• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Private businesses should legally be allowed to deny service to anybody they want for any reason.

:) well then, we are at an impasse, and if you attempt to impose such a system on me and mine, I'll kill you :)

You are certainly allowed to try
 
:shrug: Then discrimination isn't wrong.

Yes it is. In a society where we are equal under the law, no one may be denied service based purely on their identity. We are created equal, and if necessary, equal treatment must be enforced.
 
If some bakery owner wants to deny service to openly gay people, or if Cleetus the bar owner wants to deny service to people of color in his bar out in the sticks, that should be legally acceptable in my opinion. If somebody is willing to limit their own sales because they feel so strongly about not wanting to serve somebody, they should be allowed to deny their service. Somebody that invested in and built their own business should not be forced by the government to do business they don't want to do. If I want to turn down your money I should be legally allowed to do that for any stupid or illogical reason that I want. Nobody should have legal grounds to sue me because I refused to do business with them. It is ridiculous that it triggers national outrage and people get sued over not providing their private service to individuals.

Personally I wouldn't purchase services from a business like that and I would encourage others to do the same, but the government shouldn't be involved. It's all about not giving the government precedence to exert more control over the private sector. The government always has a good reason when it takes us an inch closer to their complete control of our lives and decisions.

This is basically the conservative opinion. It's a lot like what Barry Goldwater believed. It makes a lot of sense if you're a straight White man since you're not the target of any discrimination. And that's why Black people stopped voting for Republicans.
 
81KC1cQ6ytL._AC_SL1500_.jpg
 
now, take a peek at that pic above. notice the date.

are any Americans still alive from that date?
 

You got it. The roads are not just for liberals to use as a cudgel to get their way. Conservatives don't fancy sissies trying to be bullies.
 
^^^
The OP is fine with that.

A libertarian/conservative would argue that people would stop going to this bar and it would go out of business. But that's not the reality of human behavior. If the bar was in a town with a lot of racists then he could continue to this practice with impunity. And if he were the only bar in town, the minority Blacks and Hispanics would be left without this service. That's the problem with libertarian idealism.
 
You got it. The roads are not just for liberals to use as a cudgel to get their way. Conservatives don't fancy sissies trying to be bullies.

That's a nice fantasy but I havent seen that even implied anywhere. Just facts provided for ya...no scary stuff, lol.
 
No it isn't. Any more than adultery or lying are :)

You can believe whatever you like. But to enforce an equal society, discrimination cannot and will not be tolerated. It is the duty of government to enforce this.
 
^^^
The OP is fine with that.

A libertarian/conservative would argue that people would stop going to this bar and it would go out of business. But that's not the reality of human behavior. If the bar was in a town with a lot of racists then he could continue to this practice with impunity. And if he were the only bar in town, the minority Blacks and Hispanics would be left without this service. That's the problem with libertarian idealism.


1. I am extremely suspicious of the notion that, were there money to be made selling alcohol in a bar to blacks and hispanics, no one would do it. It's illegal to sell heroin to anyone, and we can't stop people from doing that.


2. However, you raise perhaps the one point at which government may have a role in stepping in - if the entirety of an industry has been made unavailable to a class based on nothing other than bias against their identity, then there may be room for government action.


Where there is not such a thing, however, well, :shrug: go to the bar down the street. They are probably not as big an asshole, and why support the asshole anyway?
 
You can believe whatever you like

As can you :) But you seem to have confused "what Irredentist believes" with "what must therefore be forced on others".

Save us from the modern theocrats. :roll:
 
As can you :) But you seem to have confused "what Irredentist believes" with "what must therefore be forced on others".

There is no confusion. Justice must be enforced, or it does not exist.
 
^^^
The OP is fine with that.

A libertarian/conservative would argue that people would stop going to this bar and it would go out of business. But that's not the reality of human behavior. If the bar was in a town with a lot of racists then he could continue to this practice with impunity. And if he were the only bar in town, the minority Blacks and Hispanics would be left without this service. That's the problem with libertarian idealism.

Another bar would open to fill the demand not being met.
 
So your argument is only entrepreneurs pay taxes? Okay, now prove it.

:shrug:

Actually I would like to hear more about this notion ya'll have picked up that, the extent to which one pays taxes should be the extent to which one controls government. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom