How does this happen? Chick-fil-A branded as anti-gay?

[Flubber]

Uh, people have been fined by the HRCs for refusing to do gay weddings. How is this not the same as what you're talking about here? Forcing businesses to take on clients is wrong. No private enterprise should be forced to take on clients that they do not want.

Ben

This wil be my last response to you. Others cite your homophobia or bigotry and that is a factor but I will no longer engage because of either your unwillingness or inability to follow a simple logical argument combined with your dishonest posting style.

To the point above.

You had stated hat that a food place could not have a blacklist comprised of the names of individuals who had acually cheated or abused their delivery staff if those names were predominantly minority. When called on this you said that photographers were punished for refusing to serve gay people and it was the same.


So your argument seems to be that it is the same to make a blanket refusal to serve gay people or black people ...... As it is to have a rule or practice to not serve people that cheat or abuse you ( which list may disproportionately include gay people or black people)

The ridiculousness of this argument is obvious on its face. ( hell one is obvious direct discrimination while the other is not). The fact that you would make up the first example while trying to pass it off as factual and then secondly then try to pass it off as being the same as an example of direct discrimination..... Well these are just the latest examples in a long string of dishonest debate from you. Either you perceive your error and are dishonest or you do not, and are insufficiently intelligent To merit debate.

Oh and please do not take the lack of future engagement as conceding any point you are making. THanks

[Ben Kenobi]

You're comparing apples to oranges. If you had family in Mexico and tried to use that service, I'm pretty sure they'd be happy to accomodate you. Offering a service that is primarily used by one group is not in any way the same as refusing to serve people based on their race or gender or disabilities etc.

Oh, I'm sure, if I spoke spanish, I'm sure!

How do you know they only hire asians?

Because their staff is 100 percent asian.

It's relevant because often small minority communities hire family/friends/aquaintances rather than using a formal hiring process.

I'm aware of that. Isn't that racist according to you guys?

I couldn't give a **** if its to the detriment of the business.

I, and many other folks do. That's the point. You're happy with red tape up the ying yang if you're told that it's 'for the greater good'. But it doesn't actually serve the greater good or even advance your own cause. All it does is eat up money that could be used for other purposes. That's my point.

People talk about business as if it will just disappear at the slightest constraint, yet supply and demand means that is not the case in the slightest

What tends to happen is the heavily regulated businesses become partially government owned and subsidized. Which is great if you have an antipathy towards private enterprise.

We expect our governments to step in to regulate all sorts of behaviour we consider harmful to society as a whole.

Which explains why you'd perform behaviour modification on the 4 percent that disagree with you? How does it feel to have more fascist policies than the BNP?

Yet that 96% is a result of a system with the very measures you now want to remove.

And the evidence for this assertion?

Yet the fact America has gone from segregation to a black president seems to show that the system HAS been working for some people.

Not really. Obama's not an African American. If anything, the fact that he is president demonstrates the exact opposite.

So why not expand that to try and help other groups who are suffering like the disabled, instead of just ripping apart a system that has actually helped people?

It's not getting through to you Kentonio, I've had to deal with the system my whole life. The system is broken. It is not working. The system is the problem and has to be ripped up - if you want to see people succeed.

[Ben Kenobi]

All that you're saying has nothing to do with my original comments.

DUH! That's what I've been saying the whole time. What I actually said and your interpretation of what I said are on two different planes of reality.

Answer the question rah. Is the sign, "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone racist?"

If it's used to deny blacks just because they're black (or substitute any other group) then yes, it is racist by definition.

Yes or no, rah. Simple as that. It's either racist or it is not.

Again racist BY DEFINITION

How? Racist is defined as treating one race differently from another. If your store bans hipsters of all colors, it's not racist.

You think that the system is broken so you don't care if they're racist, BY DEFINITION.

I think that the system itself is racist because it treats different races differently. See asians and black people.

My initial point was that some of the arguments that you posted to support YOUR OPINION were similar to those used by racists back in the 60's to discriminate against blacks. You have not posted any real rebuttals to that.

Uh, you missed the part where I argued that Brown was correct in removing segregation from public schools, and that separate is inherently inequal? America doesn't treat private enterprise the same way as it does public services. Public services are paid by everyone.

[rah]

I should give up, you are too ****ing dense to argue with. (yes I know everyone else already claims that)

Yes or no, rah. Simple as that. It's either racist or it is not.

I SAID YES, if used to deny service to a group, No, if to an individual for an individual reason like no shirt or no shoes. IS THAT SIMPLE ENOUGH FOR SOMEONE AS STUPID AS YOU.

How? Racist is defined as treating one race differently from another. If your store bans hipsters of all colors, it's not racist.

Definitely discrimination and just as bad as racism. You're the only one that cares about the difference. To me, they're equally bad and the definitions are close enough.
I don't care. So YES, it's BAD.

I think that the system itself is racist because it treats different races differently. See asians and black people.

AS I've said already. I don't care that you think the system is broken or racist. That is a separate thing which is immaterial to what I'm saying.

Uh, you missed the part where I argued that Brown was correct in removing segregation from public schools, and that separate is inherently inequal? America doesn't treat private enterprise the same way as it does public services. Public services are paid by everyone.

