Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
The MAC has joined the Ban on the State of Indiana....
Author Message
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #181
RE: The MAC has joined the Ban on the State of Indiana....
(04-04-2015 04:16 PM)CardinalZen Wrote:  I'm just some dude on a message board. If you want appeals to authority, this a'int the place.

Message board posters are not absolved of posting credible ideas.
04-04-2015 04:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #182
RE: The MAC has joined the Ban on the State of Indiana....
You know CZ, you still have actually made no honest attempt at an argument for why discrimination should not be penalized.

It seems your fallback has been that you don't believe in penalties, which is obviously a non-starter.
04-04-2015 04:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CardinalZen Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 753
Joined: Aug 2005
Reputation: 37
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #183
RE: The MAC has joined the Ban on the State of Indiana....
(04-04-2015 04:14 PM)DexterDevil Wrote:  
(04-03-2015 06:53 PM)CardinalZen Wrote:  
(04-03-2015 06:15 PM)TerryD Wrote:  This law was a pretext for bigotry hiding under the guise of religion.

Supporters of the law may not like the that the intent of the law was challenged by the general public who opposed it, but so challenged it was.

Maybe supporters and draftees of such laws should be less obvious in the future.

I don't think carving out religious exemptions goes far enough. It's all well and good that the Amish were except from the draft, for example. But, why couldn't everyone be exempt without some judicial determination about their innermost thoughts?

Anabaptists, not just the Amish, we're pacifists. The only Christain sub section that hasn't been mentioned. Been hunted by Protestants, Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, States (as in Nations), States (as in the Union). I'd assume it'd have to grandfathered in and you actually be a part of a community or church (depending on the denomination). Can't just claim the exempt status.

I think you are making my point. Someone's convictions are not any less valid if they are a congregation of a few as opposed to millions. Giving people exemptions from laws because someone in government has decided their objections have enough prominence is immoral.

Maybe it's the law that is immoral if it can't apply to everyone on a equal basis.
04-04-2015 04:22 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CardinalZen Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 753
Joined: Aug 2005
Reputation: 37
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #184
RE: The MAC has joined the Ban on the State of Indiana....
(04-04-2015 04:21 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  
(04-04-2015 04:16 PM)CardinalZen Wrote:  I'm just some dude on a message board. If you want appeals to authority, this a'int the place.

Message board posters are not absolved of posting credible ideas.

I'll take that chance. You are free to skip over my ramblings should you choose. I promise not to stalk you or otherwise be a nuisance.
04-04-2015 04:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CardinalZen Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 753
Joined: Aug 2005
Reputation: 37
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #185
RE: The MAC has joined the Ban on the State of Indiana....
(04-04-2015 04:22 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  You know CZ, you still have actually made no honest attempt at an argument for why discrimination should not be penalized.

It seems your fallback has been that you don't believe in penalties, which is obviously a non-starter.

I have attempted several points articulating my thoughts. Please accept my apologies that I am unable to make them more clear.
04-04-2015 04:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
perimeterpost Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,977
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 132
I Root For: OHIO
Location:
Post: #186
RE: The MAC has joined the Ban on the State of Indiana....
In the spirit of compromise-

Would those that support the rights of business owners to deny goods and services to minorities be in favor of having that right afforded to them on the condition that the business owner agrees to comply with visible signage in their stores and in all print and web advertising? The signage would be standardized in appearance and verbiage so all customers could easily identify what minorities, if any, the business refuses to serve. Would this be a fair and reasonable request?
04-04-2015 04:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #187
RE: The MAC has joined the Ban on the State of Indiana....
(04-04-2015 04:24 PM)CardinalZen Wrote:  I'll take that chance. You are free to skip over my ramblings should you choose. I promise not to stalk you or otherwise be a nuisance.

So you're admitting that your posts require freedom from the shackles of credibility?
04-04-2015 04:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #188
RE: The MAC has joined the Ban on the State of Indiana....
(04-04-2015 04:29 PM)CardinalZen Wrote:  I have attempted several points articulating my thoughts. Please accept my apologies that I am unable to make them more clear.

