Artists Cancel Concerts after HB2 laws are passed. What are your thoughts?

  • Thread starter ryzno
  • 139 comments
  • 7,768 views
It's hard to make sense of your posts sometimes; are you saying that you withdraw your statements about the economic effects?

Withdrawing what statement? Anyhow the point I'm trying to make is that these celebrities should keep their views to themselves rather than airing it.

On an interesting note I nearly caught a glimpse of Ms. Gomez as I was walking back from the grocery store(I near across the street where she was performing).
 
Withdrawing what statement? Anyhow the point I'm trying to make is that these celebrities should keep their views to themselves rather than airing it.

On an interesting note I nearly caught a glimpse of Ms. Gomez as I was walking back from the grocery store(I near across the street where she was performing).
Whatever happened to their right of freedom of speech? :rolleyes:
 
DK
Whatever happened to their right of freedom of speech? :rolleyes:

How is wishing a public figure to keep their social/political views to themselves undermining their right to freedom of speech?
 
How is wishing a public figure to keep their social/political views to themselves undermining their right to freedom of speech?
You want them to shut up. Sure, you probably don't have any effect on a celebrity's ability to speak up, but how is that different from me saying, "Drumpf should shut up"?
 
How is wishing a public figure to keep their social/political views to themselves undermining their right to freedom of speech?

What does it have to do with you if they air their views just as you're airing yours?
 
I couldn't care less. I don't see why the government has to step in and legislate private businesses either. The business should be allowed to decide who goes in what bathroom because it's their private property. Just like I think bars/restaurants should be allowed to ban or allow smoking indoors.
 
I couldn't care less. I don't see why the government has to step in and legislate private businesses either. The business should be allowed to decide who goes in what bathroom because it's their private property. Just like I think bars/restaurants should be allowed to ban or allow smoking indoors.

Just so I know where (if anywhere) you draw the line, then, do you feel that private businesses should be allowed to discriminate on anything they please? Race? Gender? Disabilities?
 
Just so I know where (if anywhere) you draw the line, then, do you feel that private businesses should be allowed to discriminate on anything they please? Race? Gender? Disabilities?

Federal law is already quite clear about discrimination based on race, gender, religion and a few others. Sexual preference is not one of those protected groups and shouldn't be. And I think as long as private businesses are allowed to hang up signs that say "no guns," then it seems only fair.
 
Federal law is already quite clear about discrimination based on race, gender, religion and a few others.

That's a complete non-answer. I'm asking for your thoughts on it.

Sexual preference is not one of those protected groups and shouldn't be.

Why not?

And I think as long as private businesses are allowed to hang up signs that say "no guns," then it seems only fair.

A trans person's genitals pose as much threat to the safety of others as a gun? What an absurd comparison.
 
I still see two questions left completely unanswered:

Because making it a protected class would collude with business owners' first amendment rights that protect religious belief. We have already seen this happen a few times. I'm not willing to let the government force people into thinking and feeling a certain way. You shouldn't have to decide between owning a business or being a Christian.
 
Because making it a protected class would collude with business owners' first amendment rights that protect religious belief. We have already seen this happen a few times. I'm not willing to let the government force people into thinking and feeling a certain way.

Seeing as the Bible also provides, for those wanting one, a reason to discriminate against blacks, I'm still left uncertain as to your views of whether or not racial discrimination should be allowed.

If your answer is that it should not be allowed, then your assertion that discrimination against transgender people should be allowed illustrates a glaring inconsistency in your logic.
 
You shouldn't have to decide between owning a business or being a Christian.

Of course not.

You still have to understand that most people would see a business where blacks weren't served (on the basis of an arbitrary personal attribute) or where women weren't served (on the basis of an arbitrary personal attribute) as being the kind of business they didn't want to give trade to. In my view the social reaction is a better deterrent to such behaviour than legislation.
 
Seeing as the Bible also provides, for those wanting one, a reason to discriminate against blacks, I'm still left uncertain as to your views of whether or not racial discrimination should be allowed.

If your answer is that it should not be allowed, then your assertion that discrimination against transgender people should be allowed illustrates a glaring inconsistency in your logic.

Hmm I'm not sure where it says that in the Bible. But you're entitled to your opinion.

Of course not.

You still have to understand that most people would see a business where blacks weren't served (on the basis of an arbitrary personal attribute) or where women weren't served (on the basis of an arbitrary personal attribute) as being the kind of business they didn't want to give trade to. In my view the social reaction is a better deterrent to such behaviour than legislation.

Agreed. If people want to be douches, let them, and another businesses will pop up in its place.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hmm I'm not sure where it says that in the Bible. But you're entitled to your opinion.

You'll notice I said that people could find Biblical justification for racism if they wanted to; in other words, they could interpret certain verses as condoning racism. For an example, we could look at Leviticus:

Leviticus 25:44-46
However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way.

