Quote# 84867

I believe you are right. I remember a similar case in New Mexico, and the New Mexico law made it very clear that “We Reserve The Right To Refuse Service To Anyone” is another way of saying, “I want to go to jail”.

Now, is that right? Absolutely not, and I think any of the Founders would be shocked and disgusted by our nation. That was why, even as a young child, I was confused when the civil rights movement said people had to do business with other people regardless of the desire to do so. Although my parents were strong supporters of full rights for blacks, they also could not imagine a world where a business owner HAD to do business with anyone.

I’ve got a part of my house that could easily be converted into a 2 room apartment, providing inexpensive housing. I will NEVER do so. Why? Because I cannot tell someone, “I don’t want a couple of faggots having sex under my roof.” The moment I said that, I might as well hand over the keys to my house, because when the law was done with me, they would own my house.

See my tagline? That is exactly how I feel.

("they found themselves made strangers in their own country")

Mr Rogers, Free Republic 52 Comments [11/21/2011 4:13:20 AM]
Fundie Index: 64

Username  (Login)
Comment  (Text formatting help) 

1 2 3 | bottom


as part of my many student jobs, i found myself having to do that to a(thankfully) few customers, namely on the basis of them being willfully obtuse, intolerant, vulgar, or bigotted (one customer actually refused my help, saying he couldn't trust a man with long hair).

so yeah, i get his point, but you'd better have a good reason for it (homophobia isn't a valid reason)

11/21/2011 1:38:44 PM

Old Viking

Your momma would be proud.

11/21/2011 1:49:25 PM


Dammit Freepers, you're already stupid enough, but now you're stealing Mister Rogers's name?

11/21/2011 2:47:33 PM


In most jurisdictions, if you live on the premises, your building is a quadriplex or smaller, and you're not catering to transients, you can choose your "housemates" according to your taste. You're not really considered being within the purview of the Commerce Clause. Under the Commerce Clause, anything which might affect interstate travel, such as hotel/ motel/ resort accommodations and commercial rental units can be, and is, so regulated. This does not prevent a restaurant (say) from requiring shirts, shoes, and reasonable decorum impartially from all its clientele.

11/21/2011 2:53:52 PM


Fuck you, asshat and your inexpensive housing.

11/21/2011 4:15:47 PM


11/21/2011 5:57:39 PM

We reserve the right to ignore your prejudice.

11/21/2011 6:17:09 PM


Tell me more about being a bad business man.

11/21/2011 6:32:08 PM


Look, if you want to run a business, then you abide by anti-discrimination laws. If you want to be a bigot, fine, but don't start a business thinking you're going to get away with that shit.

You can be a bigot all you want, as long as you don't infringe on the rights of others. Once you refuse service to someone who has an unchangeable characteristic you don't like, you've crossed that line.

Also, no one thinks about gay sex that much unless you're into it, you dumbass.

11/21/2011 7:50:54 PM


Actually businesses do have a right to refuse service. If customers are being disruptive, threatening, stealing from them, or otherwise a liability, then yes, they can be removed from the property. You just can't discriminate against someone for race, religion, nationality or sexual preference.

And hey, if you want to sacrifice potential income because a gay couple might want to rent those rooms, that's your problem. I doubt anyone would ever want to rent from an asshole like you anyway, especially if they have to live on the property with you. Oh, and as long as they're paying rent, they're not under "your" roof, they're under "their" roof. My landlord doesn't have the right to enter my apartment without notice, except in an emergency.

11/21/2011 8:37:54 PM


It's not like forcing bigots to be tolerant at gunpoint is going to make them any less bigoted. It'd probably do the opposite.

11/21/2011 8:55:03 PM

"It's not like forcing bigots to be tolerant at gunpoint is going to make them any less bigoted. It'd probably do the opposite."

Gunpoint? Who the fuck mentioned guns here?

11/21/2011 9:53:55 PM

I find it disgusting that a straight, white, Christian male can comment on discrimination and still live with himself. I bet this guy has never been discriminated against in his life and yet he can spew this bullshit.

11/21/2011 10:34:07 PM


For all the people defending this guy, think about something: your rights as an individual are not the same as your rights in a commercial setting. The law has always distinguished between those who are in the business or trade of providing various products or services, and those acting in an individual, non-commercial capacity.

This whole idiotic idea that businesses have the sovereign right to do whatever they want and treat people however they please is bullshit, and has never existed in any society.

11/21/2011 10:39:17 PM

rubber chicken

Technically and logically, all laws are enforced by the state with the implied threat of force. So any state/government/authority which relys upon the monopoly of violence is holding you at gunpoint or at least the implication thereof.

