• Almost a week in and the Red Hen is being harassed by protesters repeatedly.
    153 replies, posted
I'm sorry I can't hear you from that high horse you're sitting on. You mind explaining that position to the rest of us or are you just gonna gloat?
Huckabee is a propaganda mouthpiece of a facist regime. There is no double standard in discriminating horrible people. Now stop this idiotic gaslighting.
Four whole fucking pages of multiple people having to explain the basic concept of the Civil Rights Act and you chuds are still pulling this shit a suggesting they're the same thing. Either get better at trolling or for the love of god try to get out of your fantasy bubble where everything is the same, actually.
Because it's not an argument. Like many laws and the general nature of government, the Civil Rights Act was an imperfect means to solve a problem, under duress of instability no less. Regardless, law doesn't mean someone can't be any less inconsistent application of property rights, and now is a better time than ever to resolve the contradiction in how we reconcile justice and liberty. The debate is a philosophical one about the role of property rights and the public nature of business in a liberal society. Either you are allowed to deny service to a Trump official by asserting your negative liberties, or you are required to blindly serve the public as a component of a social system which can heavily affect the experience of an individual in society. There isn't a self-serving grey area where an ideologically-motivated faction gets their way, able to assure social consequences for the actions of individuals (or whatever the apology is) as private citizens while lobbying the state to deny their political and cultural opponents the ability to exercise similar rights. You either favor the interests of the town or the interests of the property owner, there is no progressive asymmetry here. Otherwise, you are trying to manufacture a logic to justify a contradiction which is so transparent and self-serving in nature that it will never be accepted on a mass scale, because people have eyes and can see the logic is nakedly about power for some, not greater liberty or justice for all.
I don't see why one would need to pick between those two things and those two things only, it seems like you're trying to make a contradiction in a place where there isn't one by providing a false dichotomy. It's not a grey area here, it's one that's been defined by people in the thread over and over. Discrimination off of what a person is (disability, race, sexual preference) as well as religion or other protected status is not ok and not cause to deny service. Discrimination over actions is. That's a pretty clear line, and the reason WHY this is a clear line has been demonstrated over and over with minorities being denied service from society as a whole. Sarah Huckabe Sanders is being targeted as an individual not as white, a woman, straight, christian, or even republican.
I do not believe that a clear minority group and one person who works for the most powerful man in the world should be judged by the same standard. I don't think that's hypocritical.
I see only a list of buzzwords here. Do you mind reexplaining your stance with simple direct English? Perhaps bullet points? I literally have no idea what you are even trying to say
It’s just typical intellectual rhetoric designed to sound like sophisticated debate, but is just really a bunch of hot air to disguise backwards thinking as intellectualism.
It's a contradiction because it's inconsistent, you want negative liberty when it serves your political purposes and positive liberty when it hurts theirs. Why should the other side not do the same? I don't care how illegitimate or different you think their form of discrimination is, yours is fundamentally no different. Either you're allowed to discriminate and use your property as you see fit, or you aren't. There are no rules for you to invent in a grey area, nor should there be since it leads to abuse of state power and is subject to mission creep. We have well-defined principles for that reason, as loose ends are subject to interpretations that agitate political battles because people are people. You want to abuse interpretations of them to foster a double standard where some form of discrimination is suddenly off-limits and yours isn't in an asymmetrical balance. Sorry, there's only political reasons to accept this, and you'll understand it can be outright rejected accordingly since I have no reason to accept your premises that half-regulates in a way to serve the political power of a side. I don't care what people in this thread have defined, it's not for them to decide and they are presenting a false dichotomy between right and wrong discrimination in a form of asymmetry that is predictably self-serving. What lets me discriminate isn't that I do it the right way, you can only have the state prevent the wrong way which suggests how flawed your original thinking is. I can do it because I own property which gives me the right to use and serve as I see fit, and in that context your red-line is arbitrary. Why should it be accepted? Your feelings?
It's 100% cool to hold double standards for Sanders because she's a public official. There will always be different standards for public and private citizens and Trump hasn't changed that.
If none of us can convince you can you please at least look into the case BOFA V Dees? Hopefully you'll see where we're coming from then.
If you don't see any difference between wholesale discriminating against a harmless minority group for something outside their control and refusing to serve a mouthpiece for a fascist administration then you're just being obtuse on purpose.
You're using a lot of words that only sorta mean what you're using them for as well as a lot of jargon which needs to be defined for those who aren't well versed in it. If you're actually trying to have a debate (which I don't think you are) you should use language that people don't have to use a thesaurus to understand.
I d probably browse red tube, jerk off then pass out after doing some lines of blow.
"we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason" Southern restaurants, circa 1962
If America so bad then why folks want all these immigrants come to such a bad place?
Just because it's a shit hole doesn't mean it's not a better shit hole than the one they're coming from.
Would that mean " It's 100% better than my shithole but i am still complaining about it being not as good as i wished it to be" mentality?
So why Mexico a shithole?
When an entire police force has to be arrested you know you're in trouble
Police forces are comprised of people. So are you saying Mexico is a shi t hole cause of the people? That Mexicans are shitt y people?
When cartels are murdering political speakers who want to remove the corruption in broad daylight, its a shit hole.
Are you being deliberately obtuse?
I'm pretty sure they're a gimmick considering they just joined today and are posting like that.
Great shitposting m8. Forgot fascist is a biological feature.
This post makes no sense to me. It's like watching an alien with a crude knowledge of the English language trying to speak.
What are you doing
A nation is it's known as critical thinking. I'm not sure why asking questions is consider being "obtuse" considering the method is the foundation to debate. Why would critical thinking upset you and be considered a "gimmick"? I asked a direct question about why Mexico is considered a shit hole by other members. So far I've got responses concerning either cartels or police forces. Both are organizations that cannot exist without people. these responses imply the members believe the people are why Mexico is a shit hole. Unless people are trying to imply something else? where is my logic and reasoning faulty? Show me. I'm here to learn from my betters
Because the entirety of mexico is a cartel. Your reasoning is faulty because with that logic, you could say the same for jews or other germans trying to flee nazi germany by saying the problems are sourced at the people there. I consider this country a shithole due to less worker rights and benefits ontop of corrupt as fuck government. But im comparing it to other western nations.
Watching people take very obvious bait in SH is great
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.