AGAIN, who cares. You keep trying to sidetrack the issue.
The justifications you're using to support denying service to someone are similar to what racists used to deny blacks.

God, are you dense. It's useless to argue with someone that doesn't listen. Which is a worse handicap that not being able to hear.

[Ben Kenobi]

I SAID YES, if used to deny service to a group, No, if to an individual for an individual reason like no shirt or no shoes. IS THAT SIMPLE ENOUGH FOR SOMEONE AS STUPID AS YOU.

Therefore the statement in and of itself is NOT RACIST.

To me, they're equally bad and the definitions are close enough.

Banning hipsters is racist? Really? You have a terrible definition of 'racism' if hipsters are a race.

AS I've said already. I don't care that you think the system is broken or racist. That is a separate thing which is immaterial to what I'm saying.

Well, I care that the system is racist. Why am I not surprised that you don't care? Racism is ok by you depending on who's doing it.

The justifications you're using to support denying service to someone are similar to what racists used to deny blacks.

Uh, so you're saying that libertarians are racist? Really? Is Justice Thomas racist? He makes the exact same argument. Tom Sowell? Is he racist too?

[Docfeelgood]

I assume they are excluding criminals whatever their colour or sexual orientation.

I think there are many issues that causes there to be a disproportionally high number of African Americans with felony convictions, but not for this thread.

Concur x2

[kentonio]

Oh, I'm sure, if I spoke spanish, I'm sure!

You're saying Mexicans in America only speak Spanish?

I'm aware of that. Isn't that racist according to you guys?

Hiring family? No, not really.

I, and many other folks do. That's the point. You're happy with red tape up the ying yang if you're told that it's 'for the greater good'. But it doesn't actually serve the greater good or even advance your own cause. All it does is eat up money that could be used for other purposes. That's my point.

What tends to happen is the heavily regulated businesses become partially government owned and subsidized. Which is great if you have an antipathy towards private enterprise.

When the government says things like chemical companies must safely dispose of theie waste in a way that doesn't poison local rivers, thats a regulation. When government says that factories cannot spew unfiltered waste out into the atmosphere causing smog to form over cities, thats a regulation. None of these (or a thousand other regulations) cause companies to go out of business/become part owned by government/destroy our freedoms. What they actually do is stop profit focused companies from screwing over society to make a quick buck.

Which explains why you'd perform behaviour modification on the 4 percent that disagree with you? How does it feel to have more fascist policies than the BNP?

Trying to stop 4% of racists from discriminating against minorities isn't exactly third reich material I'm afraid.

Not really. Obama's not an African American. If anything, the fact that he is president demonstrates the exact opposite.

His mothers American and his father was Kenyan. I'm not really sure how much more African American you can be really.

It's not getting through to you Kentonio, I've had to deal with the system my whole life. The system is broken. It is not working. The system is the problem and has to be ripped up - if you want to see people succeed.

Doesn't America have far less protections in place for the disabled than they do for racial discrimination?

[Docfeelgood]

White people are a minority now?

South Africa is a good example of how things have gotten out of control.
Americans want more than anything to have a perfect utopian, homogenized society but it will never happen.
It goes against human nature.

[Kidlicious]

I disagree that government intervention in these matters leads to a freer and more successful society. Especially not with hiring quotas. No businesses should be forced to hire someone to reach quota. They should be free to take on the most qualified person they can find. And I say that as a minority myself. Do I want to get hired because I'm the token deaf guy? Hell no.

First off, Idk what it's like to bne deaf. But I'm also sure that you have no idea what it's like to be black, or gay. So maybe consider stop comparing yourself to blacks or gays in the way that they are minorities. It only shows how little sympathy you have towards those two minority groups. I know you think that you are making a point, but you aren't.

Second. This is a fact, the market does not make sure that members of minority groups are treated fairly or that they have equal access to jobs and housing. That's a fact. Stop saying that it does. It's stupid. The next point of course is that in order for a society to be fair it should make up for that unfairness if it can. Otherwise, it is a failure.

[rah]

God Ben, almost don't even know where to start since you're so dishonest when you argue.

Therefore the statement in and of itself is NOT RACIST.

Your use of it was, since you think a business should be able to exclude a group of people from obtaining service. Or have you changed your mind and now say they shouldn't?

Banning hipsters is racist? Really? You have a terrible definition of 'racism' if hipsters are a race.

Where did I say it was racist you moron. I said it was discrimination and that the definitions were close. So typical of you.

Well, I care that the system is racist. Why am I not surprised that you don't care? Racism is ok by you depending on who's doing it.

OH please, find one post where I said I don't care and that racism is OK. I said it doesn't matter to my argument so I don't care that you think the system is racist. PLEASE LEARN TO READ.

Uh, so you're saying that libertarians are racist? Really? Is Justice Thomas racist? He makes the exact same argument. Tom Sowell? Is he racist too?

WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE IF I THINK THEY"RE RACIST?? Jesus, are you dense.
My point was that your arguments were similar to those used by racists in the 60's. It doesn't matter who else uses those arguments. I was talking about you.