11/21/2011 10:45:26 PM


The reason we have anti-discrimination laws is that, while in theory, the free market should weed out bigoted businesses, such is not at all what happens in reality.

In reality, especially back when these laws were passed, you had entire communities of bigots. If you were black, you were not getting served anywhere. Now, you might think that some savvy businessperson might say, "Hey, I'd get more customers if I served black people!" Unfortunately, that would work for only five minutes. In practice, the local community would boycott the business in question (or worse) because they don't want to be served with blacks, putting it out of business. It wasn't something white businesses dared to do, even if they WANTED to.

Free market advocates often seem to forget that there are many other motivations in our society that are far stronger than the simple greed that should drive the capitalist system... and that's where laws come in.


While you are correct in stating that laws are backed by the force of arms, that generally is not the reason people follow laws. People generally follow laws and pay their taxes because they recognize that we live in a society and that society provides rights and responsibilities. One of those responsibilities is to follow rules, as rules are vital to maintain order.

11/22/2011 5:12:08 AM


A quick shout out to commenters who think that letting the free market be free will mean racist businesses will simply be uncompetitive with inclusive ones.

This was not the experience of any nation either now or in history, it will not work. Why? Because a bigoted business can always count on the business of the bigoted, people will pay a premium to exclude others. And plenty of people will simply find these places "more upmarket" or "friendlier" because they happen to be white only, even if they don't consciously realise it.

In addition Businesses should not be free to discriminate as that limits the individual freedom of choice, a paramount principle of human rights and capitalism which surely trumps the freedom of any business.

11/22/2011 6:26:23 AM

rubber chicken

@Cohiba man

Which presumably explains the spraying of non-violent, passive protesters with noxious chemicals ?

11/22/2011 8:06:53 AM


@rubber chicken

I didn't say that abuses don't occur in the system. Nor did I say that force is not used when push comes to shove.

What I said, however, is that in a society with reasonable laws, threat of force is NOT the primary reason why most people follow those laws. They follow the law because society has made a collective decision that such is the best means by which to maintain order. Most people don't pay their taxes because the government is putting a gun to their heads -- they pay them because they recognize that paying taxes is part of the price one pays to live in a civilized society.

Don't confuse the consequences of not doing something for the reasons WHY people do the things they do.

11/22/2011 8:53:09 AM


On one hand, I'd LIKE to see business people who try actively discriminating get bitten in the ass by the same free market they think they love.

On the other hand, there are still areas where a business that discriminated against people could still succeed and could hurt many other people before it hurt itself. Sometimes, there IS no competition to go to; a small town is the perfect environment for a discriminatory business to survive, because the locals that aren't affected either share the prejudice, or at BEST ignore it since the competition isn't convenient and the discrimination doesn't affect them. So as much as I'd like to see businesses get slapped by the invisible hand for refusing service based on things other than actions, I don't think it would work on EVERY business. Only those in big cities, and even those might not lose enough customers to be put out of business.

11/22/2011 1:21:44 PM


11/24/2011 12:17:53 AM


“I don’t want a couple of faggots having sex under my roof."

How it's possible for two bundles of sticks to have sex?

11/24/2011 6:37:36 AM

rubber chicken

@Cohiba man

It's an interesting point of view but one that I don't really agree with.
The majority of people pay tax because they cannot avoid it. Check out cases of lottery winners and the like and one of the first things they do is employ an accountant to reduce their tax bill.
Try getting the rich, or churches, to pay their fair share of the tax burden. The squealing would make you think that you were asking for body organs.
The spraying of those demonstrators was not an occasional abuse or a one off. It was a message, a very forthright and simple message: "Do as you are told or we will fuck your shit up".
The same message is shown on your TV shows, "Cops, Worlds wildest police chases, Beach patrol, CSI, You name it. They all send the same message. Don't argue, don't struggle, don't complain outside the limited structures allowed to you, the authorities will always win.
The number one offence in the western world is "Contempt of cop", the biggest street gang wears blue shirts.
Try asking people involved in Britains Miners Strike or OWS or the unemployed marchers of the thirties how much of the 'social contract' they were allowed.

11/24/2011 7:38:12 AM


He complains about the civil rights movement and equal opportunity, then HE is the one alienated from society?

11/26/2011 8:09:03 AM

Ok, when blacks, muslims and other Christians are bigots against you, you'll have to eat your words one by one.It goes both ways.

11/26/2011 10:11:12 AM

1 2 3 | top: comments page