Equal rights of a consumer to access a private business should not exist. The rights of the owner should always trump the rights of the consumer. This isn't that complicated. If you do not have the right to make the rules about how what you own is used then you do not own it.

 

Businesses are owned by private individuals.  But they are not private, they are opened to the public.  This is something you are missing.  

 

When you register your business, usually with your states office of the Secretary of State, you put yourself out as a public business.  Unless you get an exemption by the federal government to be a 501c(x).  You get to choose what you sell, where you will do your business, how much you will set your prices at, etc...

 

But you don't get to choose to refuse service to entire segments of the population.  Yes you can refuse service to a drunk, or a obnoxious or rude person.  But when you open a business, it is open to the public.  All of the public.  And if you don't abide by that, sanctions will occur.  It's the law.  Sorry, but it's been decided.  If you disagree, you can vote in representatives that agree with you.  But in this situation, the majority are not in agreement with your concepts of private business versus public obligations of that business.  

---

Businesses are owned by private individuals.  But they are not private, they are opened to the public.  This is something you are missing.  

  

 

These words you've strung together are irrelevant. Because I choose to do business I no longer have the right to run the business I own as I see fit. Think about the implications of those words. And remember, "you didn't build that."

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

These words you've strung together are irrelevant. Because I choose to do business I no longer have the right to run the business I own as I see fit. Think about the implications of those words. And remember, "you didn't build that."

 

You realize this reality regarding businesses I described has been in effect for a very long time.  I'm sorry that for whatever reason you guys are getting into a tizzy about it.  But this is how it works in America. 

 

You're concern about how you choose to do business is misguided.  Like I said, you can choose what you sell, where you sell it, how you acquire your materials, you choose your own marketing and your own branding, you choose who to hire based on their qualifications, you can fire people that don't perform, you choose price points for your goods and services, you can even choose the type of entity you want your business to file as, you can take on investors, you can run it as a sole proprietorship, etc...  These are all things that make up a business.  These are all things that the government <u><em><strong>does not control over you</u>,</em></strong> the free market does.  So for you to complain about not being able to refuse gays because of some bigotry (religious or otherwise), I'm sorry, but it falls on deaf ears.

---

You realize this reality regarding businesses I described has been in effect for a very long time. I'm sorry that for whatever reason you guys are getting into a tizzy about it. But this is how it works in America.


You're concern about how you choose to do business is misguided. Like I said, you can choose what you sell, where you sell it, how you acquire your materials, you choose your own marketing and your own branding, you choose who to hire based on their qualifications, you can fire people that don't perform, you choose price points for your goods and services, you can even choose the type of entity you want your business to file as, you can take on investors, you can run it as a sole proprietorship, etc... These are all things that make up a business. These are all things that the government <em><strong>does not control over you,</em></strong> the free market does. So for you to complain about not being able to refuse gays because of some bigotry (religious or otherwise), I'm sorry, but it falls on deaf ears.

My stance is that the government shouldn't get involved in ambiguous situations like this. It is basically declaring one person's rights as superior to another's(The right to be gay versus the right to be a devout Christian). They should stay away from issues of conscious and religion. Discrimination based on hate is one thing, and many may believe this is hate, but to the shop owners, this is discrimination based on conscious. Like I said, where should the line be drawn? Can a skinamax camera man be forced to film man on man action by law when he is solicited?

---

You realize this reality regarding businesses I described has been in effect for a very long time.  I'm sorry that for whatever reason you guys are getting into a tizzy about it.  But this is how it works in America. 

 

You're concern about how you choose to do business is misguided.  Like I said, you can choose what you sell, where you sell it, how you acquire your materials, you choose your own marketing and your own branding, you choose who to hire based on their qualifications, you can fire people that don't perform, you choose price points for your goods and services, you can even choose the type of entity you want your business to file as, you can take on investors, you can run it as a sole proprietorship, etc...  These are all things that make up a business.  These are all things that the government <u><em><strong>does not control over you</u>,</em></strong> the free market does.  So for you to complain about not being able to refuse gays because of some bigotry (religious or otherwise), I'm sorry, but it falls on deaf ears.

