Poll: Should this photographer face legal action?
Yes
No
I'm undecided
I have no idea, I'm only voting so I don't feel left out
[Show Results]
 
Is this fair?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-10-2013, 02:32 PM (This post was last modified: 25-10-2013 02:49 PM by Dark Light.)
RE: Is this fair?
(25-10-2013 02:24 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(25-10-2013 02:15 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  The government wouldn't be legalizing discrimination, it would be legalizing the right to a person to discriminate. I don't know how you cannot understand the difference. Also your "bigot arguement"....really? Bravo on that front. The options are not allow discrimination or have a functioning society. Indeed society functions every day despite discrimination and would do so regardless of what laws were repealed. If these laws were repealed society would not tear itself apart.

Society (in some places) would revert to Jim Crow style, separate-but-equal(?), ghetto-ized behaviors. You call that functioning? Maybe for some, but not for all.

First they bar the gays, then the Latinos, then the Muslims, then ... Slippery slope, DL, slippery slope.

You are advocating a dumbed-down libertarianism where people can allegedly just move to some other place where they are not discriminated against.
They may not have the means, or there may not be another place.

Which places are these? Nowhere in America I have ever been to. If you think this society is formed of such a poor foundation that this law is the only thing keeping our society from spiraling out of control your fears are unfounded, I think. I do not foresee a slippery slope scenario playing out. This is the same sort of slippery slop logic that is sometimes applied to the marijuana debate in which people say using weed leads to heroin and cocaine.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 02:46 PM
RE: Is this fair?
(25-10-2013 02:32 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  Which places are these? Nowhere in America I have ever been to. If you think this society is formed of such a poor foundation that this law is the only thing keeping our society from spiraling out of control your fears are unfounded, I think. I do no foresee a slippery slope scenario playing out. This is the same sort of slippery slop logic that is sometimes applied to the marijuana debate in which people say using weed leads to heroin and cocaine.

Playing devil's advocate, why did those laws come about in the first place? Everything, from anti-trust to child-labor to equal rights has come about as a reaction to things that society was doing as a whole. We did have a poor foundation, one we are constantly striving to improve. Whether or not we'd do it again is debatable. What's not debatable is the fact that these negative behaviors exist in our nature. Remove the laws and society as a whole reverts to whatever the majority (and by majority, I mean those who want something and those who are indifferent) desires. Do you place enough faith in the majority to not be indifferent to, or in support of, a reversion to old school segregation?

If you take all the laws away from the governing authority and allow the people to self-govern as they see fit, do you trust the outcome will be equal or better to what we have now?

If Jesus died for our sins, why is there still sin? If man was created from dust, why is there still dust? If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 02:49 PM
RE: Is this fair?
(25-10-2013 02:32 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  
(25-10-2013 02:24 PM)Chas Wrote:  Society (in some places) would revert to Jim Crow style, separate-but-equal(?), ghetto-ized behaviors. You call that functioning? Maybe for some, but not for all.

First they bar the gays, then the Latinos, then the Muslims, then ... Slippery slope, DL, slippery slope.

You are advocating a dumbed-down libertarianism where people can allegedly just move to some other place where they are not discriminated against.
They may not have the means, or there may not be another place.

Which places are these? Nowhere in America I have ever been to. If you think this society is formed of such a poor foundation that this law is the only thing keeping our society from spiraling out of control your fears are unfounded, I think. I do no foresee a slippery slope scenario playing out. This is the same sort of slippery slop logic that is sometimes applied to the marijuana debate in which people say using weed leads to heroin and cocaine.

Society was like that in my lifetime. Then Congress passed anti-discrimination legislation and the Supreme Court struck down discriminatory laws.

These actions have helped the zeitgeist to advance, but there is still widespread bigotry and discrimination.
Don't presume, out of your ignorance of recent history, to tell me that my fears are unfounded. They are founded in reality.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 02:57 PM
RE: Is this fair?
(25-10-2013 02:46 PM)guitar_nut Wrote:  
(25-10-2013 02:32 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  Which places are these? Nowhere in America I have ever been to. If you think this society is formed of such a poor foundation that this law is the only thing keeping our society from spiraling out of control your fears are unfounded, I think. I do no foresee a slippery slope scenario playing out. This is the same sort of slippery slop logic that is sometimes applied to the marijuana debate in which people say using weed leads to heroin and cocaine.

Playing devil's advocate, why did those laws come about in the first place? Everything, from anti-trust to child-labor to equal rights has come about as a reaction to things that society was doing as a whole. We did have a poor foundation, one we are constantly striving to improve. Whether or not we'd do it again is debatable. What's not debatable is the fact that these negative behaviors exist in our nature. Remove the laws and society as a whole reverts to whatever the majority (and by majority, I mean those who want something and those who are indifferent) desires. Do you place enough faith in the majority to not be indifferent to, or in support of, a reversion to old school segregation?

If you take all the laws away from the governing authority and allow the people to self-govern as they see fit, do you trust the outcome will be equal or better to what we have now?

No, absolutely I do not think that we would revert to the same society we were in the fifties. Our social values have evolved, and would have done so with or without the laws which were inspired by the the civil rights movement. The civil rights movement would have been much more successful if they inspired the repeal of bad law (separate but equal) and left it up to the people to learn about each other and find acceptance without threat from the government. It created more resentment, I think. This 'natural evil in nature' you are referring to will happen regardless of law, they are just hidden. Denied promotions, bad evaluations, spit on your fast food, and so on and so forth. At least with 'my' way this isn't as much hidden. You have a pretty good idea of the attitudes a business has and you can judge for yourself if they are worthy of your money.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 03:05 PM
RE: Is this fair?
Will someone please explain to me how there is still a discussion going on?

If you blatantly discriminate against a protected status, the victim can legally sue.

