What's wrong with protecting a private businesses rights?

  • Thread starter Thread starter BobBarkersSoup
  • Start date Start date
Because a private business can allow whatever legal activity it wants to in its establishment since the private business it is a PRIVATE business.
 
Non-profit organizations are businesses too. I don't see how you could support intervention in some businesses and not in others, especially ones that are indirectly subsidized by the government.
 
after a lead-in like that I expected you to try to rip me apart, but instead I got this shit? you changed my words, but repeated what I said and then added the equivalent of the exact same thing you already said. don't tell me I know nothing of arguments when you can't come up with more than words from your Word Of The Day calendar with "uhhhh BAD!" after them.



I don't give a shit. The govt should not be defining who a private business does business with.

Unethical and immoral by whose ethics and morals?

The govt should not be requiring businesses to act in what you believe is a logical way. If it's not logical, let the business fail.


Your entire reply is just more "but but BUT I DON'T LIKE IT!!" It's not up to you to like. It's up to you to vote with your wallet, and not shop at places that do things you don't like.
 
those two items don't involve discrimination against black people, so Rand Paul and his small band of racist followers are not interested.
 
What's with all the red herring illogical rhetorical questions?

(haha, that was a rhetorical question too)
 
why don't you go ahead and explain how history supports your racist and stupid position

ibanotherdeflection
 
The two things I consider relevant to the discussion are a) the right of people to sell goods to whomever they want to, and b) the injustices that occurr when intolerance is given free reign. I don't think that the latter is sufficient reason to infringe on the former, but I think that you and I and everyone else has a duty to prevent or correct injustices to the extent that we can. I think that this is possible without sliding into self immolation. That may be an irreconcilable difference in our philosophies, but maybe we can find some kind of practical compromise.

For example, I'd like to think that family and charity would prevent old people from dying in the streets if the social security program never existed. In the same way, I hope that family and charity would largely eliminate the suffering caused by the intrusions of bigotry into business.
 
They have decreased now if you consider the starting point at "The day after segregation".

They have INCREASED now if you consider the starting point BEFORE segregation.

As with many things in life, where you end up often depends on where you start.
 
I know someone in here is going to claim that health and safety regulations aren't the same thing as a private business barring customers, but honestly, how is it different?

You don't have the right to run a private business however you want to anyways, so whats the problem?
 
I always use those two wrong.

Those being discriminated against simply don't have to patronize the business and can change other peoples opinion of it.

If we worry about everyone's feelings then we will end up with a shit ton of laws on the books and no one can say anything bad to each other for fear of being sued or ending up in jail.
 
Well I guess the solution would be to have a law prohibiting businesses from turning people away based on looks alone. That would really put in in the face for the real racists out there, while not affecting the non-racist business owners one iota (because that doesn't matter to them). Where owuld we find such a law?
 
Yes, let's give up all of our civil liberties so that business doesn't have to be bothered with it. Dumbass conservatives.

Thankfully the diac conservatards are quite fringe in the grand scheme of things.
 
Back
Top