Restaurant in Hawaii Bans Trump Voters, Faces Immediate Backlash - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Paramud;51597458]Technically the note doesn't call Trump supporters Nazis, and nowhere in the article does the owner make the connection.[/QUOTE] Wow, get real mate.

[QUOTE=Kyle902;51597460]??? are you going to formulate an argument or was that it[/QUOTE] As someone explained to me, there is Discrimination and discrimination. [I][B]D[/B]iscrimination[/I] is against something that is outside of peoples control. Not a good thing. [I]discrimination[/I] is against something someone decides to do. This is a-okay.

[QUOTE=MadPro119;51597472]As someone explained to me, there is Discrimination and discrimination. [I][B]D[/B]iscrimination[/I] is against something that is outside of peoples control. Not a good thing. [I]discrimination[/I] is against something someone decides to do. This is a-okay.[/QUOTE] so now that the zingers are out of the way what exactly was your point??

[QUOTE=Kyle902;51597475]so now that the zingers are out of the way what exactly was your point??[/QUOTE] No zingers here mate, thats the point. You are legally allowed to discriminate, Discrimination is illegal. Please explain how its bad to allow the freemarket to respond in cases of discrimination?

[QUOTE=MadPro119;51597480]No zingers here mate, thats the point. You are legally allowed to discriminate, Discrimination is illegal.[/QUOTE] oh I see what you're saying. Why the hell did you word you argument in such an incomprehensible way?

[QUOTE=Kyle902;51597482]oh I see what you're saying. Why the hell did you word you argument in such an incomprehensible way?[/QUOTE] That's how it was explained to me, I thought it was a decent explanation. Its a tricky topic to discuss clearly and concisely, both are technically discrimination but one is actually bad. Now again, please explain how its bad to allow the freemarket to respond in cases of discrimination?

[QUOTE=MadPro119;51597472]As someone explained to me, there is Discrimination and discrimination. [I][B]D[/B]iscrimination[/I] is against something that is outside of peoples control. Not a good thing. [I]discrimination[/I] is against something someone decides to do. This is a-okay.[/QUOTE] It's up to courts to decide if something like this is protected under a business's right to refuse service. There's a hard rule against discrimination based on religion, race, national origin, and sex, but most courts will also not allow a business to refuse service based on arbitrary reasons. Since this case doesn't seem like it'll go to court, it doesn't really matter and we'll never find out if this would've been protected or not.

[QUOTE=MadPro119;51597472]As someone explained to me, there is Discrimination and discrimination.[/QUOTE] Holy shit this is dumb. You basically wrote a way for the people who consider being gay to be a personal choice to be morally in the clear when they discriminate.

[QUOTE=Paramud;51597488]It's up to courts to decide if something like this is protected under a business's right to refuse service. There's a hard rule against discrimination based on religion, race, national origin, and sex, but most courts will also not allow a business to refuse service based on arbitrary reasons. Since this case doesn't seem like it'll go to court, it doesn't really matter and we'll never find out if this would've been protected or not.[/QUOTE] Actually no, you are incorrect I believe. The protected classes are clearly laid out. [quote]Race – Civil Rights Act of 1964 Color – Civil Rights Act of 1964 Religion – Civil Rights Act of 1964 National origin – Civil Rights Act of 1964 Age (40 and over) – Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 Sex – Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Civil Rights Act of 1964 The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission includes discrimination based on gender presentation and sexual orientation as protected beneath the class of 'sex'[1] Pregnancy – Pregnancy Discrimination Act Citizenship – Immigration Reform and Control Act Familial status – Civil Rights Act of 1968 Title VIII: Housing cannot discriminate for having children, with an exception for senior housing Disability status – Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 Veteran status – Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974 and Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act Genetic information – Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act[/quote] [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_class[/url] Someone correct me If I am wrong please.

[QUOTE=MadPro119;51597487]That's how it was explained to me, I thought it was a decent explanation. Its a tricky topic to discuss clearly and concisely, both are technically discrimination but one is actually bad. Now again, please explain how its bad to allow the freemarket to respond in cases of discrimination?[/QUOTE] Fair enough, although I think discrimination on any grounds being allowed sets a dangerous precedent. Especially when its as vague as political affiliation since it would be rather easy to use that as an excuse to kick anyone you wanted out of your place of business.

[QUOTE=Kyle902;51597502]Fair enough, although I think discrimination on any grounds being allowed sets a dangerous precedent. Especially when its as vague as political affiliation since it would be rather easy to use that as an excuse to kick anyone you wanted out of your place of business.[/QUOTE] I see it the exact opposite. Should the government force the restaurant owner to serve someone he does not wish to serve (who isn't a protected class)? That seems like a violation of freedom. Also before someone jumps on me more about homosexuals/transgenders. I'm all for adding them as a protected class.

[QUOTE=MadPro119;51597498]Actually no, you are incorrect I believe. The protected classes are clearly laid out. [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_class[/url] Someone correct me If I am wrong please.[/QUOTE] I'm not a lawyer so I'm no expert when it comes to these things, but I'm pretty sure those are what's protected under that hard rule I mentioned. Anything not on there would go to court and it'd be decided then and there whether or not the discrimination was allowable. Again, not an expert.

[QUOTE=MadPro119;51597511]I see it the exact opposite. Should the government force the restaurant owner to serve someone he does not wish to serve (who isn't a protected class)? That seems like a violation of freedom. Also before someone jumps on me more about homosexuals/transgenders. I'm all for adding them as a protected class.[/QUOTE] The problem is that allowing discrimination based on political affiliation also allows discrimination for pretty much anything else (such as homosexuality and trans people) under the guise of political affiliation. For example this would allow a bar owner to kick out trans people by simply saying he doesn't serve democrats or whatever. On the flipside it would also allow a Muslim to ban Christians from his business by saying they're republicans and he won't serve them due to that.