Where? What are the post numbers?
(This post was last modified: 04-04-2015 04:45 PM by MplsBison.)
04-04-2015 04:45 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MplsBison Offline
Banned

Posts: 16,648
Joined: Dec 2014
I Root For: NDSU/Minnesota
Location:
Post: #189
RE: The MAC has joined the Ban on the State of Indiana....
(04-04-2015 04:36 PM)perimeterpost Wrote:  In the spirit of compromise-

Would those that support the rights of business owners to deny goods and services to minorities be in favor of having that right afforded to them on the condition that the business owner agrees to comply with visible signage in their stores and in all print and web advertising? The signage would be standardized in appearance and verbiage so all customers could easily identify what minorities, if any, the business refuses to serve. Would this be a fair and reasonable request?

That's not a compromise. That's silly.

You'd just be giving those who wish to promote discrimination a legal path to do so.
04-04-2015 04:47 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,335
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #190
RE: The MAC has joined the Ban on the State of Indiana....
(04-04-2015 02:52 PM)CardinalZen Wrote:  
(04-04-2015 12:53 PM)ken d Wrote:  But let's not get confused about whether this is a religious issue. It absolutely is not. I believe, and I hope, that most Christians do not agree with your position that discrimination based on race should be legal.
You can believe and hope all you want, but you do not speak for all Christians. And there are other beliefs to consider as well. You don't speak for them either.

Besides, my thoughts on this matter are not so much 'discrimination should be legal', as they are 'discrimination should not be illegal'. The first suggests that the state has acted to allow something. The second is more in tune with the concept of 'inalienable rights', i.e. the state has restrained from acting.

(04-04-2015 12:53 PM)ken d Wrote:  I would hope they would agree that your position is immoral, and that any god that would require it is immoral as well. Your position is one of anarchy - that one shouldn't have to obey any law if he claims to have a religious objection to it.
I guess the cause makes the martyr, doesn't.

There are people lining up all over the place to break laws that they think are immoral. I would much rather that we limit the number of laws so that people don't have to choose between their principles or getting arrested.

(04-04-2015 12:53 PM)ken d Wrote:  Our society has rejected that. But we have to continually fight those who would overturn years - even centuries - of progress. We'll never stamp out bigotry, but we owe it to ourselves and our country to keep trying.
Have you even thought about that at all? How many more laws would you have us pass to achieve your perfect society, free of discrimination?

Do you know why there's still bigotry? Bigotry is part of the human condition. We're all imperfect creatures. Trying to perfect humanity using laws doesn't work. In the end, the essence of humanity is freedom of conscience, the right to choose. You cannot legislate virtue, but you can crush the human spirit under the weight of countless laws and regulations.

I must admit, you are a master at avoiding actually responding to what I have claimed - that this has nothing to do with religion. There's a good reason for that. You know that it isn't. When you say I don't speak for all Christians (which, of course I never claimed to do) you don't say that what I said about them is incorrect. Because if it were, or if you thought that it were, you would refute it.

No, religion is just a red herring here. The Tea Partiers who propose legislation like this don't really believe that people should be allowed to use a claim of religious objection as a get out of jail free card to exempt themselves from legislation. They believe everybody should be allowed to exempt themselves from having to obey laws for any reason or no reason. They just don't like that we have laws, so any excuse for disobeying them will do. It need not be sincere, it need not even be real.

To say that you can claim to object on religious grounds, and further that no one may question the legitimacy or sincerity of that claim, is simply an excuse for the anarchy you seek. Why don't you just say that? Are you so afraid that Americans would reject that idea that you have to trick people into passing silly laws like this one?
04-04-2015 05:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
CardinalZen Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 753
Joined: Aug 2005
Reputation: 37
I Root For:
Location:
Post: #191
RE: The MAC has joined the Ban on the State of Indiana....
(04-04-2015 05:20 PM)ken d Wrote:  I must admit, you are a master at avoiding actually responding to what I have claimed - that this has nothing to do with religion. There's a good reason for that. You know that it isn't. When you say I don't speak for all Christians (which, of course I never claimed to do) you don't say that what I said about them is incorrect. Because if it were, or if you thought that it were, you would refute it.

I don't wish to engage about the specifics of Christian beliefs or religious beliefs in general. It is enough for me that people say they have beliefs. I take them at their word. The law, to the maximum extent possible, should be about actions, not thoughts or beliefs.

