Board 8 > Alt-righter banned from gym for being alt-right

(+) Yeah! (+)

ExThaNemesis posted...

redrocket_pub posted...

NOW somebody got GOT LOLOLOL!

...is this serious?

Like is this the level of butt sniffing we've gotten to since I left the politics topics? Jesus.

COMPLETE.

GLOBAL.

BUTTDEVASTATION.
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

pjbasis posted...

+5 for using the word atheist. So many people are scared of that word for some reason

Over the past ten years atheists have made complete and utter fools of themselves online to the degree that it's hard to wanna be associated with the word. The same direction liberal has gone, basically.

I think it's better to just be true to the word than worry about associations. I'm definitely still a liberal. But that doesn't mean I have to agree with everything or even most things the left or Democrats do. Heck some of my liberal principles are hidden in conservative idealogy! But that just shows how strange the parties have become.
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

redrocket_pub posted...

NOW somebody got GOT LOLOLOL!

...is this serious?

Like is this the level of butt sniffing we've gotten to since I left the politics topics? Jesus.

100% of posts with "LOLOLOL" are completely serious.
---

There are reasons for not allowing segregated businesses other than "I'm a sociopath who wants people to suffer," ExTha.
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

And of course I don't think a business should be able to refuse service to a black person, but that's hardly the same thing as forcing a Christian bakery to cater specifically to a gay wedding with the loaded gun of bankruptcy level lawsuits pointed at them.

in fairness, you do establish a line here so the question then goes to what level the line should be. is it because of past history? is it because race is that clear? is it because of your respect to a person's religion? because i can flip the last one a bit to make a more awkward situation: what if you've got a Muslim bakery who doesn't want to cater or do business with the wife, saying they'd solely work with the husband or her father?

pj's position is fairly consistent, using the law only to create a balance that otherwise couldn't exist thanks to the past. nationally that is, obviously some parts of the US did not need the law. yours has more holes in it. which again is totally fine, everyone's got their line.
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

100% of posts with "LOLOLOL" are completely serious.

I'm more-so talking about the fact that we're saying that a boycott is even remotely on the same path as wanting a company put into bankruptcy through legislation.

They're not even in the same hemisphere.
---

banananor posted...

Extha and PJ, you just need to read this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_class

Then determine what, if anything, you disagree with

Framing it as a disagreement is missing the point. I agree with a lack of discrimination. I even believe these laws were probably necessary when they were made. They could even still be necessary. But I believe there will come a time when they won't be.
---

paperwarior posted...

There are reasons for not allowing segregated businesses other than "I'm a sociopath who wants people to suffer," ExTha.

They just want christians or conservatives or anyone not part of their group to suffer.
---

pjbasis posted...

But I believe there will come a time when they won't be.

I mean we're having an uptick in hate crimes the past few years, something tells me there's places who would absolutely love to deny service to blacks, Hispanics, Arabic people, etc
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

Inviso posted...

Don't forget how just 50 years ago, interracial marriage was illegal and treated with the same disdain.

I forgot that the bakers refusing to make the cake meant that the marriage would somehow stop being sanctioned. And that that bakery was the only place they could shop for their cake.

Again, I don't take any business seriously that refuses customers who are going to pay them for a service, but that doesn't mean they should be bankrupted.

If someone is being a fucking c*** and dehumanizing themselves, why not punish or even ruin them for it? Lawsuits are within the law. The plaintiff(s) did not engage in illegal behavior like killing the bakery owners or burning the business down, which would obviously be criminal and wouldn't be condoned by anyone on any side of this argument, but why not put them in a position where they are agonizing over consequences brought about by their decisions? "You fucked with me. I fucked with you."
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

Inviso posted...

Don't forget how just 50 years ago, interracial marriage was illegal and treated with the same disdain.

I forgot that the bakers refusing to make the cake meant that the marriage would somehow stop being sanctioned. And that that bakery was the only place they could shop for their cake.

Again, I don't take any business seriously that refuses customers who are going to pay them for a service, but that doesn't mean they should be bankrupted.

The problem is that it's not just about a cake. It's about setting a standard. Sure, a bakery's not an end of the world situation. But if you say "sure, you can legally discriminate against gays HERE" then what's to stop discrimination in other, more vital places, like a doctor's office or hospital? The issue is that it's a fucking CAKE and some people can't put their prejudices aside in order to MAKE MONEY...so maybe I'd be good to get THAT shit sorted out before a real life or death situation comes along.
---

And this is far more speculative, but in a truly egalitarian world, the existence of laws that recognize race and color and gender could do more harm than good. I'd rather us not really even see those things beyond as basic facts that don't really impact any decision making.
---

Inviso posted...

The problem is that it's not just about a cake. It's about setting a standard. Sure, a bakery's not an end of the world situation. But if you say "sure, you can legally discriminate against gays HERE" then what's to stop discrimination in other, more vital places, like a doctor's office or hospital? The issue is that it's a fucking CAKE and some people can't put their prejudices aside in order to MAKE MONEY...so maybe I'd be good to get THAT shit sorted out before a real life or death situation comes along.

You 100% would not have this opinion if it were a muslim bakery lol
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

100% of posts with "LOLOLOL" are completely serious.

I'm more-so talking about the fact that we're saying that a boycott is even remotely on the same path as wanting a company put into bankruptcy through legislation.

They're not even in the same hemisphere.

Who in this topic said they want that?

Because Moogle is saying "I want the fear of repercussions to keep people from discriminating", which literally the basis for any law is "I want the fear of repercussions to keep people honest".
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

paperwarior posted...

There are reasons for not allowing segregated businesses other than "I'm a sociopath who wants people to suffer," ExTha.

They just want christians or conservatives or anyone not part of their group to suffer.

TIL making a cake for gay people makes Christians suffer. I must be a bad Christian, because I see no problem with gay marriage or baking a cake for a gay couple.
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

paperwarior posted...

There are reasons for not allowing segregated businesses other than "I'm a sociopath who wants people to suffer," ExTha.

They just want christians or conservatives or anyone not part of their group to suffer.

Or they want people who are in business commerce to do commerce, which is something that a republican candidate for President literally said.
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

100% of posts with "LOLOLOL" are completely serious.

I'm more-so talking about the fact that we're saying that a boycott is even remotely on the same path as wanting a company put into bankruptcy through legislation.

They're not even in the same hemisphere.

the goal of "make the business suffer financially is the same, we just disagree on the degree

roughly how much money do you think a business should lose for discriminating against gay people?
---

Inviso posted...

TIL making a cake for gay people makes Christians suffer. I must be a bad Christian, because I see no problem with gay marriage or baking a cake for a gay couple.

You're one of those pick and choose Christians that I have even less respect for, modifying the bible to the point where it suits you.
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

Inviso posted...

The problem is that it's not just about a cake. It's about setting a standard. Sure, a bakery's not an end of the world situation. But if you say "sure, you can legally discriminate against gays HERE" then what's to stop discrimination in other, more vital places, like a doctor's office or hospital? The issue is that it's a fucking CAKE and some people can't put their prejudices aside in order to MAKE MONEY...so maybe I'd be good to get THAT shit sorted out before a real life or death situation comes along.

You 100% would not have this opinion if it were a muslim bakery lol

I would, actually. Unfortunately for your argument, Muslims don't exactly have the population or political clout to get away with denying service to gay people on the basis of their religion.
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

Inviso posted...

TIL making a cake for gay people makes Christians suffer. I must be a bad Christian, because I see no problem with gay marriage or baking a cake for a gay couple.

You're one of those pick and choose Christians that I have even less respect for, modifying the bible to the point where it suits you.