Whether or not it hold up in court is irrelevant to the discussion.

The photographer (legally) should have been sued.

It's black and white law.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 03:06 PM
RE: Is this fair?
(25-10-2013 02:49 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(25-10-2013 02:32 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  Which places are these? Nowhere in America I have ever been to. If you think this society is formed of such a poor foundation that this law is the only thing keeping our society from spiraling out of control your fears are unfounded, I think. I do no foresee a slippery slope scenario playing out. This is the same sort of slippery slop logic that is sometimes applied to the marijuana debate in which people say using weed leads to heroin and cocaine.

Society was like that in my lifetime. Then Congress passed anti-discrimination legislation and the Supreme Court struck down discriminatory laws.

These actions have helped the zeitgeist to advance, but there is still widespread bigotry and discrimination.
Don't presume, out of your ignorance of recent history, to tell me that my fears are unfounded. They are founded in reality.

I realize that you're an old fucker and you can remember all this terrible shit that happened. Don't presume I am ignorant. Your experiences are different than mine, and what you remember happening in the past undoubtedly affects your opinions on the subject. Do you genuinely think you going to see widespread 'negro water-fountains' again regardless of the law? No. Generation X and younger have a different experience. It's even hard for many of the youngest generation to even conceive of a reality in which minorities are second-class citizens. They don't think in the same terms. A business treating minorities with contemptuous 'no WASP, no service' policies in today's world is financial suicide.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 03:07 PM
RE: Is this fair?
(25-10-2013 03:05 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Will someone please explain to me how there is still a discussion going on?

If you blatantly discriminate against a protected status, the victim can legally sue.

Whether or not it hold up in court is irrelevant to the discussion.

The photographer (legally) should have been sued.

It's black and white law.

We are not debating what the law is, we are debating what it should be.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 03:09 PM
RE: Is this fair?
(25-10-2013 03:07 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  
(25-10-2013 03:05 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Will someone please explain to me how there is still a discussion going on?

If you blatantly discriminate against a protected status, the victim can legally sue.

Whether or not it hold up in court is irrelevant to the discussion.

The photographer (legally) should have been sued.

It's black and white law.

We are not debating what the law is, we are debating what it should be.

And I am telling you it needs to be what it is. History says so.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 03:10 PM
RE: Is this fair?
(25-10-2013 02:57 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  Our social values have evolved, and would have done so with or without the laws which were inspired by the the civil rights movement.

I agree that certain segments of the population were evolving, thus the creation of the laws. I disagree that, without the push, we would have arrived where we are now. There was huge push back from entire regions (that arguably still harbor race inequality). Why would populations deeply rooted in segregation choose, on their own, to desegregate?

(25-10-2013 02:57 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  The civil rights movement would have been much more successful if they inspired the repeal of bad law (separate but equal) and left it up to the people to learn about each other and find acceptance without threat from the government.

I disagree. Being raised in a segregated society, you adapt to your culture. How can you promote equality, or even consider it, when you're taught to judge by race?

(25-10-2013 02:57 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  It created more resentment, I think.

Agreed. The alternative to the laws is, to me, less desirable. I'd choose resentment over a prolonged change, especially when equal rights are involved.

(25-10-2013 02:57 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  This 'natural evil in nature' you are referring to will happen regardless of law, they are just hidden. Denied promotions, bad evaluations, spit on your fast food, and so on and so forth. At least with 'my' way this isn't as much hidden. You have a pretty good idea of the attitudes a business has and you can judge for yourself if they are worthy of your money.

Again, this is hoping that you have options to chose from. One of many scenarios, good or bad, is that the dominant race... dominates. Are you going to not buy groceries because you disagree with all your local supermarkets? Are you going to drive 50 miles to buy food from a business you agree with, politically? It's not just desires, but also indifference, that allow the segregation to expand. Again, this is only one possibility. You could be absolutely correct in assuming we'd continue down our path of modern morality.

If Jesus died for our sins, why is there still sin? If man was created from dust, why is there still dust? If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-10-2013, 03:17 PM
RE: Is this fair?
(25-10-2013 03:10 PM)guitar_nut Wrote:  I agree that certain segments of the population were evolving, thus the creation of the laws.
Then you wrote.
(25-10-2013 03:10 PM)guitar_nut Wrote:  I disagree. Being raised in a segregated society, you adapt to your culture. How can you promote equality, or even consider it, when you're taught to judge by race?

These two ideas are conflicting. Independent thought. I did not get all my ideas from my parents, or my community. I got it through independent thought and learning. Most atheists should be able to identify with this as few of our parents were atheists. We thought for ourselves.

(25-10-2013 02:57 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  It created more resentment, I think.

(25-10-2013 03:10 PM)guitar_nut Wrote:  Agreed. The alternative to the laws is, to me, less desirable. I'd choose resentment over a prolonged change, especially when equal rights are involved.
Resentment breeds hate. Irrational, illogical, hate.
(25-10-2013 02:57 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  This 'natural evil in nature' you are referring to will happen regardless of law, they are just hidden. Denied promotions, bad evaluations, spit on your fast food, and so on and so forth. At least with 'my' way this isn't as much hidden. You have a pretty good idea of the attitudes a business has and you can judge for yourself if they are worthy of your money.

(25-10-2013 03:10 PM)guitar_nut Wrote:  Again, this is hoping that you have options to chose from. One of many scenarios, good or bad, is that the dominant race... dominates. Are you going to not buy groceries because you disagree with all your local supermarkets? Are you going to drive 50 miles to buy food from a business you agree with, politically? It's not just desires, but also indifference, that allow the segregation to expand. Again, this is only one possibility. You could be absolutely correct in assuming we'd continue down our path of modern morality.

I've already covered this point.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: