Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
And gay couples will continue to marry. This will simply open up new business for others.
As it should be, it is wrong to force complains to do these things.
Considering Libertarians are fine with any sort of discrimination and that creates scenarios like segregation and inequality. Everything from lunch counters to banks redlining is just A-OK in a Libertarian paradise.
Libertarians are not "fine" with discrimination. They just don't support all the government created laws to address it.
They're fine with it in that government shouldn't be involved even though that's the most effective way of combating discrimination.
Whether it's the most effective way of fighting discrimination is an open question. Regardless, we do reject 'ends-justifies-the-means'. Losing the right to decide who we associate with is far worse than the discrimination these laws attempt to thwart.
Piss off, troll.the truly Religious should be not for the profit of lucre, but for the profit of our immortal souls.That's the thing. They pretend this is about equal rights, that what they want is for businesses to treat everyone equally. But that's not what these laws mandate. They merely target a few types of discrimination that are currently unpopular with the government (and its lobbyists). Everything else is fair game.Remember you Lefties: Discrimination happens all the time that you don't give a fuck about. The Asian community is notorious for discriminating in both hiring and housing renting. And what about black businesses that hire blacks. Where are the Lefties on those topics? Nowhere.
You can already do that on private property. You cannot do that in Public Accommodation.The best solution is to allow every business to decide whom they wish to serve or not serve at their own discretion. The free market will decide if these business practices will be rewarded or rebuked. I would never give a business my money that enacted such polices or my run business in such a fashion, but you should be able to.
American Exceptionalism instead of Commerce, well regulated and consistent?You can already do that on private property. You cannot do that in Public Accommodation.The best solution is to allow every business to decide whom they wish to serve or not serve at their own discretion. The free market will decide if these business practices will be rewarded or rebuked. I would never give a business my money that enacted such polices or my run business in such a fashion, but you should be able to.
Except the federal court just ruled otherwise
Your property is not private in public accommodation or you could run your business from home.You can already do that on private property. You cannot do that in Public Accommodation.The best solution is to allow every business to decide whom they wish to serve or not serve at their own discretion. The free market will decide if these business practices will be rewarded or rebuked. I would never give a business my money that enacted such polices or my run business in such a fashion, but you should be able to.
Public accommodation laws are bullshit that violate my property, individual, and, business rights. They should be scrapped.
American Exceptionalism instead of Commerce, well regulated and consistent?You can already do that on private property. You cannot do that in Public Accommodation.The best solution is to allow every business to decide whom they wish to serve or not serve at their own discretion. The free market will decide if these business practices will be rewarded or rebuked. I would never give a business my money that enacted such polices or my run business in such a fashion, but you should be able to.
Except the federal court just ruled otherwise
"Letting the markets' decide" is a nice way of saying that the racists in the rural South could band together and promote discrimination and it turned out "the markets" were just fine with it until Liberal protesters came in followed by the federal government.
You can already do that on private property. You cannot do that in Public Accommodation.The best solution is to allow every business to decide whom they wish to serve or not serve at their own discretion. The free market will decide if these business practices will be rewarded or rebuked. I would never give a business my money that enacted such polices or my run business in such a fashion, but you should be able to.
Public accommodation laws are bullshit that violate my property, individual, and, business rights. They should be scrapped.
You can already do that on private property. You cannot do that in Public Accommodation.The best solution is to allow every business to decide whom they wish to serve or not serve at their own discretion. The free market will decide if these business practices will be rewarded or rebuked. I would never give a business my money that enacted such polices or my run business in such a fashion, but you should be able to.
Public accommodation laws are bullshit that violate my property, individual, and, business rights. They should be scrapped.
"Letting the markets' decide" is a nice way of saying that the racists in the rural South could band together and promote discrimination and it turned out "the markets" were just fine with it until Liberal protesters came in followed by the federal government.
No, "let the markets decide" is a nice way of saying "let the people decide".
the non-Religious should be able to say the same thing, in our secular and temporal Republic.American Exceptionalism instead of Commerce, well regulated and consistent?You can already do that on private property. You cannot do that in Public Accommodation.The best solution is to allow every business to decide whom they wish to serve or not serve at their own discretion. The free market will decide if these business practices will be rewarded or rebuked. I would never give a business my money that enacted such polices or my run business in such a fashion, but you should be able to.
Except the federal court just ruled otherwise
A constitutional right...freedom of religion
Effective at what exactly? Establishing government control of business (people)? They're not effective at ensuring equal rights. All they do is suppress the expression of unpopular opinions.They're effective is what they are.
We already have a supreme law of the land. Our Civil War could have been avoided through eminent domain since abolition was federal policy."Letting the markets' decide" is a nice way of saying that the racists in the rural South could band together and promote discrimination and it turned out "the markets" were just fine with it until Liberal protesters came in followed by the federal government.
No, "let the markets decide" is a nice way of saying "let the people decide".
Not if the majority of the people don't care about protecting peoples' rights like in the segregated South. I'd argue that "the markets" preferred segregation.
"Letting the markets' decide" is a nice way of saying that the racists in the rural South could band together and promote discrimination and it turned out "the markets" were just fine with it until Liberal protesters came in followed by the federal government.
No, "let the markets decide" is a nice way of saying "let the people decide".
Not if the majority of the people don't care about protecting peoples' rights like in the segregated South. I'd argue that "the markets" preferred segregation.
Effective at what exactly? Establishing government control of business (people)? They're not effective at ensuring equal rights. All they do is suppress the expression of unpopular opinions.They're effective is what they are.
they should be doing it, for the Sake of the Art.Effective at what exactly? Establishing government control of business (people)? They're not effective at ensuring equal rights. All they do is suppress the expression of unpopular opinions.They're effective is what they are.
What government control? Saying that your business has to do the bare minimum in not throwing people out of it for their race or religion is not exactly government control. Being a libertarian is a privilege for only those in the majority. Everyone else? Just go to the next business, the one in the dilapidated neighborhood that our local banks won't give loans to...cuz freedom.
We already have a supreme law of the land. Our Civil War could have been avoided through eminent domain since abolition was federal policy."Letting the markets' decide" is a nice way of saying that the racists in the rural South could band together and promote discrimination and it turned out "the markets" were just fine with it until Liberal protesters came in followed by the federal government.
No, "let the markets decide" is a nice way of saying "let the people decide".
Not if the majority of the people don't care about protecting peoples' rights like in the segregated South. I'd argue that "the markets" preferred segregation.
What government control? Saying that your business has to ...
the point was about letting markets not the coercive use of force of the State or the Union, decide.We already have a supreme law of the land. Our Civil War could have been avoided through eminent domain since abolition was federal policy."Letting the markets' decide" is a nice way of saying that the racists in the rural South could band together and promote discrimination and it turned out "the markets" were just fine with it until Liberal protesters came in followed by the federal government.
No, "let the markets decide" is a nice way of saying "let the people decide".
Not if the majority of the people don't care about protecting peoples' rights like in the segregated South. I'd argue that "the markets" preferred segregation.
I don't think we're going back that far.