Literally every Christian that wears poly-blend clothes and doesn't segregate women on their periods is a 'pick and choose Christian".
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

Inviso posted...

TIL making a cake for gay people makes Christians suffer. I must be a bad Christian, because I see no problem with gay marriage or baking a cake for a gay couple.

You're one of those pick and choose Christians that I have even less respect for, modifying the bible to the point where it suits you.

This is literally all Christians who aren't insane people.

Unless your stance, ExTha, is that all Christiam men should be required by law to kill their wives if they find out they weren't virgins when they got married.
---

Also the shellfish thing.
---

I think all religious people are pick and choose at some point.

Their texts are just way too open to interpretation, and like normal human beings they're affected by their current culture.
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

Inviso posted...

TIL making a cake for gay people makes Christians suffer. I must be a bad Christian, because I see no problem with gay marriage or baking a cake for a gay couple.

You're one of those pick and choose Christians that I have even less respect for, modifying the bible to the point where it suits you.

You mean like the kinds of people that hold up their Bible to justify fear and discrimination of homosexuals?
---

pjbasis posted...

banananor posted...

Extha and PJ, you just need to read this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_class

Then determine what, if anything, you disagree with

Framing it as a disagreement is missing the point. I agree with a lack of discrimination. I even believe these laws were probably necessary when they were made. They could even still be necessary. But I believe there will come a time when they won't be.

that's fair enough! it just seemed like some people were arguing they weren't necessary today, or that these protected classes were the same as being alt-right, which they are not
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

paperwarior posted...

There are reasons for not allowing segregated businesses other than "I'm a sociopath who wants people to suffer," ExTha.

They just want christians or conservatives or anyone not part of their group to suffer.

I don't think anyone should be sued for disagreeing with me on the appropriate tax rate for the wealthy or socialized healthcare or whatever. This is about bigger things than politics.
---

On a side note you guys are way too used to arguing with each other that I don't think you see your main points so much as you see the other guy and want to "win" at something.

Don't have so much pride.
---

LapisLazuli posted...

This is literally all Christians who aren't insane people.

Unless your stance, ExTha, is that all Christiam men should be required by law to kill their wives if they find out they weren't virgins when they got married.

I mean where do you draw the line at. Where does "The word of God" become "The word of God maybe"?

It's part of why I just reject the whole thing completely. I think being a christian requires a certain amount of insanity anyway.
---

pride is the backbone of the politics topic.
of which this is really an extension.
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

Inviso posted...

TIL making a cake for gay people makes Christians suffer. I must be a bad Christian, because I see no problem with gay marriage or baking a cake for a gay couple.

You're one of those pick and choose Christians that I have even less respect for, modifying the bible to the point where it suits you.

oooh... *sharply inhales and winces at the same time*

well good luck to everyone in this debate and in this topic. I for one need to be hittin' the ol' dusty trail... peace out.
---

Problem is that someone is arguing that you should be able to refuse service for any reason. Any reason includes things like people's race, religion, gender, sexuality, etc.
---

TheRock1525 posted...

Problem is that someone is arguing that you should be able to refuse service for any reason. Any reason includes things like people's race, religion, gender, sexuality, etc.

That's not my argument, that's the one you guys made when you said the business had every right to throw out Spencer.
---

pjbasis posted...

On a side note you guys are way too used to arguing with each other that I don't think you see your main points so much as you see the other guy and want to "win" at something.

Don't have so much pride.

This is 99% the result of the the "other guy" on this forum tends to be.

We have the misfortune of having maybe 3 sane conservatives on B8 and none of them post in the Politics topic because they're too scared of being associated with the other ones.
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

I think being a christian requires a certain amount of insanity anyway.

Well before hittin' the ol' dusty trail, just gotta say I am in fact in agreement with you completely here. Okay bye for reals this time.
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

paperwarior posted...

There are reasons for not allowing segregated businesses other than "I'm a sociopath who wants people to suffer," ExTha.

