Women and Augusta National Golf Club

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Ming
No... I'm not trolling. I'm just pointing out that you seem to be totally against discrimination, but are the first to admit that discrimination is OK. To you, it only depends on who is being discriminated against. It's ok to discriminate against men, but not communists...

GET A GRIP... You are talking out of both sides of your mouth.

No I am not. If you can't see the difference between justifiable discrimination and wrongful discrimination then that's your problem. I'm only against wrongful discrimination - the other sort doesn't bother me. For example, I'm not wringing my hands because a public health system gives women free mammograms and not men. But this doesn't stop me believing that keeping blacks at the back of the bus is not a despicable thing to do. Sometimes different treatment is justified - sometimes it isn't. And this is hardly a profound point.

And I'm sorry... if you can't see the difference between being a man or a woman... or the difference between Blacks and Whites... then you will never understand how illogical your arguments are. And your comments that all men are pigs, and to use that as justification why women should have their own clubs, but men shouldn't just shows how there is no logic or reason in any of your arguments...

There's a lot more than there is in yours. As if you know anything about logic anyway.

I don't believe that men should be prohibited from having their own clubs. My position is that when there's a good reason, it's fine. When the reason is just plainly sexist it isn't. I don't think golf clubs have a good reason. Sound the trumpets! What a controversial position!?!

[Ben Kenobi]

But this doesn't stop me believing that keeping blacks at the back of the bus is not a despicable thing to do.

So public transit = private club?

That's an interesting world you live in, Agathon.

[loinburger]

Originally posted by Agathon
I don't think golf clubs have a good reason. Sound the trumpets! What a controversial position!?!

It's not a controversial position, just a stupid one -- if you were making a consistent argument then it would be one thing, but by claiming that one form of discrimination is acceptable across the board while another is unacceptable across the board without making any kind of objective justification whatsoever you've basically rendered your entire argument meaningless.

You also say that Augusta doesn't have a good reason for disallowing women, in your opinion. What you continually fail to realize is that your opinion doesn't matter, since Augusta is a private club -- you don't pay any dues or contribute to the club in any meaningful way, so why should you have a say in how the club is run? I'm not allowed to dictate how somebody runs a business or club within the confines of the law, and neither can you, regardless of how righteously indignant and argumentatively inconsistent you are.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

public transit = public money = non private = everyone allowed.
privategolf course = private money = non public = members admitted by private ownership.

[Imran Siddiqui]

What I was saying was that the determination of what counts as good reasons would be ultimately decided by a court based on the antidiscrimination law which would provide a basis for the decision.

Um... may I point to you the Boy Scout opinion by the US Supreme Court (the ultimate arbiter of antidiscrimination law)?

Of course I have an argument for it. My argument is that racist institutions are wrong and that they harm those who they discriminate against.

I believe Communist institutions are wrong and they harm society. Can I close all of them?

If not, then why. What is different?

And since the harm done by discrimination is far worse than the harm done by stopping a few racists from actively being racist I don't see the problem.

You act like your beliefs are the God's honest truth.

Again we aren't talking about speech here.

BULL****! I can't think of a worse restriction on speech than abolishing groups that advocate a view that you don't like.

I'm not saying that racists should be kept quiet.

Yes you are.

In short where the organisation is centred around people being of a like minded view and that's in a large part the point of it (say like an organisation of Catholic youth) there is no problem with excluding others who don't hold similar values (because the values are the point of the organisation) - with the important exception of racist organisations like the KKK - because racism is wrong and racists need to be prevented from having any ability to turn their poisonous views into reality.

Yes, thank you Herr Dictator. Unfortunetly for you, most of us Americans believe in the concept of free speech. We believe that everyone has the right to say their views and join with likeminded people to further their views no matter HOW repugnant! It is the only way to have a free society.

You don't counter discimination by more discrimination.

Every person you prevent from excersizing their rights, you weaken our democracy.

We are only taking away the rights of racists to be racist, that is not very much at all.

What is that saying? 'They came for the Communists and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. They came for the Homosexuals and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a homosexual.... When they came for me, there was no one to speak for me' (basically).

You might as well take away the rights of Democrats to be Democrats. That's not much at all. And they hurt America more than anyone else . I'm sure you don't agree, but your proposals are the first step.

'I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it' - Voltaire (this includes being able to join an organization)

When you try to ban 'racist' organizations it'll be over my (and the ACLU's) dead body.

[SlowwHand]

[Lawrence of Arabia]

ACLU = good

[yavoon]

ACLU=amazingly necessary idea gone horribly wrong.

=]

[Drake Tungsten]

ACLU = good

If only it were that simple. It pains me to see an organization with such a noble purpose embarass itself by acting with a complete lack of perspective. The ACLU has become a joke and I don't think it will ever recover...

[SlowwHand]

Almost any organization that starts out with good intent runs the risk of losing their aim.

Labor unions. Prime example.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by loinburger

It's not a controversial position, just a stupid one -- if you were making a consistent argument then it would be one thing, but by claiming that one form of discrimination is acceptable across the board while another is unacceptable across the board without making any kind of objective justification whatsoever you've basically rendered your entire argument meaningless.

Duh? My name is Loinburger and I am a moron who sounds off without reading other people's posts.

Read and learn. One can treat the sexes and races differently without doing anything wrong, but that doesn't mean that every form of different treatment is permissible. That some forms of different treatment are good doesn't entail that none are bad.

Now don't bother me with this stupidity again.

You also say that Augusta doesn't have a good reason for disallowing women, in your opinion. What you continually fail to realize is that your opinion doesn't matter, since Augusta is a private club -- you don't pay any dues or contribute to the club in any meaningful way, so why should you have a say in how the club is run? I'm not allowed to dictate how somebody runs a business or club within the confines of the law, and neither can you, regardless of how righteously indignant and argumentatively inconsistent you are.

