Gay Rights Regulations Passed in UK; Christians Protest

[5stringJeff]

Normally I would agree but qhwn you allow that you allow things like widespread descrmination. If lots of businesses owner didn't want to do business with a certain group of people like blacks or gays it would lead to problems.

What problems? The problem of liberty? Like your flag says: "Don't tread on me!"

[LiberalNation]

No like widespread descrimination, like blacks had it in the south before the civil rights movement. Denied good job, ect, which led to a lot of problems.

[avatar4321]

I support not descriminating against people. You can have your morality. Not mistreating gays or having to associate with them in business setting is not infringing on your right to have your own moral beliefs.

So are you against discriminating against people who kill others as well?

What about liars?

And Thieves?

Or Child molestors?

Bad behavior should be discriminated against.

[LiberalNation]

Only when it causes harm to others ie murder, stealing, ect.

[Hobbit]

I'm going to have to don some asbestos after saying this, but here it goes.

Non-government entities should have the inalienable right to descriminate against whoever they want for any reason without providing said reason.

There. I said it. It's your business. If you only want to hire hot, buxom young women (like a certain restaurant), then you should be able to. If you want your business to only employ whites, that should be your right. If you don't want to sell something to some guy because you think his mustache looks funny, go for it. Capitalism will sort it out. If enough people have a problem with your descrimination, you'll go out of business. If you can descriminate and still stay in business, then those you descriminate against are just going to have to either live with it or convince others not to do business with you. Once you start dictating certain criteria on who a privately owned business MUST do business with, you begin stepping on individual freedoms and you can never know how far it will be allowed to go.

[5stringJeff]

I'm going to have to don some asbestos after saying this, but here it goes.

Non-government entities should have the inalienable right to descriminate against whoever they want for any reason without providing said reason.

There. I said it. It's your business. If you only want to hire hot, buxom young women (like a certain restaurant), then you should be able to. If you want your business to only employ whites, that should be your right. If you don't want to sell something to some guy because you think his mustache looks funny, go for it. Capitalism will sort it out. If enough people have a problem with your descrimination, you'll go out of business. If you can descriminate and still stay in business, then those you descriminate against are just going to have to either live with it or convince others not to do business with you. Once you start dictating certain criteria on who a privately owned business MUST do business with, you begin stepping on individual freedoms and you can never know how far it will be allowed to go.

I agree. In the long run, it is bad for businesses to discriminate against hiring people, because you will tend to miss out on quality employees that possess an "undesirable" trait (i.e. wrong race, gender, etc.). And if one discriminates against doing business with a certain type of customer, one runs the risk of losing out on a particular market. However, as Hobbit said, both should be within the limits of the law.