[QUOTE=Kyle902;51597530]The problem is that allowing discrimination based on political affiliation also allows discrimination for pretty much anything else (such as homosexuality and trans people) under the guise of political affiliation. For example this would allow a bar owner to kick out trans people by simply saying he doesn't serve democrats or whatever. On the flipside it would also allow a Muslim to ban Christians from his business under the guise of political affiliation.[/QUOTE] And those people would be free to construct a legal case, pursue a lawsuit, and win.

[QUOTE=MadPro119;51597533]And those people would be free to construct a legal case, peruse a lawsuit, and win.[/QUOTE] How would they win though? If it was legal to discriminate against political affiliations then he'd win simply by saying that his decision was based on politics, not race/gender/religion.

[QUOTE=Kyle902;51597530]For example this would allow a bar owner to kick out trans people by simply saying he doesn't serve democrats[/QUOTE] This is and has been an issue. In North Carolina you can refuse service to anyone by saying "you look gay". And FADA wants to make that a thing in the whole country.

[QUOTE=Kyle902;51597543]How would they win though? If it was legal to discriminate against political affiliations then he'd win simply by saying that his decision was based on politics, not race/gender/religion.[/QUOTE] So are you implying the business owner is only kicking out trans from one political party? The second the owner kicked out trans people from both parties they would be able to seek the legal repercussions.

[QUOTE=Super Muffin;51597545]This is and has been an issue. In North Carolina you can refuse service to anyone by saying "you look gay". And FADA wants to make that a thing in the whole country.[/QUOTE] what people supporting that don't realize is that allowing discrimination based on vague clauses will allow discrimination against essentially anything. Including Christians, republicans, and white people.

[QUOTE=Kyle902;51597552]what people supporting that don't realize is that allowing discrimination based on vague clauses will allow discrimination against essentially anything. Including Christians, republicans, and white people.[/QUOTE] The only two Facepunchers supporting FADA were fully aware of that.

[QUOTE=MadPro119;51597550]So are you implying the business owner is only kicking out trans from one political party? The second the owner kicked out trans people from both parties they would be able to seek the legal repercussions.[/QUOTE] He could just say that he's part of a third party and he doesn't serve republicans or democrats.

[QUOTE=MadPro119;51597558]The only two Facepunchers supporting FADA were fully aware of that.[/Quote] Them believing the free market will protect them is laughable.

[QUOTE=Kyle902;51597559]He could just say that he's part of a third party and he doesn't serve republicans or democrats.[/QUOTE] So when he inevitably serves republicans and democrats, they pursue legal repercussions. Unless you are suggesting he is actually not serving Republicans and Democrats? In which case the business promptly files for bankruptcy.

[QUOTE=MadPro119;51597569]So when he inevitably serves republicans and democrats, they pursue legal repercussions. Unless you are suggesting he is actually not serving Republicans and Democrats? In which case the business promptly files for bankruptcy.[/QUOTE] How exactly would the person suing prove the political affiliations of the other people there? Furthermore this is assuming the hypothetical victim would be willing to sue, which is more often then not not the case.

[QUOTE=Kyle902;51597582]How exactly would the person suing prove the political affiliations of the other people there? Furthermore this is assuming the hypothetical victim would be willing to sue, which is more often then not not the case.[/QUOTE] It isn't hard to prove that a business is serving members of either of the major political parties. If those who have been wronged don't seek justice then it being illegal won't really change that will it? [editline]29th December 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=catbarf;51597372]I don't think the idea that intelligence is wholly hereditary, and completely unaffected by upbringing, has much traction in the scientific community.[/QUOTE] Also as expected Big Dumb American has no response to this.

[QUOTE=MadPro119;51597590]It isn't hard to prove that a business is serving members of either of the major political parties.[/quote] Then explain it. [quote] If those who have been wronged don't seek justice then it being illegal won't really change that will it? [/QUOTE] Not everyone can afford the legal fees to bring it to court.

[QUOTE=Kyle902;51597400]Its true though. This unwillingness to compromise and the divisive rhetoric contributed greatly to why Trump is in office. Shunning trump supporters is [I]not[/I] how we could have won this election.[/QUOTE] Really there isn't any one thing that caused Trump to win. Hillary's campaign died from a thousand cuts.

"You can't force a Christian bakery to make a cake for a gay wedding!!!" -Most Trump supporters "You can't let a business turn away customers because of opposing beliefs!" -Most Trump supporters

[QUOTE=hippowombat;51597624] "You can't let a business turn away customers because of opposing beliefs!" -Most Trump supporters[/QUOTE] Where are all these trump supporters saying this? They aren't in this thread. [editline]29th December 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Kyle902;51597604]Then explain it.[/QUOTE] Wait for a customer to leave, ask them if they are a registered democrat or republican. If they don't answer you ask the next one.

[QUOTE=MadPro119;51597631]Wait for a customer to leave, ask them if they are a registered democrat or republican. If they don't answer you ask the next one.[/QUOTE] That wouldn't prove anything since businesses can choose whether or not to enforce their rules.

[QUOTE=hippowombat;51597624]"You can't force a Christian bakery to make a cake for a gay wedding!!!" -Most Trump supporters "You can't let a business turn away customers because of opposing beliefs!" -Most Trump supporters[/QUOTE] And a Muslim Bakery can refuse baking a cake for a gay wedding also in my opinion.