EPTYou can not just hair-split what kind of discimination is ok, and what is not. It is either not ok to have any, or it is ok to have all.
Customer Discrimination: Okay or Not? - Page 5
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
naastyOne
491 Posts
You can not just hair-split what kind of discimination is ok, and what is not. It is either not ok to have any, or it is ok to have all. | ||
|
jakethesnake
Canada4948 Posts
On January 19 2013 05:23 naastyOne wrote: As long as there are sexist laws or someone is legally getting preferential treatment(same as discrimination) by state or private enteties, based on their race(affirmative action), etnicity(organisations giving scolarships only for certain etnicity), or gender(Violence Against Women Act), private enterprises should have right to segregate customers in any way they want. You can not just hair-split what kind of discimination is ok, and what is not. It is either not ok to have any, or it is ok to have all. Seriously? So if it is ok to give a discount to seniors or war vets then it is ok to deny service to black people or the disabled? You really think that those two things are equal? | ||
|
bonifaceviii
Canada2890 Posts
On January 19 2013 05:23 naastyOne wrote: You can not just hair-split what kind of discimination is ok, and what is not. It is either not ok to have any, or it is ok to have all. Stay out of politics please; we don't need any more of this kind of thinking... | ||
|
Frigo
Hungary1023 Posts
| ||
|
killa_robot
Canada1884 Posts
So yes, businesses should be allowed to do this, because you're not being forced to buy from them. Unless this is being done by some sort of government service, I don't see an issue. | ||
|
RavenLoud
Canada1100 Posts
It's really just another form of corruption and favoritism that has existed as long as society has. Although I don't like it, it's not going to go away either because this flawed way of perceiving and doing things is too ingrained in human nature. All I can do is to avoid being an asshole as much as possible. | ||
|
Rassy
Netherlands2308 Posts
The supermarket where i get my grocerys is close to a highschool and they dont let in more then 5 kids at a time when they come there during lunchbreak,probably because the fear of shoplifting. Am not sure am ok with this but can understand it somewhere from the supermarket. Dicsrimination on gender or race or sexual preference i am not ok with, dancings and clubs sometimes discriminate man (women can always get in, man often get refused) here and from a business point of vieuw i can understand that. Maybe they also discriminate on race at times, its hard to tell as they can refuse people without reason. But ya, am not ok with customer discrimination in general, though i also think everyone has the right to do business with who he wants,its a bit difficult. | ||
|
naastyOne
491 Posts
On January 19 2013 05:28 jakethesnake wrote: Seriously? So if it is ok to give a discount to seniors or war vets then it is ok to deny service to black people or the disabled? You really think that those two things are equal? Yes, giving discounts to seniors/wets/disabled for being seniors/wets/disabled is wrong, since they are making profit by discriminating. If the organisations/goverment want to help them, they can use their right to contribute to charity. On January 19 2013 05:28 bonifaceviii wrote: Stay out of politics please; we don't need any more of this kind of thinking... I like it where you`re going. Only people that share my oppinion should be engaged in politics. | ||
|
Warlock40
601 Posts
| ||
|
ThomasjServo
15244 Posts
| ||
|
naastyOne
491 Posts
On January 19 2013 05:46 ThomasjServo wrote: It is his business and he can charge accordingly. That being said I voted depends, because I don't believe such a pricing discrepancy to be appropriate in the case of sexuality, religion, race, etc. While rather cumbersome publicity in the short term, the business owner should recognize that in the long run this won't benefit his business. How did you figure? In a very conservative state, it may not be a problem, at all. | ||
|
r.Evo
Germany14081 Posts
In general, unless violence, name calling and other things are involved I'm all for letting the businesses handle stuff like this themselves. A night club has the right to say "You're not getting in here", a restaurant has the right to say "Please leave" - a cakemaker should be able to say "No cake for you". If in any of these cases someone adds "Because you're gay / black / white / fucked my wife" it suddenly is a thin line because now he starts to project his believes/perspective on the person openly for the public to discuss. Since in pretty much all cases the reason is obvious to most people in the first place I don't think this should be treated differently by authorities/law. However, in theory, acting like this should make a business lose money unless the majority in the area shares this view. In case this actually happens it's probably best for whatever minority we're talking about to move along. I certainly wouldn't like to live there. | ||
|
bonifaceviii
Canada2890 Posts
On January 19 2013 05:44 naastyOne wrote: I like it where you`re going. Only people that share my oppinion should be engaged in politics. You got me dude; I want to abolish the dreaded scourge of credit reports (because it discriminates against people who don't pay their bills) and the foul plague of background checks (because it discriminates against people who lie their ass off on resumes) and need my ideological enemies purged in order to bring about my pure egalitarian utopia. Not to mention the crypto-fascist standard door height and how it dehumanizes those who are nine feet tall. Or maybe I want a pragmatic discussion on what discrimination is worth regulating and think all-or-none thinking is ridiculous and counterproductive. | ||
