The Wow I Can't Believe That News Story Thread

[OccultHawk]

Originally Posted by Chula Vista

Brass tacks man. Your analogies just keep getting more and more out there.

And Hawk, the argument doesn't hold up. The USA has laws regarding discrimination, both in the public and the business sectors.

You want to open a business in this country and call it your own? OK. You still have to abide by laws - local, state, and federal. You want to profit off of our free market system? Cool. But you have to play by the rules to cash in.

You can not discriminate based on sexual orientation.

Basic human rights 101.

I know the law. My point is it’s worth considering whether there should be these kinds of laws. It’s not a top priority or even a philosophy I subscribe to. It’s a little frustrating because Merit (sorry dude) is rambling all over the place and not doing much to advocate for the merits of a much more laissez faire style of governance. Since I’m not a proponent of private property I’m not especially inspired to try to resell it for him. Starting from a position of homophobia didn’t help.

[[MERIT]]

Originally Posted by OccultHawk

it’s worth considering whether there should be these kinds of laws.

Exactly

Originally Posted by OccultHawk

Merit (sorry dude) is rambling all over the place and not doing much to advocate for the merits of a much more laissez faire style of governance. Since I’m not a proponent of private property I’m not especially inspired to try to resell it for him. Starting from a position of homophobia didn’t help.

No worries. I' m always doing a dozen things at once when I'm on here, so I don't have time to make long, thought-out diatribes.

And again, it's not about homophobia, it's about others not having the right to your labor. What is more fascist? A gay couple being denied [by fellow private citizens] a wedding cake because they are homosexuals, or a citizen being forced by their government to perform labor against their will? I think both are wrong and stupid, but the latter is worse.

[Frownland]

Originally Posted by [MERIT]

Exactly


No worries. I' m always doing a dozen things at once when I'm on here, so I don't have time to make long, thought-out diatribes.

And again, it's not about homophobia, it's about others not having the right to your labor. What is more fascist? A gay couple being denied a wedding cake because they are homosexuals, or a citizen being forced by their government to perform labor against their will? I both are wrong and stupid, but the latter is worse.

Could you answer my question please?

Originally Posted by Frownland

Besides for "freeeeedom", what do businesses lose when they're not allowed to discriminate against customers? What do individuals lose when they are discriminated against? Which one of those is the bigger or more important loss?

[OccultHawk]

And again, it's not about homophobia

My bad, I should have said a position that could be misinterpreted as homophobic.

[[MERIT]]

Originally Posted by elphenor

what about my right to not be discriminated against

Aren't we all special. We all have to be treated nice and neat. Again someone SHOULDN'T discriminate against others based upon their race, sexual orientation, religion, gender, etc., but do we really need the government to tell us that?

If the only reason you act good is to avoid incarceration or eternal damnation, does that REALLY make you a good person? In my views, you do good things because they are the right thing to do. In the eyes of those arguing against me in this thread, you do good things because the government tells you to.

Originally Posted by elphenor

no right to healthcare?

You have the right to health insurance. You don't, however, have the right to someone else's labor. again, that doesn't really apply in this situation, as has been discussed, but I need to stress that FACT.

Originally Posted by elphenor

do you think people have a right to clean drinking water?

Of course. Do you have the right to force others to extract and clean it for you? No, you do not.

[[MERIT]]

Originally Posted by OccultHawk

My bad, I should have said a position that could be misinterpreted as homophobic.

You're good. Call me a homophobe. I couldn't care less.

I'm like the soldier who fights for your right to protest against him and his war. Seems counter-productive and dumb, but it's the right thing to do.

[Frownland]

Originally Posted by OccultHawk

a position that could be misinterpreted as homophobic.

That would be the correct interpretation. The first thing that he did to justify his stance was dismiss homosexuality as frivolous while oddly using it interchangeably with gender-fluidity. Later on, he dismissed those who didn't agree with him as only doing so because the scenario involved the LGBT community. Both of those (among many others) espouse the motivation behind his reasoning on this subject.

Originally Posted by [MERIT]

Aren't we all special. We all have to be treated nice and neat. Again someone SHOULDN'T discriminate against others based upon their race, sexual orientation, religion, gender, etc., but do we really need the government to tell us that?

History tells us yes.

If the only reason you act good is to avoid incarceration or eternal damnation, does that REALLY make you a good person? In my views, you do good things because they are the right thing to do. In the eyes of those arguing against me in this thread, you do good things because the government tells you to.

Strawman alert!

You have the right to health insurance. You don't, however, have the right to someone else's labor. again, that doesn't really apply in this situation, as has been discussed, but I need to stress that FACT.

both sides of the scenario are very plainly opinions. Morality and fact are not even in the same family tree.










WOULD YOU MIND ANSWERING THE QUESTION THAT I ASKED HERE?

Originally Posted by Frownland

Besides for "freeeeedom", what do businesses lose when they're not allowed to discriminate against customers? What do individuals lose when they are discriminated against? Which one of those is the bigger or more important loss?

You're free to say "no I won't answer your question, Frownland."

[Frownland]

Originally Posted by elphenor

the right to insurance sounds like demanding someone cover you mate

what if all water filtration and distribution was privatized instead of regulated as a public utility

would it make sense to say "you don't have the right" to someone being price gouged into dehydration?

Free market! Everything is gonna turn up roses, buddy, I promise.

[Frownland]

Originally Posted by elphenor

besides medicine comes from the earth like everything else

who decided who had the right to own what?

I know you and I weren't consulted

I said that everything will be fine! How about we focus on getting rid of all of these pesky laws, we're having a hard time finding places to store them. And we're getting rid of the laws for that reason only.

[Trollheart]

Originally Posted by [MERIT]

No, because they CHOSE to enter into a contract. It wasn't FORCED upon them.

I'm saying that if they CHOOSE to take the oath, they should, by all means, abide by it.

If for some reason they are in a medical practice where they didn't have to swear some kind of oath or enter into some kind of contract [be they a privately owned and operated medical institution], then they can do what they want, within reason.

It's about freedom. Not discrimination. Plain and simple. You can spin it to fit whatever agenda pleases you the most [not you personally TH, people in general], but that doesn't change what it is.

You said doctor. EVERY DOCTOR has to swear to, and abide by, the H.O. So maybe you're trying to backpedal or move the goalposts here, but it won't work. If you mean doctor, as you said, then there is no middle ground: it's black and white. If you're a doctor, you are bound to treat your patients under the oath which you freely (were not forced to) swore to. That simple, really.