Just admit that you think businesses should be allowed to be racists. By definition. I don't care for your reasons.

[Kidlicious]

I believe a business owner can refuse service for any reason whatsoever. To anybody.

That's what they said in the segregated south.

[Ben Kenobi]

First off, Idk what it's like to bne deaf. But I'm also sure that you have no idea what it's like to be black, or gay. So maybe consider stop comparing yourself to blacks or gays in the way that they are minorities. It only shows how little sympathy you have towards those two minority groups. I know you think that you are making a point, but you aren't.

So what now, you're calling me an Uncle Tom?

You're right, I've never been a black person. I've never spent a day in their shoes. But I have read things written by black people. Specifically some of the people that I have considerable respect for what they have done and what they have written. One of my favorite books, (and requested gift), is the autobiography of Clarence Thomas. "My Grandfather's Son". I don't have many books down here with me right now (my library is mostly still up north), but that is one I have on my shelf here.

I use it in my classes sometimes. I'm going to quote for you part of the autobiography, to get a better idea of where I am coming from and why.

real freedom meant independence from government intrusion, which in turn meant that you had to take responsibility for your own decisions. When the government assumes that responsibility, it takes away your freedom - and wasn't freedom the very thing for which blacks in America were fighting

And that's that point I am trying to drive home to you. You believe that all black people believe as you do, that government is benevolent, and that they have the best interests of the black men and women of america at hand. And I'm here to tell you that this is just not so.

Maybe, I'm not a black man - but I do understand how the government really isn't interested in helping me. They are interested in trapping me, putting me in a box where they can control every aspect of my life. That is the price I would have to pay to go back into the system. Do you not get this Kid? Is this not getting through to you the expectations that the government has for deaf people?

[Ben Kenobi]

Your use of it was, since you think a business should be able to exclude a group of people from obtaining service.

I believe as a business owner owns his own business, that yes, he has the freedom to conduct and manage the business how he sees fit. If an owner is willing to forgo a client, that is his imperative. He does not need a reason. He does not need the government to decide for him how to run his business. He does not need the government to tell him "but thou must", or fine him for making decisions contrary to their will.

You say that is racist and I say, no, it's not. You say that everyone must follow the rules that you set down, or else face the wrath of the state. Do you not see how this is contrary to liberty? To freedom?

Or have you changed your mind and now say they shouldn't?

What you don't seem to get is just because I disagree with how they do things, doesn't mean that I believe they should be forced to do things my way. Yes, I think it's wrong if they pass over the best hire because of his or her race. I think it's detrimental to the overall health of their business. However, it is not my place to tell them how to run their own business. Nor should it be. As an owner of the business, that is their decision to make.

Where did I say it was racist you moron. I said it was discrimination and that the definitions were close.

So your definition is so broad now that anything you don't like qualifies as discrimination. I see. Your input is simple - if you don't like how a business is run - do not patronize them.

OH please, find one post where I said I don't care and that racism is OK.

You're perfectly fine with affirmative action, hiring quotas, etc. You're fine with racism so long as it's the state doing it.

WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE IF I THINK THEY"RE RACIST?

So you're saying now, that Justice Thomas is racist. Perhaps the problem isn't the principles. Perhaps the problem is you. Labelling everyone whom you disagree with as 'racist' tends to water down the term.

It doesn't matter who else uses those arguments.

Uh, you just said it does matter who else uses the argument. The fact that Justice Thomas uses the exact same arguments I do is devastating to your argument. It shows that racism has nothing at all to do with it. Freedom on the other hand...

Just admit that you think businesses should be allowed to be racists.

I think business owners should be allowed to run their business as they see fit.

[kentonio]

Maybe, I'm not a black man - but I do understand how the government really isn't interested in helping me. They are interested in trapping me, putting me in a box where they can control every aspect of my life. That is the price I would have to pay to go back into the system. Do you not get this Kid? Is this not getting through to you the expectations that the government has for deaf people?

Ben how can you not get this? By enacting legislation to stop discrimination the government stops you having to live under their control and allows you to live the same full life as everyone else! If you have the same employment rights, access to services and opportunities in life, then you don't need help to get by at a full and decent standard of living. Ironically it's about freedom for goodness sake!

Seriously dude, do you really think people in government give a **** about trying to control your life? Do you not think they maybe have somewhat higher ambitions than that?

[Ben Kenobi]

Ben how can you not get this? By enacting legislation to stop discrimination the government stops you having to live under their control and allows you to live the same full life as everyone else! If you have the same employment rights, access to services and opportunities in life, then you don't need help to get by at a full and decent standard of living. Ironically it's about freedom for goodness sake!

Then why does the average deaf person have a reading level of grade four, no high school education and no college?

If the government wants them to have a full and decent standard of living, why are they not educating deaf people?

I'll tell you why - because the government doesn't care. That is why they perpetuate a segregated system. That is why they cripple deaf people by insisting that they learn to sign. Most deaf people talk very poorly, if at all. The ones who do manage to learn how to speak are the ones who do that on their own time.

I was fortunate. I got out of the box.

After seeing what they've done, I just want the government to stay the hell out of my life.