Blah blah blah.....

Again - this assumes without argument that somehow because an institution is private (whatever that means - a useful and consistent definition is hard to come by) its members can do what they like.

This is false. They can't manufacture crack, sell children, plan terrorist attacks and lots of other things. Assuming that they have the right to racially discriminate as you have done is called begging the question. That club, like other clubs has to obey the law. If there were a law against racial discrimination it would have to obey it too.

Perhaps you ought to fly off back to libertarian la-la land where everyone can own their own field howitzer and blacks are at the back of the bus where they belong.

[SlowwHand]

Negative vibes, Agathon.

Must be that Commie Complex.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

What I was saying was that the determination of what counts as good reasons would be ultimately decided by a court based on the antidiscrimination law which would provide a basis for the decision.

Um... may I point to you the Boy Scout opinion by the US Supreme Court (the ultimate arbiter of antidiscrimination law)?

Gee whiz - conflating morality with legality. Another fine fallacy to add to your collection.

I believe Communist institutions are wrong and they harm society. Can I close all of them? If not, then why. What is different?

Because your belief has no basis in fact. I've no idea what the American Communist Party gets up to, but I imagine that PETA are a greater threat to the republic. Unlike the unknown predations of the American Communist Party the effects of racism are plainly evident.

And since the harm done by discrimination is far worse than the harm done by stopping a few racists from actively being racist I don't see the problem.

You act like your beliefs are the God's honest truth.

So you're saying that the fact that a few people feel bad because can't indulge their racist proclivities is much worse than the effects that tolerating discrimination has upon minorities. Imagine the horrors forced on the white rednecks by making them play golf with the hated racial enemy.



I think I'll die laughing now.

Again we aren't talking about speech here.

BULL****! I can't think of a worse restriction on speech than abolishing groups that advocate a view that you don't like.

I'm not saying that racists should be kept quiet.

Yes you are.

No I'm not - you reconstruct my argument from what's been shown in this thread and you show me where I am committed to silencing racists. I can think of other reasons why they ought to be silenced, but I haven't brought them up in this thread.

And don't try bringing up the KKK. I said it ought to be prohibited as a criminal gang, but that is not the same as gagging its members.

Yes, thank you Herr Dictator. Unfortunetly for you, most of us Americans believe in the concept of free speech. We believe that everyone has the right to say their views and join with likeminded people to further their views no matter HOW repugnant! It is the only way to have a free society.

Well yours isn't particularly free if you're black or poor. Again - I never said that I was gagging people. It's amazing how a claim that institutions shouldn't be able to practice discrimination has suddenly been transformed into an attack on free speech.

Every person you prevent from excersizing their rights, you weaken our democracy.

You don't have a bloody democracy. It's poisoned by money and influence peddling to the degree that hardly anyone bothers to vote. Your country is conformist to the hilt. All that daft flag waving and fascist pledging and "supporting the president". Give me a break. Some idiot once tried to get schoolkids in my country to salute the flag - it died - everyone thought it was silly.

What is that saying? 'They came for the Communists and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. They came for the Homosexuals and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a homosexual.... When they came for me, there was no one to speak for me' (basically).

What if in 1931 they'd come for the Nazis....?

'I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it' - Voltaire (this includes being able to join an organization)

How patronising. I may not agree with what you say, but if it's harmless I'll not bother you. But if you start f*cking things up for other people - look out.

When you try to ban 'racist' organizations it'll be over my (and the ACLU's) dead body.

I certainly hope so if the ACLU sticks up for racist scum.

Hasta la victoria siempre.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Agathon
No I am not. If you can't see the difference between justifiable discrimination and wrongful discrimination then that's your problem.

It's not discrimination... and that's the point. People have the right to pick their own friends. That's the right of association, not discrimination. Your whole argument is that Augusta should be treated differently because it's male only and your ONLY reason is "because men are pigs." But then you say women should be able to have their own club, and that when women do, it's not discrimination. Well guess what... it isn't discrimination for either sex to want their own club.

PLEASE EXPLAIN WHY WOMEN SHOULD BE ALLOWED THEIR OWN CLUBS BUT NOT MEN. Your opinion that all men are pigs IS NOT a valid argument. It's discrimination.

But this doesn't stop me believing that keeping blacks at the back of the bus is not a despicable thing to do.

Gee... Augusta's male only policy doesn't stop my from thinking that keeping blacks at the back of the bus is despicable... so what's your point?

There's a lot more than there is in yours. As if you know anything about logic anyway.

Your logic is that it's discrimination if men do it, but not if women do it... please explain the logic here. You also say that private clubs are ok, but not Augusta/Men's golf clubs... again, please explain the logic here.
You seem to be the one having problems with the concepts of reason and logic.

I don't believe that men should be prohibited from having their own clubs. My position is that when there's a good reason, it's fine. When the reason is just plainly sexist it isn't. I don't think golf clubs have a good reason. Sound the trumpets! What a controversial position

So you are the only one the universe that gets to decided if there is a valid reason or not.

And since you have no knowledge of Men's Golf Clubs, and therefore can't see a reason, it must be discrimination and not be allowed.

Yet Women can have their own clubs because men are pigs...



Well.. that's not a logic argument. That's just a statement showing that when you don't understand something... you don't like it and don't want to allow it. Hmmm, kind of sounds just like discrimination...

Come on back after you take a class or two on logic.
And if you already did... you might want to take it again.

[Tuberski]

I can't believe you are still arguing with this mental defective.

ACK!