 

How nice of you to let me have some control over something I own.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

My stance is that the government shouldn't get involved in ambiguous situations like this. It is basically declaring one person's rights as superior to another's(The right to be gay versus the right to be a devout Christian). They should stay away from issues of conscious and religion. Discrimination based on hate is one thing, and many may believe this is hate, but to the shop owners, this is discrimination based on conscious. Like I said, where should the line be drawn? Can a skinamax camera man be forced to film man on man action by law when he is solicited?

 

It's not about anything other than property rights. Owners should have the right to discriminate and no one who isn't the owner should have the right to tell them otherwise.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

How nice of you to let me have some control over something I own.

 

LOL, some control?  You're kidding right?  

---

It's not about anything other than property rights. Owners should have the right to discriminate and no one who isn't the owner should have the right to tell them otherwise.

 

Did you just wake up and realize you live in America?  Owners haven't had the right to discriminate since the 1960s.  Welcome to America, Rumplestilzkin!   :teehee:

---

LOL, some control?  You're kidding right?  

 

Less and less every year. The trend is discouraging, at least to those of us who believe in personal freedom.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Less and less every year. The trend is discouraging, at least to those of us who believe in personal freedom.

Yes yes freedom. Call it whatever makes you feel good. Racism and sexism has moved to bigotry and people are sad when criticized for having these beliefs in a modern society.

---

Yes yes freedom. Call it whatever makes you feel good. Racism and sexism has moved to bigotry and people are sad when criticized for having these beliefs in a modern society.

 

I call it an adult that doesn't like when some other adult, who has never met them and knows nothing about them, making their grown up decisions for them and telling them how they should behave.  I have no problems with anti-discrimination laws, but in cases like this where there are two rights that are infringing upon each other, it shouldn't be up to the government to take sides.  

 

When has the government ever done anything smoothly or efficiently?  Its full of corruption with too many parts to have any kind of real oversight.  Take, for example, VF Solutions.  They have an exclusive government contract to supply uniforms for large swathes of government employees.  Except they charge the government nearly $200 for a $50 retail pair of New Balance shoes per employee.  How is this even possible?  $30 for a single pair of socks?  Oh, right, Al Gore was a significant partner when the contract was awarded.  Now it makes sense.  Book a flight using the government travel system Concur.  The government pays $1200 for the same exact flight that could be booked on travelocity for $600.  And this is the government that has all the answers?

 

This government is run by special interest groups; therefore, I don't trust it when it comes to special interests.

---

Did you just wake up and realize you live in America?  Owners haven't had the right to discriminate since the 1960s.  Welcome to America, Rumplestilzkin!   :teehee:

 

Do you think I came to this position just this morning?

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Yes yes freedom. Call it whatever makes you feel good. Racism and sexism has moved to bigotry and people are sad when criticized for having these beliefs in a modern society.

 

If I'm only free to think like you want me to then I'm not free. And what happens to you when your principle suddenly falls out of favor? Who will stand up for you then?

 

And you really think this is about "criticism?" This is about much much more than just words.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

I call it an adult that doesn't like when some other adult, who has never met them and knows nothing about them, making their grown up decisions for them and telling them how they should behave.  I have no problems with anti-discrimination laws, but in cases like this where there are two rights that are infringing upon each other, it shouldn't be up to the government to take sides.  

 

When has the government ever done anything smoothly or efficiently?  Its full of corruption with too many parts to have any kind of real oversight.  Take, for example, VF Solutions.  They have an exclusive government contract to supply uniforms for large swathes of government employees.  Except they charge the government nearly $200 for a $50 retail pair of New Balance shoes per employee.  How is this even possible?  $30 for a single pair of socks?  Oh, right, Al Gore was a significant partner when the contract was awarded.  Now it makes sense.  Book a flight using the government travel system Concur.  The government pays $1200 for the same exact flight that could be booked on travelocity for $600.  And this is the government that has all the answers?

