people can tend to be confrontational when they think they're being looked down upon, but TECHNICALLY if you just keep telling them "I am going to have to refuse you service for personal reasons" they can't really do anything. Hell, the whole "Cake" thing that recently came up, the owners of the establishment weren't fined for discrimination. They were fined for posting the name and address of the gay couple who complained on facebook, exposing them to cyber-bullying (actually a for of 'Harassment' legally).

Just stand your ground and turn the other cheek.

Unfortunately there are assholes in all walks of life, so if you've felt unfairly attacked in the past I'm sorry you had to go through that. I've had this conversation with a number of homosexuals that have said "I'm sorry, but I believe my faith forbids me from doing this cake." (or a similar polite variation) wouldn't be a problem, but the confrontational people who think its an personal insult that they exist gets a little tiring.



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join