If the owner of a business chooses to not serve someone, it is my belief that it is no affair of any government. Any particulars about religion, are irrelevant.

ken d Wrote:  No, religion is just a red herring here. The Tea Partiers who propose legislation like this don't really believe that people should be allowed to use a claim of religious objection as a get out of jail free card to exempt themselves from legislation. They believe everybody should be allowed to exempt themselves from having to obey laws for any reason or no reason. They just don't like that we have laws, so any excuse for disobeying them will do. It need not be sincere, it need not even be real.
I agree religion is irrelevant to my main point. You are the one that keeps trying to make it a point of contention between us.

It is my understanding that the various Tea Parties had their genesis in economic issues, like the government bailouts for the big bank and Wall Street firms. I'm not sure they are behind the measure in Indiana or not. Maybe you should find a Tea Partier and ask them what they think instead of caricaturing them? It's a thought anyway.

It might be true that Conservative Christians support the measure in Indiana. And you know what, I don't care. Similar laws have been used to defend the religious freedom of Sikhs and Native Americans. If someone could explain how this measure is limited only to Christians, then I might change my mind.

As it stands, I will freely make common cause with Christians, Sikhs, Native Americans, or even the Sons of Odin if I think the cause of Liberty is furthered.

ken d Wrote:  To say that you can claim to object on religious grounds, and further that no one may question the legitimacy or sincerity of that claim, is simply an excuse for the anarchy you seek. Why don't you just say that? Are you so afraid that Americans would reject that idea that you have to trick people into passing silly laws like this one?
I do not seek anarchy. Those are your words not mine.

The government still has it's role in enforcing contracts and policing violence, there are not exemptions to those. But refusing to serve someone should not be a crime.

And while granting exemptions to prosecuting that is some progress, ultimately everyone should have the inalienable right to withhold their services for any reason. In fact, they should not even have to verbalize a reason. Simply saying 'no' should be enough.
04-04-2015 07:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
nastar36 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 644
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation: 40
I Root For: Memphis Tigers
Location:
Post: #192
RE: The MAC has joined the Ban on the State of Indiana....
(04-03-2015 01:50 PM)CardinalZen Wrote:  So much for having a pluralist republic.

What's most interesting is how some want to substitute their judgement of Christianity or religion for someone else's. People have the ability, and should have the right, to interpret their beliefs how they choose. If someone says that Odin forbids their selling hammers to unsanctified people, then who are we to argue?

The only reason that this is an issue is the advent of "public accommodation" laws. At first appearance, they are a good idea. Upon closer examination they were a bad idea implemented to replace another bad idea, segregation by the force of law.

Real freedom is the right to be a bigot if that's what you want. The government is not creating freedom by forcing people to do business with people that they'd choose not to.

Just because something is not illegal doesn't make it right. And just because something is immoral doesn't mean it should be illegal. Every attempt to legislate morality, is an assault on the principle of live-and-let-live. Moral fashions change. But imposing morality by force of law is always tyranny.

This
04-04-2015 07:35 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
blunderbuss Offline
Banned

Posts: 19,649
Joined: Apr 2011
I Root For: ECU & the CSA
Location: Buzz City, NC
Post: #193
Re: RE: The MAC has joined the Ban on the State of Indiana....
(04-04-2015 09:46 AM)CardinalZen Wrote:  
(04-03-2015 09:19 PM)TerryD Wrote:  Not many people think this law was anything but a Tea Party, Born Again Christian driven political move.

It backfired. The Tea Party is overreaching. Even the "country club" wing of the Republican party is tired of these guys, along with most of the rest of the country.

Do you mean Tea Partiers like these?

;bow:
04-04-2015 09:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
blunderbuss Offline
Banned

Posts: 19,649
Joined: Apr 2011
I Root For: ECU & the CSA
Location: Buzz City, NC
Post: #194
Re: RE: The MAC has joined the Ban on the State of Indiana....
(04-04-2015 02:07 PM)CardinalZen Wrote:  
(04-04-2015 11:17 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  You have an embarrassingly poor understanding of American history. Your fantasy hypothetical of allowing bigoted business owners to openly discriminate with the expectation that that the target of their prejudice can simply go somewhere else is just that- a fantasy. Your hypothetical suggestion was put into practice for 100 years in this country, Jim Crow was an abject failure and a wretched stain on our nation's history.
You do realize, don't you, that Jim Crow was a series of laws that enforced racial discrimination with the full power of government force behind them?

Jim Crow laws were unconstitutional the entire time of their existence, so yes, they were a stain on our nation's history. The Congress and the Federal courts should have abolished them much sooner, as they were empowered to do via the 14th Amendment.

