Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 17 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,543 posts, read 16,528,077 times
Reputation: 6029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier
The title of the thread is "South Dakota Lawmaker Says Businesses Should Be Able To Turn Away African-Americans ".
Show Harrier where in the story the lawmaker in question said such a thing.
The issue is free association and the ability of a business to do business with whom they choose.
So your problem is the title of the article, not the article itself.
Quote:
“If someone was a member of the Ku Klux Klan, and they were running a little bakery for instance, the majority of us would find it detestable that they refuse to serve blacks, and guess what? In a matter of weeks or so that business would shut down because no one is going to patronize them,”
Because he did indeed say it.
So now my question is, did you read the article, at all ????? Because it seems you didnt. No one argued that it wasnt about free association, but simply that businesses shouldnt be allowed to discriminate in the first place.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 17 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,543 posts, read 16,528,077 times
Reputation: 6029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier
Harrier did read the article.
Nowhere in that quote did the lawmaker say what the title implies.
Yes he did.I just quoted it. he said they should be able to deny service to who ever he wants, and he gave a specific example of a KKK owned bakery and not serving black people.
He said the free market should then decide if the bakery stays open.
You are now ignoring the fact that he said it.
I honestly believe he is saying the free market should decided, but i simply disagree with it. But that doesnt change the fact that he did say they should have that right, why are you trying to pretend that he didnt say it ?
Yes he did.I just quoted it. he said they should be able to deny service to who ever he wants, and he gave a specific example of a KKK owned bakery and not serving black people.
He said the free market should then decide if the bakery stays open.
You are now ignoring the fact that he said it.
I honestly believe he is saying the free market should decided, but i simply disagree with it. But that doesnt change the fact that he did say they should have that right, why are you trying to pretend that he didnt say it ?
He said "the majority of us would find it detestable that they refuse to serve blacks " -
NOT
"Businesses should be able to turn away African-Americans".
You have an odd talent to read things that are just not on the printed page.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 17 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,543 posts, read 16,528,077 times
Reputation: 6029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier
He said "the majority of us would find it detestable that they refuse to serve blacks " -
NOT
"Businesses should be able to turn away African-Americans".
You have an odd talent to read things that are just not on the printed page.
Are you seriously arguing that arguing that they dont mean the same thing ?
You seems to be claiming that since he didnt say the exact words " Businesses should be able to turn away African-Americans ", that he didnt mean it, and that sir, is spin.
I wonder how many blacks purchase goods in South Dakota and really what would be the effect on a business who refuse to do business with blacks. I guess refusing to do business with physically or mentally challenge people would be okay also. That right sure know how to use buzz words to hide behind their agenda.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 17 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,543 posts, read 16,528,077 times
Reputation: 6029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harrier
Yes.
How is finding it "detestable to turn away blacks" equivalent to "businesses should be able to turn away African-Americans"?
Are you seriously saying that they mean the same thing?
Yes they do.
You said yourself that he was arguing freedom of association. He says he is arguing freedom of association.
He even went on to say that if a business chose to do that, the free market would then decided to close that businesses because no one would patronize it.
You are being dense here Harrier, and i really dont understand why ?
If someone says you have the right to choose who does and doesnt go into your establishment based on their race or religion, then that is indeed the same thing as saying you have a right to choose whether or not they go into your establishment based on whether they are black, white, Mormon, or Islamic because those are races and religions.
"“It’s a bill that protects the constitutional right to free association, the right to free speech and private property rights,” he said.
Jensen goes so far as to say that businesses should have the right to deny service based on a customer’s race or religion – whether that’s right or wrong, he says, can be fairly addressed by the free market, not the government. “If someone was a member of the Ku Klux Klan, and they were running a little bakery for instance, the majority of us would find it detestable that they refuse to serve blacks, and guess what? In a matter of weeks or so that business would shut down because no one is going to patronize them,”"
From OP's link.
So we have a Republican condemning the KKK - just arguing for a libertarian perspective of free association. I think it is pathetic for the OP to take this out of that context and then try to smear a guy for stating a libertarian belief.
This is what is wrong with politics. The guy says racism is wrong, but let the free market punish racists, don't make the government make it illegal to be racist. So the OP presents it in a manner to play the race card instead of merely presenting the guy's beliefs in an honest way and then saying why he supports government intervention instead of this guy's belief...
Very well said.
Harrier is reposting it because some here must have missed it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
