Paperview
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2013
- Messages
- 10,341
- Reaction score
- 5,076
- Location
- The Road Less Travelled
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Should all Public Accommodation laws be repealed?
Simple straightforward poll question. Yes or No?
Probably. Aren't they basically ineffective anyway and a business can refuse customers for a variety of reasons? Unless, of course, the customers are backed up by an effective dominating assertive thug-like groups. My brother has been refused entry into the nearest market on the grounds that he apparently offends some customers. He has some mental issues and questionable social/emotional intelligence. Never arrested for anything but his mental issues rub some the wrong way. So he is barred from the store. No other markets nearby and he doesn't drive so it is a significant problem for him. Yet precisely the same type of people outraged over a pizza place endorse his banning. Because his issues doesn't have the powerful lobby supporting him.
Accommodation should not be based on the size and power of your support group. It should be based on fairness and justice.
Should all Public Accommodation laws be repealed?
Simple straightforward poll question. Yes or No?
Should all Public Accommodation laws be repealed?
Simple straightforward poll question. Yes or No?
Actually I'm outraged that anyone is letting a store get away with treating your brother that way unless there's something more to the story you're conveniently leaving out, like no one has filed charges, but he has been a legitimate problem and either he hasn't got a minders, or his minders can't control him.
Should all Public Accommodation laws be repealed?
Simple straightforward poll question. Yes or No?
I vote no. BUT....there must be religious and conscientious objection exemptions to the laws.
It really isn't possible to rationally reconcile general anti-discrimination laws with the freedom of association implied by the First Amendment, nor is it even possible to apply such laws in a fair and evenhanded manner compatible with the Fourteenth Amendment's equal protection clause.
Like AA they are no longer needed. We have mobility and diversity like we've never had before.
Why? If Bob's religion says black people are evil why should he be able to refuse service to them? Why are personal views suddenly holy and sacred when you add an arbitrary "religious" title to it?
no. we stopped letting store owners kick out black people, and it was a change for the better and a long time coming. they shouldn't be allowed to kick out gays, either.
we've left plenty of room for discrimination in our laws... and plenty of workarounds.
we can legally kick people out over their politics, or their dress , or their tastes, their behavior... and a whole host of things that have little to do with commerce.
so yeah, as usual , our law have good intentions , but are flawed ..... that's what we get by having demographic based agendas instead of actually being interested in properly formulated laws.
Religion is a private matter. Individuals can have whatever religious beliefs they wish.
Business is a public matter. Businesses that are open to the public must serve the public.
I voted yes. Anyone who thinks in the digital age that the market won't take care of things is naïve. These laws were desperately needed as women, blacks, Asians, Hispanics, the Irish, and so on were systematically subjected to discrimination and second class citizenship. That isn't the case anymore. The laws only cause problems, as evidenced by the last week.
So, you would have all religious people act as hypocrites, paying only lip service to the standards thereof, while politely acting in public against these standards?
yeah, but the thing is this : sexual identity is innate. all of that other stuff can be changed via choice. race and sexual identity can't.
the point is that if we are going to disallow discrimination in public retail commerce, we can narrow it down to simply "ability to pay" and be done with all the bull****..... otherwise, we're just leaving potential loopholes
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?