My position is that laws that take away peoples rights should not be corrected by laws that take away other peoples' rights. Two wrongs do not make a right.

(04-04-2015 11:17 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  You can't begin to understand the shame and humiliation a black man would have felt driving with his family from Detroit, MI to Biloxi, MS to attend a funeral and finding that once he entered the segregated South there were no easy to find rest stops off the highway for people of color, forcing him to pull over to the side of the road so his wife and daughter could go to the bathroom in the woods like animals. No American deserves to be degraded this way. The suggestion that minorities can simply go somewhere else is a proven lie.
That is because no other business could serve them under penalty of law. If Congress and the Courts had done their jobs sooner, businesses could have opened who catered to minorities without threat to their lives or liberty. Thank goodness that Southern Blacks still had recourse to the 2nd Amendment for use in their self defense!

Life and liberty are true human rights though. I'm not quite sure where the right not to be humiliated ranks. Probably down with the right not to be offended. They both touch on what other people think and do. And those other people have the same rights as anyone to think and act how they please. It's likely that any law that aimed to eliminate humiliation or offense would be vastly impractical and any attempt would ultimately lead to government abuses.

(04-04-2015 11:17 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  This is the cold, ugly reality of allowing business owners to openly discriminate against minorities all in the name of Jesus and Freedom. You should be ashamed for suggesting such a disgraceful solution.
You really don't get that businesses in that era did not 'choose' to discriminate, they were 'forced' to discriminate under threat of legal sanction. This was perversion of state power.

Just like it's a perversion of state power to force someone to supply a service they would not voluntarily choose to provide. There's actually a word for that, you know?

Perfect response.
04-04-2015 09:29 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
perimeterpost Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,977
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 132
I Root For: OHIO
Location:
Post: #195
RE: The MAC has joined the Ban on the State of Indiana....
(04-04-2015 09:29 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  
(04-04-2015 02:07 PM)CardinalZen Wrote:  
(04-04-2015 11:17 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  You have an embarrassingly poor understanding of American history. Your fantasy hypothetical of allowing bigoted business owners to openly discriminate with the expectation that that the target of their prejudice can simply go somewhere else is just that- a fantasy. Your hypothetical suggestion was put into practice for 100 years in this country, Jim Crow was an abject failure and a wretched stain on our nation's history.
You do realize, don't you, that Jim Crow was a series of laws that enforced racial discrimination with the full power of government force behind them?

Jim Crow laws were unconstitutional the entire time of their existence, so yes, they were a stain on our nation's history. The Congress and the Federal courts should have abolished them much sooner, as they were empowered to do via the 14th Amendment.

My position is that laws that take away peoples rights should not be corrected by laws that take away other peoples' rights. Two wrongs do not make a right.

(04-04-2015 11:17 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  You can't begin to understand the shame and humiliation a black man would have felt driving with his family from Detroit, MI to Biloxi, MS to attend a funeral and finding that once he entered the segregated South there were no easy to find rest stops off the highway for people of color, forcing him to pull over to the side of the road so his wife and daughter could go to the bathroom in the woods like animals. No American deserves to be degraded this way. The suggestion that minorities can simply go somewhere else is a proven lie.
That is because no other business could serve them under penalty of law. If Congress and the Courts had done their jobs sooner, businesses could have opened who catered to minorities without threat to their lives or liberty. Thank goodness that Southern Blacks still had recourse to the 2nd Amendment for use in their self defense!

Life and liberty are true human rights though. I'm not quite sure where the right not to be humiliated ranks. Probably down with the right not to be offended. They both touch on what other people think and do. And those other people have the same rights as anyone to think and act how they please. It's likely that any law that aimed to eliminate humiliation or offense would be vastly impractical and any attempt would ultimately lead to government abuses.

(04-04-2015 11:17 AM)perimeterpost Wrote:  This is the cold, ugly reality of allowing business owners to openly discriminate against minorities all in the name of Jesus and Freedom. You should be ashamed for suggesting such a disgraceful solution.
You really don't get that businesses in that era did not 'choose' to discriminate, they were 'forced' to discriminate under threat of legal sanction. This was perversion of state power.

Just like it's a perversion of state power to force someone to supply a service they would not voluntarily choose to provide. There's actually a word for that, you know?

Perfect response.

lol.
04-05-2015 06:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.