|
naastyOne
491 Posts
On January 19 2013 06:23 bonifaceviii wrote: So, you want to hairsplit discrimination and want to silence people that do not agree with you. Ok. But since it wourks both ways, why wouldn`t you shut yourself for your unproductive vieves?Or maybe I want a pragmatic discussion on what discrimination is worth regulating and think all-or-none thinking is ridiculous and counterproductive. | ||
|
ampson
United States2355 Posts
| ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4433 Posts
Blacks were given the cheapest deal, followed by hispanics, whites and then Asians. Completely racist of course as there is poor people in every race.These guys didn't get the memo that the richest guy in the world is Hispanic? | ||
|
bonifaceviii
Canada2890 Posts
On January 19 2013 06:46 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: I have seen on liberal college campuses at bake sale people selling cakes at different prices for different races Blacks were given the cheapest deal, followed by hispanics, whites and then Asians. Completely racist of course as there is poor people in every race.These guys didn't get the memo that the richest guy in the world is Hispanic? Affirmative action bake sales are not exclusive to liberal colleges; they're a common means of protesting discriminatory admissions policies no matter who's in charge. | ||
|
danl9rm
United States3111 Posts
On January 19 2013 04:54 Fenris420 wrote: No they do not. What you are doing here is a false dilemma or a propositional fallacy. I am not a racist just because I do not share your oppinion as a non-racist. What is racism anyway? It is generalisation of people base on race. By saying I don't like black people for the sole reason that they are black is racist and irrational, that is why we don't like racists. You are saying that you don't like any racists for the sole reason that they are racist. That is the exact same reasoning if you ask me. This has always been an ironic relationship in my oppinion. As long as someone isn't doing something to other people, I can accept discriminatory oppinions. I don't like them, but they are everywhere so I really cannot afford to take offense all of the time. Besides, if someone is racist and that makes them undesireable to you, would you not prefer that they are allowed to demonstrate that with their behaviour? If we force racists to hide that they are racist we might end up supporting such store owners without even knowing about it. If I was gay, I would not like to buy a cake from a militant homophobe even if I could. A law against racism only makes people not talk about it, it will not remove racism itself. Same goes for all of the above mentioned disciminatory convictions. Talk about irrational. The guy (baker) said he would sell them a cake for a birthday or whatever, he just wouldn't make them a cake for a homosexual wedding, since it goes against his beliefs to support such a thing. That makes him a "militant homophobe?" To add, you claim the reason "we don't like racists" is that they are "racist and irrational." The fact that they are irrational is irrelevant. We don't agree with racists because, and you got it right here, they are racist. And, racism is wrong. | ||
|
fuzzy_panda
New Zealand1681 Posts
On January 19 2013 06:29 naastyOne wrote: So, you want to hairsplit discrimination and want to silence people that do not agree with you. Ok. But since it wourks both ways, why wouldn`t you shut yourself for your unproductive vieves? I think he's trying to point out that not everything in life is black and white, this or that. There are some grey areas and discrimination is one of those. I personally believe it's ok to discriminate. You have that right to. In the end the public will vote with their money and internet "civil movements", and as long as you're up for the challenge you can be a total Nazi and ban all Jews from your shop or something. Just be prepared for backlash | ||
|
Reedjr
United States228 Posts
On January 19 2013 06:18 r.Evo wrote: However, in theory, acting like this should make a business lose money unless the majority in the area shares this view. In case this actually happens it's probably best for whatever minority we're talking about to move along. I certainly wouldn't like to live there. Saying "it's probably best [...] to move along" is horrible victim blaming bullshit. Should women not fight for equal pay from businesses? Should minorities have left the south prior to the Civil Rights Acts? Should homosexuals just leave the states that have voted against gay marriage, or leave any town where there's an anti-gay crime? Bigotry should be challenged, not acquiesced. On January 19 2013 06:29 naastyOne wrote: So, you want to hairsplit discrimination and want to silence people that do not agree with you. Ok. But since it wourks both ways, why wouldn`t you shut yourself for your unproductive vieves? Yes, we're going to "hairsplit" discrimination because the USA has created and upheld legislation that does precisely that. In what way are his views "unproductive?" Your false dichotomies and vague accusations go a lot farther in shutting down discussion than anything he's doing. | ||
| ||
