Should a business, for any reason it chooses, be allowed to discriminate in any way it chooses to? Don't want to serve blacks? Hispanics? Asians? Gays? Women? Men? OR hire them? OR pay one set of people less or more based on certain racist / sexist/whatever qualities? for any reason that suits your fancy? I guess what I am asking is, should any and all forms of race, sexual, or gender discrimination be legal when it comes to business, either the hiring of, or providing of? Should A business's freedom to do that be allowed, and protected?
always a fine line as this is never a black/white issue with solid yes/no answers. If I want to open a business called "homophobia" that caters to just heterosexual, how is that any different than the business in my town opening a store called "brotha's fashions" which only caters to blacks? is "brotha's fashions" racist if they hire a black guy over a much more qualified white guy for a management position? would I be an ignorant bigot if I hired a straight guy over a much more qualified gay guy for a management position for "Homophobia"? that's the double standard in today's society.... I don't think it should be a free for all in discrimination pay and hiring practices by any means, but where one person draws the line for acceptable, is never the same where another one draws that line. All I ask is that whereever the line is drawn, it's across the board the same and not saying that it's ok to discriminate against the white guy in my above scenario but it's not ok to discriminate against the gay guy in my above scenario. And SO.MANY.BLEEDING.HEARTS.LIBERALS believe it's justified to have double standards in situations like above.
It might be a nice idealistic thought to make everything "fair", but the plain truth is that, in this situation, demands are being forced onto the business owner. I believe in the freedom of association, including when economic activity is involved. I do not see how it is fair to tell the business owner who he has to hire, or who he has to give a promotion to. http://www.politicalforum.com/race-relations/216701-right-racially-discriminate-video.html In many cases, these types of anti-discrimination laws do not make things any fairer. They just make businesses vulnerable to baseless lawsuits and selective one-sided applications of justice.
They own the business so they can do what they want. But I don't think any sane person would want to shop there if it became known. And of course telling everyone about the bigot-r-us and making it a big issue when they open or expand in a new area. Do whatever, but if you're an ass, you deserve to lose to non-asses.
I'm disabled so I would oddly say yes but the business should not get the benefits of the Federal or State Government such as contracts since the government should be not promoting discrimination in the public sphere. And public opinion should be a factor if Walmart didn't hire disabled people then I should have the moral right to not do business with them and picket them legally with others to make them change this position. And such businesses should get fair tax considerations to make a place accessible and consideration for government business based on if they do hire disabled people or racial minorities or women etc. over ones that don't. That pressure can be as formidable if not more so than direct legal demands IMHO.
i don't think it should be lawful to discriminate based on sex, age, race, either for supplying goods and services or for receiving them. nor should it be legal in terms of employment. that said, not every case that claims these types of discriminations occurred were even the true case of the matter. http://www.politicalforum.com/polit...ible-women.html?highlight=dentist+fired+court at first glance this might be construed as sexual discrimination where it was actually quite clearly a correction of said sort of discrimination.
Currently racial discrimination in hiring is legal (except in 8 states in the USA). It should not be. Currently racial discrimination in college admissions is also legal. It also should not be.
i'm not so sure that's true. that sounds like an over reach of state powers. such things would be ruled as unconstitutional in record time wherever they're conclusively the case. note: a conclusive case would not be this one http://www.politicalforum.com/polit...ible-women.html?highlight=dentist+fired+court
Sure why not. I don't discriminate based on race personally. To me it has always been for the week and suggestible.
I AM sure it's true. Whereever there is race-based affirmative action (in 42 US states), there is racial discrimination in hiring. In many cases, black managers hire only blacks whether there is affirmative action or not, and they get away with it. As for the 8 states that have banned AA >> California, Washington, Michigan, Nebraska, Arizona, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Oklahoma. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_action_in_the_United_States
Due to the rigid laws, ladies night happened to be unconstitutional because it is "discriminating against men" but we all know it is a business gimmick to attract more guys who pay into their ways in for few female ticket charges they choose to forgone. This is a classic case of unintended consequences of rigid laws. I find it ironic for government to stay vigilant against Business discrimination where Business, in the eyes of well-intentioned bureaucrats, were notorious for pure profits.
Yes, they should be able to discriminate. For the same reasons we are all given the ability to discriminate. I chose to not marry a mexican, I chose to marry a white woman. Discrimination? Absolutely. I also don't congregate with those that play basketball, and those really into drama and play. Discrimination? Obviously. Really, discrimination isn't as big as a problem as people think it is - it is a manufactured problem. If we quit addressing it, it will largely go away on its own. I don't go to the black part of town, or the yellow or brown part, because they don't want me there. So I don't go there, but also because I have no desire to go there because of how different they are from myself in just about every way from music to religion. This whole "opposites attract" stuff works with chemistry and physics but when it comes to the dynamics of human interaction it just doesn't seem to hold water. Certainly there are few exceptions, but I am hard pressed to think of a society that took on the characteristics of its exceptions. So by all means, discriminate away, and do it with a megaphone if you feel like it.
If they want to do that, fine - but they should put a notice in their window that states they do not serve a particular group, and people can vote with their feet.
A very good idea. That way nobody is confused, except blind people. But that is a fairly small minority of people.
