d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Public Accommodation Laws Are Wrong
Prev14567Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Mar 4 2023 12:21pm
Quote (JessiWan @ Mar 4 2023 10:33am)
That's because everybody agrees that murder is wrong and should be a crime. However not everyone agrees that racism is wrong and should be a crime.


So if enough people agree then it's fine?

What's the line? Literally everybody? 90%? 75%?
Member
Posts: 22,264
Joined: Aug 17 2021
Gold: 1,546.83
Warn: 30%
Mar 4 2023 12:22pm
Quote (NetflixAdaptationWidow @ Mar 4 2023 10:21am)
So if enough people agree then it's fine?

What's the line? Literally everybody? 90%? 75%?


No. This is not a referendum.

Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Mar 4 2023 02:16pm
Quote (JessiWan @ Mar 4 2023 12:22pm)
No. This is not a referendum.


So it doesn't depend on how many agree?
Member
Posts: 7,251
Joined: Oct 9 2021
Gold: 4,661.71
Mar 4 2023 03:12pm
Every law is originally based on morals. This should be clear.
Member
Posts: 13,313
Joined: May 20 2004
Gold: 253.00
Mar 4 2023 03:16pm
Noticed no one has really challenged the OP on facts and went straight to the "evil racist" argument.

#1 The United States and Canada are constitutional republics, not democracies. While some small measures may be voted on by referendum almost every law is decided on by representatives chosen in an election. Simply put if you do not like the laws then you may vote for new representation to change said laws and if enough people share your viewpoints they will vote for similar candidates that will change those laws. When you look at the demographics the population of Canada and the US are majority. If most people were upset about current public accommodation laws they would vote for representation to get rid of said laws.
#2 I wasn't aware that there were seating charts on public transportation except for air or trains. You can sit wherever you want by whoever you want but just because you paid for a ticket doesn't give you ownership of the vehicle you are using. Taxpayers funded those modes of transportation and people of color pay taxes as well giving them the equal right to access available seating on said transportation.

I'm pretty laissez-faire when it comes to business's. The government should have as minimum involvement with the running of said businesses only intervening when public safety is involved however that logic is also true in reverse. For example if a bakery refuses to bake a gay wedding cake that is their right and the government should not intervene but if the people denied services get the word out and enough people feel the same way and boycott and or protest the bakery causing it to shut down due to lack of income then the government shouldn't interfere there as well. Successful businesses generally do not discriminate and focus on the color of peoples money rather than the color of the hand giving it to them.
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Mar 4 2023 03:31pm
Quote (tman65ky @ Mar 4 2023 03:16pm)
Noticed no one has really challenged the OP on facts and went straight to the "evil racist" argument.

#.


You should read again because I'm actively challenging OP
Member
Posts: 16,078
Joined: Dec 27 2019
Gold: 69.69
Mar 4 2023 03:38pm
Quote (tman65ky @ Mar 5 2023 10:16am)
Noticed no one has really challenged the OP on facts and went straight to the "evil racist" argument.

#1 The United States and Canada are constitutional republics, not democracies. While some small measures may be voted on by referendum almost every law is decided on by representatives chosen in an election. Simply put if you do not like the laws then you may vote for new representation to change said laws and if enough people share your viewpoints they will vote for similar candidates that will change those laws. When you look at the demographics the population of Canada and the US are majority. If most people were upset about current public accommodation laws they would vote for representation to get rid of said laws.
#2 I wasn't aware that there were seating charts on public transportation except for air or trains. You can sit wherever you want by whoever you want but just because you paid for a ticket doesn't give you ownership of the vehicle you are using. Taxpayers funded those modes of transportation and people of color pay taxes as well giving them the equal right to access available seating on said transportation.

I'm pretty laissez-faire when it comes to business's. The government should have as minimum involvement with the running of said businesses only intervening when public safety is involved however that logic is also true in reverse. For example if a bakery refuses to bake a gay wedding cake that is their right and the government should not intervene but if the people denied services get the word out and enough people feel the same way and boycott and or protest the bakery causing it to shut down due to lack of income then the government shouldn't interfere there as well. Successful businesses generally do not discriminate and focus on the color of peoples money rather than the color of the hand giving it to them.


In that regard capitalism works because it operates on the voting power of the dollar. It doesn't care what color or sexual preference the hand that holds the money. It represents value not your religious or political beliefs.
These socialist laws and proposals simply trying to mandate morality. I say let the chips fall and play out the natural consequences, let businesses make their own decisions but equally they should bear the good and the bad. You want to not sell to some religious group fine don't expect people to sell to you. It works itself out eventually because people will find a middle ground or they will be forced deal with the consequences.

If you want gay cake why don't you ask around more than one shop or pay extra or ask for ingredients and do it yourself how hard is it to draw a penis on a cake? Its clearly an unreasonable request
Member
Posts: 31,915
Joined: Oct 25 2005
Gold: 3,868.50
Mar 4 2023 03:50pm
Quote (JessiWan @ Mar 2 2023 06:24pm)
The government shouldn't get to determine for business owners who is and isn't a legitimate member of the public. The way I see it, it's people's private business, they can run it however they want. .


Norfolk Southern agrees.
Member
Posts: 22,264
Joined: Aug 17 2021
Gold: 1,546.83
Warn: 30%
Mar 4 2023 03:58pm
Quote (NetflixAdaptationWidow @ Mar 4 2023 12:16pm)
So it doesn't depend on how many agree?


I mean exactly what I say. It's not a referendum. Feel free to spin it your way, though.
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Mar 4 2023 04:00pm
Quote (JessiWan @ Mar 4 2023 03:58pm)
I mean exactly what I say. It's not a referendum. Feel free to spin it your way, though.


You haven't given a basis to say that it's not the government's business.

The government can clearly make laws based on moral grounds. Why can't they do the same with regard to discrimination?
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev14567Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll