The Totalitarian Leftist Tactics against the Right

Which will work fine in locations where the proportion of bigots is small. In other places, the public will jump all over a hint of non-bigotry. Until capitalists won their long struggle for civil rights. (Some black people helped as well, I believe.) Well, that makes the situation very different from a bathroom bill, which is hardly a law at all.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

For example?

For example all those places where the politicians know that they will attract more popular approval than disdain for passing bathroom bills.

I don't see why that matters. My point was that 'capitalist forces' cannot be relied upon on the grounds that being more inclusive means more custom since the notion that being more inclusive means more custom is not necessarily true.There have been local establishments boycotted for being 'gay friendly', but I haven't got the numbers sufficient to do a business analysis of all current situations. It certainly has happened, I would strongly expect there were some places where having a 'blacks are equal' philosophy for a public business such as a restaurant would have resulted in the majority of your custom going elsewhere prior to the sixties in the USA. The same for gays in the 70s and 80s. Currently its more difficult to be sure, because, you know the regulations in place prohibit a lot of those shenanigans.Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

I'm for letting the business owner decide. I don't see any biblical problem but they may.

That is not correct. Having no guidelines is not the same as having guidelines once and then having them revoked. It is pretty clear now that there will be no federal enforcement from disregarding LGBT rights under Title IX and no legal obligation to follow the previous guidelines. It is fairly clear that the guidelines no longer describe how the "Departments evaluate whether covered entities are complying with their legal obligations." The Trump administration has now said that such things are to be left up to the states.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Well we tried that but they decided that serving black people was ungodly. Why not? Is there one of Paul's epistles I've overlooked that says it's OK to supply some kinds of sinners with some kinds of furniture on which to commit some kinds of sins, but not others?Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Faith still avoids the direct questions:

quote:

---

What is your problem?

---

Bigotry.Especially when it is expressly forbidden by statute and the Constitution.

quote:

---

Christians don't care what the US government says if it contradicts God's word.

---

Christians may not believe in the Constitution, but the Constitution believes in them. And if they violate its guidelines for how society is to be run, they will suffer the consequences.Render unto Caesar that which is due Caesar, Faith.

quote:

---

Why can't you follow a simple argument?

---

Because your argument makes no sense. It presumes that your opinion overrides the Constitution.

quote:

---

Your opinion means NOTHING.

---

I think that was precisely my argument to you just now.The law prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. And just as the Christians tried to get around the law regarding discrimination against blacks by saying their religious beliefs prevented them from serving black people ("race-mixing" and all that...you *do* recall the Loving v. Virginia case, yes?) they were slapped down because no, your religious beliefs don't get to deny other people's rights.If it's bogus when applied to race, why does it suddenly become legitimate when applied to sexual orientation?

quote:

---

And neither does the Supreme Court's opinion.

---

I believe you will find that the Constitution says that the Supreme Court's opinion is the only one that matters.

quote:

---

They are in the wrong.

---

You can believe that, but it doesn't mean anything unless you can justify it.Still waiting on your answer, Faith:How does one "validate" a marriage if you aren't the one performing the sacrament?Do your religious proclivities allow you to deny interracial couples? Would you be "validating" "race-mixing" by doing so?

Hey if you can count to ten, continue.

The America that you are talking about has never existed, except as a figment of your imagination.

New Cat's Eye responds to me:

quote:

---

quote:

---

Woolworth's was justified in their refusal to serve black people at the lunch counter?

---

Ha ha. No, I'm saying we don't need it. Capitalists and a free market would sort it out.

---

Strange how that didn't happen. Woolworth's still refused to serve black people.So since we know that "capitalists and a free market" don't actually sort it out, what do we do then?Dream for this mythical city of "Capitalism" where people are never bigoted?Of course, there's still the problem that even if people are willing to accept anybody's money, they're still going to be racist and keep those who aren't white from getting an education, a job, housing, etc., etc.Exactly how does capitalism end slavery? As we have seen, it's actually one of the biggest proponents of it. How much more money can you make when you don't have to pay your employees?

quote:

---

quote:

---

Strange how all those capitalists seemed to think that the money of Jews and blacks wasn't any good.

---

Where?

---

Here in the US.Are you saying you don't understand the reference to Woolworth's and lunch counters?Black people's money wasn't good enough.Are you seriously claiming you don't understand that the US has a long history of denying Jews access to various services?

quote:

---

quote:

---

So we seem to have a problem: You think the world is populated with these automatons known as "capitalists," but that seems to conflict with the reality that the world is instead populated by things known as "humans" and they are known to be bigots.

---

Even a bigoted capitalist will take your money, or if not, they'll go out of business.

---

And yet, a simple inspection of reality trivially shows your claim to be false. Bigoted capitalists make tons of money. Look at Trump.Have you forgotten that he was sued regarding his discrimination against blacks in housing?How is it that Woolworth's managed to even be a business capable of refusing to serve black people if they went out of business for refusing to serve black people?The history of the US is nothing but a real-world example of how bigoted capitalists make huge profits and how their bigotry doesn't stop them.

quote:

---

quote:

---

So what do we as a society do with that fact?