It doesn't take much creativity to read that as justification to treat people of other ethnicities as inferior.

What I didn't say was that the Bible explicitly instructs people to be racists. But if that's the standard you're looking for, okay, we can play by that standard. So now, I'll wait as you find a Bible verse that explicitly condemns transgender folks. If you can't, then you've still yet to demonstrate any difference between racial discrimination and discrimination against trans folks.

I'm also still waiting for a simple yes or no to my original question:

do you feel that private businesses should be allowed to discriminate on anything they please?
 
You'll notice I said that people could find Biblical justification for racism if they wanted to; in other words, they could interpret certain verses as condoning racism. For an example, we could look at Leviticus:



It doesn't take much creativity to read that as justification to treat people of other ethnicities as inferior.

What I didn't say was that the Bible explicitly instructs people to be racists. But if that's the standard you're looking for, okay, we can play by that standard. So now, I'll wait as you find a Bible verse that explicitly condemns transgender folks. If you can't, then you've still yet to demonstrate any difference between racial discrimination and discrimination against trans folks.

I'm also still waiting for a simple yes or no to my original question:

I honestly couldn't care less what people do in their own private time. I'm just saying business owners should not have to do things which honor that stuff.
 
I honestly couldn't care less what people do in their own private time.

You just don't want them to enjoy any legal protection from discrimination, nor do you want to articulate any logically consistent reasons why. Got it.
 
@huskeR32

Do private businesses have a right to discriminate? Of course they do as they are exercising their right to private property (and in some cases free association). In fact one way businesses/employers already do discriminate is through the use of a dress code and things of that nature. In fact facebook's ban on the sale guns via its dite is a form of discrimination.

Anyhow private actors have every right to discriminate so long as its not being done with the force of government.. Affirmative Action and Jim Crow are examples of this as they are methods of government-forced discrimination.

As for anti--discrimination laws, they are counterproductive to a free society as they undermine the right to free speech, private property and association. Not only that but they just another way for one group to hold sway over another given the force of government.
 
Last edited:
Bruce Jenner's opinion aside, why is a state government telling private businesses who can and cannot use the restrooms?
I was under the impression that the law applied to government buildings, not private. Nor does it ban anyone outright from a bathroom; it specifies which bathroom one may use.
 
No problem:
- targets activists and their family members with harassment, imprisonment and torture
- Nobel prize winner for demanding political change imprisoned for subverting the government
- human rights activists often face imprisonment, detention, torture, commitment to psychiatric facilities, house arrest, and intimidation.
- use of torture to extract confessions is prevalent, and miscarriages of justice are frequent due to weak courts and tight limits on the rights of the defense.
- until very recently there were about 160,000 people in about 350 camps sent there through arbitrary detention in which the police can detain people for up to four years without trial.
- government enforced family planning severely limiting the ability to have children.
- To date there is still no law protecting people from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, which remains common especially in the workplace.
- Same-sex partnership and marriage are not recognized under law. In February, a lesbian couple attempted to register at the marriage registry in Beijing but their application was rejected.
- On May 17, the International Day against Homophobia, city authorities detained Xiang Xiaohan, an organizer of a local gay pride parade, and held him for 12 days for organizing an “illegal march.” Demonstrations require prior permission, which is rarely granted.

Problem:
Restricting bathroom use to biological sex only.

The NBA, fighting for the rights of it's fans everywhere. Errrrr...except the nearly 20% of the globe that lives in China.
 
No problem:
- targets activists and their family members with harassment, imprisonment and torture
- Nobel prize winner for demanding political change imprisoned for subverting the government
- human rights activists often face imprisonment, detention, torture, commitment to psychiatric facilities, house arrest, and intimidation.
- use of torture to extract confessions is prevalent, and miscarriages of justice are frequent due to weak courts and tight limits on the rights of the defense.
- until very recently there were about 160,000 people in about 350 camps sent there through arbitrary detention in which the police can detain people for up to four years without trial.
- government enforced family planning severely limiting the ability to have children.
- To date there is still no law protecting people from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, which remains common especially in the workplace.
- Same-sex partnership and marriage are not recognized under law. In February, a lesbian couple attempted to register at the marriage registry in Beijing but their application was rejected.
- On May 17, the International Day against Homophobia, city authorities detained Xiang Xiaohan, an organizer of a local gay pride parade, and held him for 12 days for organizing an “illegal march.” Demonstrations require prior permission, which is rarely granted.

Problem:
Restricting bathroom use to biological sex only.

Yes, taking a stance on one issue means that a person/organization doesn't care at all about anything else.

So tell me, which single issue is it that you truly care about? Choose carefully, because once you've decided, it will be presumed that you condone everything else in this world.

Give me a break. :rolleyes:
 
Back