What's new

NY's Proposed Ban on Large Sugary Drinks

Getting fined when breaking a rule hardly makes something legal.

Hence the reason I placed quotation marks around the word legal. It's not legal in the traditional sense but it is no longer a felony offense that will get you arrested and tossed in jail. Try to keep up.
 
Yes. It would likely get her protested and blacklisted and she'd go out of business but it is her right to refuse service.

The law on that probably varies by state. In states where sexual orientation is a protected class, you can't refuse service to a homosexual anymore than you can to a black person.

However, it's good to seeing you go back to supporting bigotry. Back when you were a taqunch advocate for limiting what the prosecution said about defendants at press conferences, I wondered what had happened to you.

Or maybe not...
 
However, it's good to seeing you go back to supporting bigotry.

I'm not supporting bigotry but rather freedom. I feel a black business owner can refuse service to whites. Like I said, there are ramifications but he should be able to do it.
 
I'm not supporting bigotry but rather freedom. I feel a black business owner can refuse service to whites. Like I said, there are ramifications but he should be able to do it.

Keep slamming your head against that wall Scat.
 
Applying for loans from the SBA. Getting various tax deductions. Pretty much any any sort of government assistance to help small businesses. It the business is not a public good, there's no expectation of public support, right?
 
Applying for loans from the SBA. Getting various tax deductions. Pretty much any any sort of government assistance to help small businesses. It the business is not a public good, there's no expectation of public support, right?

I love when you make the case for my extreme form of libertarianism.
 
I love when you make the case for my extreme form of libertarianism.

I'm not saying government loans are a bad idea in general. I think libertarianism would be great if the world were fair and people were trustworty.
 
Hence the reason I placed quotation marks around the word legal. It's not legal in the traditional sense but it is no longer a felony offense that will get you arrested and tossed in jail. Try to keep up.

Yeah, I guess in your world speeding is "legal" and parking without paying a meter is "legal." I'll try to keep up, but I guess I'm at a disadvantage since I don't get to make up the definitions of words on the fly.
 
Yeah, I guess in your world speeding is "legal" and parking without paying a meter is "legal." I'll try to keep up, but I guess I'm at a disadvantage since I don't get to make up the definitions of words on the fly.

Think of it in terms of warnings and infractions and it'll all make sense.
 
Yeah, I guess in your world speeding is "legal" and parking without paying a meter is "legal." I'll try to keep up, but I guess I'm at a disadvantage since I don't get to make up the definitions of words on the fly.

Whoa... that's your world "Mr. I hate waiting at stop lights and then ignore the ticket".
 
I'm curious as to what everyone thinks of Bloomberg's proposed ban on large sugary drinks in NYC? Is it government's business to even consider such a thing?

gv060612dAPR20120606044521.jpg


Candrew, you live there. Is this out of control government intervention or justifiable?

by 2 or more regular/small ones.

people arent allowed to think for themself anymore. **** the government
 
Yes. It would likely get her protested and blacklisted and she'd go out of business but it is her right to refuse service.

I see where you're coming from, and I understand that you have a certain ideological value system of which I actually think requires quite a lot of courage to live by, especially when many people may disagree with you. That said, I do disagree with you.

The reason being, from a broad perspective, is that it is easy to classify things as black and white but it paints an incomplete picture. In this case, you argue for a persons right to refuse service from the viewpoint that people should have their own personal rights, no matter the consequences. The first problem I see with this idea is that it is dangerous to champion a society with an ethos of exclusion and derision with respect to widespread human traits that are non-controllable for the people that have these traits (being black, gay, a jazzfan etc.), especially if these traits are not hurtful to the people that have them nor to other people around them. Secondly, I also think that people should have basic human rights and should be able to make decisions about who they spend their time with in their personal lives, but in the case of the wedding photographer, she should have known that there would be many kinds of weddings that she would have to work, and as part of her job, that includes gay weddings. If she does not feel comfortable doing this, then she should not have accepted the position.

Finally, most people on this board are not diametrically opposed to one another, rather we tend to have opinions that are like vectors pointing in the same direction, but are of different magnitudes. I and many others on this board are with you on the whole freedom of choice thing, but are not nearly as extreme as you are for the reasons I stated previously, but that doesn't make us wrong.
 
Back
Top