---

Yelp.

---

Nope.

quote:

---

We don't need federal laws to figure this out.

---

So why did we fight a Civil War and have to create a Constitutional amendment recognizing the rights of people regardless of race? We were a capitalist society. How could there possibly be any racism of any kind? I mean, it's been more than 200 years, for crying out loud. When is the wonderful invisible hand of the free market finally going to do its job and end racism?

quote:

---

Yup, that's a totalitarian tactic. I'm just saying we don't need it.

---

So Woolworth's should be allowed to deny service to black people?A restaurant should be allowed to serve spoiled food?And considering that we're a democracy and these laws were enacted via the democratic process, exactly how is it "totalitarian"? Methinks you're about to spout some Libertarian claptrap where you demand all the rights and privileges of a democracy but refuse to accept any of the responsibilities. Rights for you, screw everybody else. You got yours and everybody else can go pound sand.We as a society agreed to these regulations.You agreed to follow those regulations when you signed the social contract by accepting citizenship.If you are unhappy with the regulations, you have many options:1) Grumble but just accept it.
2) Attempt to change the regulations (we have these things called "elections"...perhaps you've heard of them?...we just had one. It helps keep down the bloodshed that comes when people try to change them by initiation of force.)
3) Leave.Just because you don't like the regulations that govern your life doesn't mean you're a victim of some totalitarian dictatorship. No man is an island. You accepted citizenship of this country and thus, you are bound to follow its laws. You agreed to be bound by those regulations. You don't get to whine about "initiation of force" because the contract you voluntarily and willfully signed requires you to do something you don't want to do.But like I said, that's Libertarian claptrap. Contracts only mean something if you're the aggrieved party demanding somebody else do something for you. As soon as you're the one with an obligation, it's "tyranny!"

quote:

---

quote:

---

Your bigotry is showing.

---

So's yours.

---

Nice try.I'm going to ask you nicely:Please, let us not play dumb.Fighting against racism is not racism against racists.
Fighting against bullying is not bullying the bullies.
Fighting against discrimination is not discrimination against those who discriminate.
Fighting against bigotry is not bigotry against the bigoted.Woolworth's was justified in their refusal to serve black people at the lunch counter?You *do* have the right to deny people on the basis of race, sex, religion, marital status, veteran status, etc.?Those are yes-or-no questions, New.I noticed you seemed to be unable to actually answer them.

New Cat's Eye responds to Modulous:

quote:

---

quote:

---

And when most of your customers will take their business elsewhere if you allow black people or gays to patronize your establishment, then the invisible hand in Capitalism will in fact reinforce the problem, not fix it.

---

Is that happening?

---

Yes.It's why we have anti-discrimination laws in the first place. The very thing you said couldn't happen in your mythical fantasyland of "Capitalism" was actually rampant.And, in fact, capitalism made it worse.

New Cat's Eye writes:

quote:

---

Today, we have near instantaneous communication between practically all of the potential patrons of an establishment, and if there is even a hint of bigotry the public jumps all over the business and calls them out.

---

Except that isn't true.And it isn't helpful when there is only one provider of a service. In many areas of this country, for example, the only hospital in town is a Catholic-run institution.So how are you going to get your birth control prescription?When every hotel decides to deny lodging to black people, which was common in the Jim Crow South, where are the black people supposed to go?It's cute how you think Yelp is the answer...considering that the the Negro Motorist Green Book wasn't able to do it.Again, it's been more than 200 years. Exactly when is the wonderful invisible hand of the free market going to get off its ass and end racism?

quote:

---

We really don't need a state giving us laws in order to figure this out.

---

Except the entire history of the United States is a trivially disproves that assertion. We need not only the state to give us laws, we need a vigorous enforcement of it in order to "figure this out."

quote:

---

Also, racial segregation was mandated by the state by law.

---

Nice try.Why were the segregation laws passed? What had just happened?After all, the great fantasyland of "Capitalism" should have immediately seen that all those black citizens were just a great untapped market waiting to be exploited. So how on earth did we end up with mandatory segregation with all those good Capitalists running around in control of everything?

quote:

---

It wasn't just a bunch of mean ol' capitalists trying to limit their business opportunities.

---

Actually, that's precisely what it was.Are you about to invoke "No True Capitalist"?

Still waiting on your answer, Faith:How does one "validate" a marriage if you aren't the one performing the sacrament?Do your religious proclivities allow you to deny interracial couples? Would you be "validating" "race-mixing" by doing so?

This story might belong better on a thread about the election but this is the best fit I can find at the moment. The relevance is that the Left has been pushing hard on the fake news that Trump's people have been involved with Russians in questionable ways.According to this Russian representative there were meetings between the Russian ambassador and both Trump's and Clinton's people, and none of it had anything to do with the election. Kremlin spokesman: Russian ambassador met with advisers to Clinton campaign tooEdited by Faith, : No reason given.