A civil debate?

[PCXV]

Which part of my statement is in error?


Also, maybe you can explain this...Do some people have more rights than others? Should they?

How many homes are seized by the government because mooches don't want to pay for the schools that their kids went to? Is that what happened to you?

Define rights.

 

[chemphlegm]

But how exactly did he 'violate his civil rights'? I don't in any way agree with what he did. But a business has a right to refuse service to any individual for any reason. And we as individuals have a right to either give that business our money or not. I feel like what I said might give the impression I'm excusing the baker in some way. To clarify. I am in NO WAY excusing or saying what he did was okay. But he didn't physically attack them, and as far as I know he wasn't verbally abusive in any way, if I'm missing a part of this story where he was more than just a guy with kinda backwards beliefs hit me up with a link and I'll retract my statement. He simply said that due to his beliefs he could not do it. So wouldn't we be violating HIS civil rights if we forced him to do so against his beliefs anyways?

understood.

no matter where you live in this country the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 says you cannot deny service to someone because of his or her race, color, religion, national origin or disability. In some states and cities, you also cannot discriminate against people because of their sexual orientation. If there is no state, federal or local law prohibiting discrimination in public accommodations against a particular group of people, then you can legally refuse to serve that group of people.

 

[Sour Wreck]

No, no wall. But a huge part of the fabric of America is religious freedom. I don't think that they should refuse service. But if a business can tell me to leave for not being properly dressed, why not a belief that they hold deeply? It's my right as a consumer to go elsewhere. If I don't like it to bad. I'll give em hell on Yelp and move on.

this is the problem.

christians think they are being prosecuted if they can't get their way.

morons !!!!!!

 

[Rob Roy]

How many homes are seized by the government because mooches don't want to pay for the schools that their kids went to? Is that what happened to you?

Define rights.

Home seizures? All of the ones where the victims do not pay the thugs extortion demands.

I notice you didn't refute any of my assertions. What a surprise.

 

[InigoMontoya]

Another person that doesn't understand common core.

I never said all homeschooled kids are indoctrinated in religious dogma and fall behind their public schooled counterpart, I said some are/do, which is true.

Part of religious dogma, at least in regards to Christianity, is always having to be the victim. I've seen you post asking if others think they are better than you several times, and it makes me wonder about your background (not in an insulting way). To answer your general line of questioning, insulting has only come after positions and tactics have been established. The libertarians refuse to temper their views, whereas most of the rest of us support a third way of a mixed economy (public and private sectors). A decent portion of Americans are hardlined against any government, especially one that promotes humanist, liberal values. They are virtually nihilists when it comes to politics, blaming both sides but not-so-secretly defending Republicans as they consciously or sub-consciously identify with the right-wing dogma of oligarchical greed, bigotry, xenophobia, and misanthropy. Deplorables is the best way to describe them, as they are iredeemable by either choice of nature; they want to see it all burn and thus their only goal is muddy the conversation with empty platitudes within logic fallacies. Libertarianism is retarded.

I haven't looked all that much into common core so I'll say right now you may be very right. And that's very true, some do, and the same can be said the other way. I apologize for not actually getting full context on what you said. And I ask others if they think their better than me because when I'm being called an idiot or something similar, I have to question why they think they have a right. I think republicans are just as much to blame as democrats. My father's side of the family were super hardcore conservatives, whereas on my mother's side they are the definition of liberal die hards. So I took what I think was right from both platforms. I'f I'm presented with factual information telling me I'm wrong I will absolutely admit it and change my view on it. I'm fiscally conservative and believe we can't spend our way out of debt and bigger gov't is not the answer. But I don't like associating with libertarians because they have given themselves such a bad name in the past decade or so. It's just the closest I can come to a party. I love my country. I believe we are all equal and I think there are a lot of problems. But if we come together, even if we disagree on some shit. We would have so much more of an impact than just getting each other riled up.

 

[Rob Roy]

this is the problem.

christians think they are being prosecuted if they can't get their way.

morons !!!!!!

Christians have every right to control their own property and hold their own beliefs, they also have ZERO right to determine the use of other peoples property and force their beliefs on others. Nobody does. Wouldn't you agree?

 

[chemphlegm]

When businesses open their doors to the public, they must open them to everyone on the same terms, regardless of race, color, national origin, disability, or – under many state laws – sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity. Even when a business owner’s religious beliefs may motivate her to discriminate, that doesn’t justify an exemption from our civil rights laws. Providing commercial services, like selling cakes, doesn’t mean a business owner is endorsing anyone’s marriage. It simply means they are following the rules that apply to us all.
Demands for religious exemptions from civil rights laws are not new. In the past, businesses have repeatedly sought to pay women less than men because of a religious belief that men are “heads of household” and women should not work outside the home.

businesses have refused service to people living with HIV because of a belief that they are sinful.

restaurants refusing to serve blacks
NO DISABLED ALLOWED
NO COLORED ALLOWED
The courts rightly rejected all of these claims for religious exemptions, despite the fact that they were based on deeply held beliefs.

In which these violations would you support the offender?

 

[PCXV]

No, no wall. But a huge part of the fabric of America is religious freedom. I don't think that they should refuse service. But if a business can tell me to leave for not being properly dressed, why not a belief that they hold deeply? It's my right as a consumer to go elsewhere. If I don't like it to bad. I'll give em hell on Yelp and move on.