 

This government is run by special interest groups; therefore, I don't trust it when it comes to special interests.

 

Exactly, and it really doesn't matter which party is running the government.  The corruption and inefficiencies are no different as long as it's the same establishment folks who may have an R or a D after their name, but they're all about keeping the power in the hands of the few.  Until we break up that monopoly, it will be business as usual. 

 

Personally, I think there's a major reboot coming for this country, and it's going to happen sooner rather than later. 

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

If I'm only free to think like you want me to then I'm not free. And what happens to you when your principle suddenly falls out of favor? Who will stand up for you then?


And you really think this is about "criticism?" This is about much much more than just words.

As I've said before you can think however you want as its your right. Just don't cry when you and your ilk get criticized by modern society for your backwards views because that's their right also. The world has left your views behind. It's just the fact of the matter.

---

As I've said before you can think however you want as its your right. Just don't cry when you and your ilk get criticized by modern society for your backwards views because that's their right also. The world has left your views behind. It's just the fact of the matter.

 

Criticize all you want, just do it off my property. There's a line there that needs to be reestablished between what's yours, what's the community's, and what's mine. It's blurring left you thinking you have more than you do.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Racism, slavery, treason, and anti-American ideals are the things I associate with the confederate flags.


Of their own volition, the confederates made their views on slavery and race known.


This from Alexander Stephens (vice president of the Confederacy) in his "Cornerstone of the Confederacy" speech:


(emphasis added)


Despite what many think, it wasn't about States' rights.


Here is South Carolina's declaration of Secession, in relevant part:


(emphasis added)

South Carolina specifically calls out these states for exercising States' Rights in not enforcing provisions of the Fugitive Slave Act and other Slavery related laws.


This from Mississippi...


(emphasis added)


So we know the principles for which the Confederacy was founded from the Confederates' own words.


What about the flag itself?


We know the "Stars and Bars" was not the official flag of the Confederacy. Nevertheless, we know it was adopted by part of the Confederate army in battle. The Confederacy never repudiated its use by the army who advanced the Confederacy's aims in battle. Its designer, William Thompson, is quoted thusly:



(emphasis supplied)


The Confederacy was defeated and dissolved without ever renouncing the abhorrent principles articulated above.


Other than using Jedi mind tricks known as flat out denial, and meaningless platitudes like "Heritage, not hate," no defenders of the stars and bars and other confederate icons have managed to show a divorcing of the Confederacy or the flags the Confederacy adopted of its own volition from the repugnant and anti American principles upon which it was founded.


There was a reason that flag resurfaced in the midst of the Civil Rights era, in the aftermath of Brown v. Board of Education and similar legislation that ended "Separate but Equal" Jim Crow de jure segregation. The same bigoted intransigence that resulted in the Civil was and Jim Crow led to the Duval County School board naming a high school after Nathan B. Forrest, a Confederate general and founder of the Ku Klux Klan, in addition to raising that flag, in defiance of the mandates from Washington. The same unmitigated racism connected with the flag is the same reason the Ku Klux Klan-of all groups-is rallying to support the Confederate flag in South Carolina later this week.

Amazing post. I agree with everything you stated. Revisionist historians can try and twist what the civil war was about but they're wrong

---

Know your history

---

Amazing post. I agree with everything you stated. Revisionist historians can try and twist what the civil war was about but they're wrong

 

Go ahead and believe it was solely or almost entirely about slavery if you wish.  The South was offered twice a Constitutional Amendment to protect slavery, but it was declined because it was only one of many grievances by the South.  Four of the States didn't even join the Confederacy until Lincoln started the Civil War and invaded the South.  They were protecting what they perceived as one sovereignty being invaded by an aggressor. 

---

Criticize all you want, just do it off my property. There's a line there that needs to be reestablished between what's yours, what's the community's, and what's mine. It's blurring left you thinking you have more than you do.

The vast majority of businesses don't own their space they rent it. In case you didn't know that means its not your property. It's a rented space owned by someone else.

---