EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 2364
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany12080 Posts
| ||
KwarK
United States44440 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 02 2015 03:42 KwarK wrote: Discrimination is pretty hard to prove anyway. Unless you're coupling the rejection with racial insults or there are some dumb email records proving you're violating a protected field with employment discrimination you'll get away with it. The idea that a drunk black guy crying "I'll sue you for racialism" as he gets ejected actually wins isn't based on anything. Its easy when the cake baker says "I don't make cake for gay couples". That case wins itself. But the rest of the time it is VERY hard to prove. Any form of discrimination need a smoking gun email, comment or very predictable pattern of discrimination to be proven in court. It's very hard. | ||
|
Toadesstern
Germany16350 Posts
BREAKING: Oregon community college shooting suspect 'is down': Oregonian newspaper Several dead after shooting at Oregon college As many as 15 people were reported killed and 20 were reported wounded at a shooting at a community college in Roseburg, Oregon. www.reuters.com  | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens Sadly, this never stops being relevant. | ||
|
jcarlsoniv
United States27922 Posts
fucking damnit I would love to stop seeing these kinds of things | ||
|
KwarK
United States44440 Posts
| ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On October 02 2015 04:41 Plansix wrote: Again: ‘No Way To Prevent This,’ Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens Sadly, this never stops being relevant. Such a wonderful example of satire, but dammit I wish it would stop popping up. | ||
|
ZasZ.
United States2911 Posts
On October 02 2015 02:58 Plansix wrote: This isn't any different that the normal problem retailers face. They already fear social influential people who don't like their service and decide to badmouth them on facebook or some shit. The gay couple is no more a threat than the women who brings her shitty kids to the cake and gets mad when the owner tell them not to touch the cakes. Both can go ham on social media to put them out of business. You misunderstand me, I'm saying that if society wants to correct the behavior, that's fine. Aren't we talking about making refusal of service illegal? Because "discrimination" is such a loose term that making the law apply only to those religious nuts that hate the gays seems like a pipe dream. I'm saying I'm more comfortable with businesses being able to refuse service to anyone they like, for any reason, and having society work out who the assholes are. I realize that's not ideal, but so is allowing any asshole who gets kicked out of a place to claim discrimination and get the business owners fined or thrown in jail. And Nyxisto, there are plenty of reasons why people can refuse service, other than discrimination. Throwing someone out of a bar for being too drunk is refusing service. Kicking a homeless guy out of your store for loitering can be considered refusing service. Kicking a person being an asshole out of your business is refusing service. No shoes, no shirt, no service is a sign seen all over the place in business windows. Unfortunately, it's complicated. If people had made the same argument I am making now about black customers, there probably would have been entire towns in the deep south that refused to serve black people, with little alternative to them, and no societal impulses to correct their behavior. But I also think that was a different situation because as far as I know we do not have concentrated gay communities that are isolated within large swaths of homophobic businesses. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On October 02 2015 04:59 KwarK wrote: 300,000,000 people and you're bound to get some cunts. Couple that with the guarantee of top post on reddit and 24 hour news coverage for a few days and here we are. The US has more school shootings than any other nation on the planet combined, and those nations have people, too. There's really no need for fatalism. http://www.mibazaar.com/schoolshootings/ And that map doesn't even cover the last three years. The discrepancy is so high that you can't seriously blame it on "a few people being cunts". | ||
|
Mercy13
United States718 Posts
On October 02 2015 05:09 ZasZ. wrote: You misunderstand me, I'm saying that if society wants to correct the behavior, that's fine. Aren't we talking about making refusal of service illegal? Because "discrimination" is such a loose term that making the law apply only to those religious nuts that hate the gays seems like a pipe dream. I'm saying I'm more comfortable with businesses being able to refuse service to anyone they like, for any reason, and having society work out who the assholes are. I realize that's not ideal, but so is allowing any asshole who gets kicked out of a place to claim discrimination and get the business owners fined or thrown in jail. And Nyxisto, there are plenty of reasons why people can refuse service, other than discrimination. Throwing someone out of a bar for being too drunk is refusing service. Kicking a homeless guy out of your store for loitering can be considered refusing service. Kicking a person being an asshole out of your business is refusing service. No shoes, no shirt, no service is a sign seen all over the place in business windows. Unfortunately, it's complicated. If people had made the same argument I am making now about black customers, there probably would have been entire towns in the deep south that refused to serve black people, with little alternative to them, and no societal impulses to correct their behavior. But I also think that was a different situation because as far as I know we do not have concentrated gay communities that are isolated within large swaths of homophobic businesses. I'm sure there are still a lot of small towns with businesses that would love to refuse service to black people, let alone gay people, if they could get away with it. You don't need a concentrated black/gay community for this to be a problem for the members of those groups who do live there. And even in big towns there are still large swaths of transphobic businesses. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 02 2015 05:09 ZasZ. wrote: You misunderstand me, I'm saying that if society wants to correct the behavior, that's fine. Aren't we talking about making refusal of service illegal? Because "discrimination" is such a loose term that making the law apply only to those religious nuts that hate the gays seems like a pipe dream. I'm saying I'm more comfortable with businesses being able to refuse service to anyone they like, for any reason, and having society work out who the assholes are. I realize that's not ideal, but so is allowing any asshole who gets kicked out of a place to claim discrimination and get the business owners fined or thrown in jail. Legal the term is very limited. Assholes are not a protected group. Legally they wouldn't be able to get them fined or a court order forcing the business to serve them. And if the business is serving other member of the ass-hole's protected group, they have a defense. And before you say that the threat of frivolously lawsuits is a problem, those are always a threat. Removing the requirement to serve protected groups would not protect the business from the legal cost of a frivolously lawsuit. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/09/public-school-funding-and-the-role-of-race/408085/ | ||
|
Djzapz
Canada10681 Posts
Just wanted to throw this here, it speaks to the quality of the medias in the US (and Canada's no better). She just sticks to the script... (Just watch, it gets good around 1:25-1:35). I don't know that HLN is representative of anything, IDK how bit that network even is, but it's funny nonetheless. | ||
|
JinDesu
United States3990 Posts
I think he really spoke well in this press conference. | ||
|
killa_robot
Canada1884 Posts
On October 02 2015 05:43 oneofthem wrote: yet more evidence that racism is pretty real, like we all know. http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/09/public-school-funding-and-the-role-of-race/408085/ For a report dealing with poverty it seems rather odd they wouldn't release anything to do with crime or academic achievement in those areas. Then again its stats. Skewing things to further their own agenda is how most research works. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
A man can dream. This was posted to 4chan yesterday, holy crap. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
Edit: I saw that. I love how the edgelords of 4chan are cheering him on. That a garbage site and community. | ||
|
Cowboy64
115 Posts
Senseless tragedy, I can't even imagine the pain those families must be going through. RIP | ||
| ||