One is unsanitary and poses a risk to other customers and the restraunt in the case of a health inspection, the other is harmless and only a problem because of personal bigotry. Agents of a business act in the capacity of that business, which has agreed to serve the public by law and to make reasonable accomodations. The business operates to accomplish a specific function, which the government aka the people aka the community have a stake/say in with regards to serving the community in a fair, equitable way. The government aka the people have the right to regulate businesses if there is a very good reason, simply put.

 

[InigoMontoya]

this is the problem.

christians think they are being prosecuted if they can't get their way.

morons !!!!!!

Who's saying anything about christians being prosecuted? Am I missing something?

 

[Rob Roy]

When businesses open their doors to the public, they must open them to everyone on the same terms, regardless of race, color, national origin, disability, or – under many state laws – sex, sexual orientation, or gender identity. Even when a business owner’s religious beliefs may motivate her to discriminate, that doesn’t justify an exemption from our civil rights laws. Providing commercial services, like selling cakes, doesn’t mean a business owner is endorsing anyone’s marriage. It simply means they are following the rules that apply to us all.
Demands for religious exemptions from civil rights laws are not new. In the past, businesses have repeatedly sought to pay women less than men because of a religious belief that men are “heads of household” and women should not work outside the home.

businesses have refused service to people living with HIV because of a belief that they are sinful.

restaurants refusing to serve blacks
NO DISABLED ALLOWED
NO COLORED ALLOWED
The courts rightly rejected all of these claims for religious exemptions, despite the fact that they were based on deeply held beliefs.

In which these violations would you support the offender?

So would you force a black person to use his property and body to serve a white person against his will?

 

[chemphlegm]

If people have the right of self determination, then there can be no such thing as "civil rights" since the exercise of one right cancelling another right is impossible.

I am more than "pretty sure" about that since it is self evidently accurate.

when one right infringes upon anothers rights, for example

 

[chemphlegm]

So would you force a black person to use his property and body to serve a white person against his will?

So how many slaves of any color would you own if you could own slaves legally?

 

[Rob Roy]

when one right infringes upon anothers rights, for example

So, you believe one person has a right to force an association on the property of another person who is leaving them alone and threaten them with force if they don't comply and that is something you believe is a "civil right" ?

That this "civil right" is a ticket to disregard the wishes of a peaceful property owner and that it's okay to take away the property owners right of self determination in favor of the so called "civil right" as described above?

 

[PCXV]

Home seizures? All of the ones where the victims do not pay the thugs extortion demands.

I notice you didn't refute any of my assertions. What a surprise.

I noticed you have no evidence to support your argument.

What assertions? Looked like questions to me, I asked you to clarify.

 

[Sour Wreck]

Christians have every right to control their own property and hold their own beliefs, they also have ZERO right to determine the use of other peoples property and force their beliefs on others. Nobody does. Wouldn't you agree?

i agree up until the point christians want to start putting up nativity scenes on public property. displaying the ten commandments in court houses, refusing service based on someones sexual orientation, etc...

and there is no war on christmas, trump is a fucking liar. obama and his family wished the country Merry Christmas every year.

for christians and their FAKE NEWS media to push this shit is divisive and wrong.


what would jesus do? would he build a fucking wall like southern baptists want to do....?

MORONS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Rob Roy]

So how many slaves of any color would you own if you could own slaves legally?

I don't seek to own anyone. Nor would I consent to being owned.

No masters. No slaves. Peace and individual freedom is my thing.

 

[Fogdog]

No I don't support cutting medical services for the poor. But how is saying that all of the politicians are corrupt naive exactly?

It is naive to say that republicans and democrats are the same.

Republicans are cutting funding for medical services for the poor. Next year about 2 million children will lose healthcare benefits. Of those children several thousand will die or live disabled. Republicans are pushing for even deeper cuts. Democrats would expand coverage, not shrink it. This is but one example of a very stark and clear difference between the two parties.

Regarding your naivete, I submit that if you had a kid that depended on those programs, you'd be less likely to overlook the depredations of the radical right. I submit that it would be difficult to have a civil conversation with people who support removing your child from access to health care.

Let's compare your demand for civil conversation with an earlier reply where you mocked me for saying the the tax bill was literally killing people. Pot calling the kettle black, much?

When an ICE agent appears in a Hispanic neighborhood, it sends a message that spreads fear in the community. People living there have mothers and fathers who can be deported by those agents. If you were one of those people, you wouldn't be so blase about the foolish anti-Hispanic police action the Trump administration is so devoted to carrying out.

Basically, you are a white male living in Utah who can only be blase about the actions of the reactionary right because you won't be affected by any of it.

 

[Rob Roy]

I noticed you have no evidence to support your argument.

What assertions? Looked like questions to me, I asked you to clarify.

My argument is that you own yourself and your property, but you don't own others and their property.

Pretty horrible eh? Which part of my argument do you disagree with?

 

[chemphlegm]

So, you believe one person has a right to force an association on the property of another person who is leaving them alone and threaten them with force if they don't comply and that is something you believe is a "civil right" ?

That this "civil right" is a ticket to disregard the wishes of a peaceful property owner and that it's okay to take away the property owners right of self determination in favor of the so called "civil right" as described above?

I didnt make the law of this land, if I get caught not complying I'd be jailed. If it was that difficult to comply I'd be in a different land

 

[PCXV]

So would you force a black person to use his property and body to serve a white person against his will?

If a neighborhood is established along a river which they drink and bathe out of, and upstream a business starts dumping radioactive waste into the river, do the people not have a right to determine the use of that business's property in part?