They just want christians or conservatives or anyone not part of their group to suffer.

I suppose some people do, yeah. But I don't. I just don't want the destructive effect on society and human dignity that segregating by group introduces. It doesn't matter how insignificant the individual case is. Every case matters, same as freedom of speech. The principle is only being upheld if it's applied consistently.
---

Like either embrace the full libertarian mindset ("Yes you can refuse service to black people") or realize that people should be protected from discrimination in commerce.
---

LapisLazuli posted...

We have the misfortune of having maybe 3 sane conservatives on B8 and none of them post in the Politics topic because they're too scared of being associated with the other ones.

No sane conservative wants anything to do with arguing with you people.
---

TheRock1525 posted...

Like either embrace the full libertarian mindset ("Yes you can refuse service to black people") or realize that people should be protected from discrimination in commerce.

You guys are the ones with the inconsistent position here, not me.
---

TheRock1525 posted...

Problem is that someone is arguing that you should be able to refuse service for any reason. Any reason includes things like people's race, religion, gender, sexuality, etc.

extha's not arguing that though, he clearly drew a line on the issue earlier, though the reasons for it remain unclear. pj isn't either considering that's what he's mostly described was also explicitly stated to be his ideal, he's already said he believes that the government should get involved when it's causing a clear harm against certain people. details unclear but still, neither is arguing that as an absolute. nobody is.
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

TheRock1525 posted...

Like either embrace the full libertarian mindset ("Yes you can refuse service to black people") or realize that people should be protected from discrimination in commerce.

You guys are the ones with the inconsistent position here, not me.

What's wrong with Rock's statement here?

Pick one.
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

TheRock1525 posted...

Like either embrace the full libertarian mindset ("Yes you can refuse service to black people") or realize that people should be protected from discrimination in commerce.

You guys are the ones with the inconsistent position here, not me.

You say people can't be refused service because they're black.
You say people CAN be refused service because they're gay.

That's fairly inconsistent, my friend.
---

Kenri posted...

DoomTheGyarados posted...

It's actually perfectly the same if you just look at it from a bird's eye view.

what's a bird's eye view even mean here

Ignoring all context

It's a favorite pastime of people who are "super analytical hyper rational"
---

TheRock1525 posted...

You say people can't be refused service because they're black.
You say people CAN be refused service because they're gay.

That's fairly inconsistent, my friend.

I don't think people should be refused service for ANY reason, that's my position.
---

Wanglicious posted...

of which this is really an extension.

oh shit why'd I post
---

Are you sure it's not being in the same pool as "as a conservative in New York I receive the same segregation as 1960's black Americans did" G?
---

I think that political party probably also shouldn't be allowed as a basis for discrimination, and should definitely be harshly criticized. But Spencer here is a public figure. If a bar wanted to not allow Obama or Trump in, that would be valid, albeit rather meaningless in most cases.
---

ExThaNemesis posted...

TheRock1525 posted...

You say people can't be refused service because they're black.
You say people CAN be refused service because they're gay.

That's fairly inconsistent, my friend.

I don't think people should be refused service for ANY reason, that's my position.

what if someone shits on the cash register
---

Also let's not ignore the fact that the women in question here is the biggest asshole in all of this.

Instead of putting her head down and focusing on her workout, she decided to put the gym in a really awful position.

Either they could've allowed Spencer to stay, in which case they would've been hit with the stick of the radical left, calling for them to be boycotted and shut down due to allowing Nazis.

Or they could do what they did, ban Spencer and now they're gonna get hit with the stick by their supporters too.

TLDR, the woman who did this is a fucking monster.
---

banananor posted...

what if someone shits on the cash register

well then they'd have to buy the cash register
---

Or they could do what they did, ban Spencer and now they're gonna get hit with the stick by their supporters too.

oh no, whatever will this gym do if nazis don't want to go to it

this woman did everyone at the gym a favor by erecting an anti-nazi force field around it
---