Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Not so long ago it was quite common for restaurants, shops, hotels and other commercial outlets to refuse service to people because of skin colour. Such a thing is now outlawed under anti-racism laws, however, does this not impinge on the rights of other citizens to serve who they want and employ who they want?

Is it wrong for the owner of a hotel to refuse to give a room to a man because he is black and is it wrong for a shop manager to refuse to employ hispanics?

Also, while this is the Private Sector what about the Public Sector?

Should Local Authorities be able to establish schools for people of different ethnicities and choose who can work in what sort of Public-Owned enterprises?

I'd differentiate between "is it wrong" and "should the government ban it". To my personal morals, it is very wrong to deny a black man anything solely due to his race, but, I do not believe that the government should that possibility away, as I also think that it is more wrong of the government to infringe on a person's private decision as to their own believes as well to services their company provide.

On the other hand I understand that such a law, likely furthered the civil rights movement in the earlier days, which is certainly desirable, I just would, probably, not want it at the cost of self-expression, etc.

As for the public sector, decisions based on anything which has nothing to do with the person's own behaviour and/or skill (basically, everything that doesn't judge a person as an individual) should be outright banned.

Originally posted by Bardock42
On the other hand I understand that such a law, likely furthered the civil rights movement in the earlier days, which is certainly desirable, I just would, probably, not want it at the cost of self-expression, etc.

Self expression?

I wonder if they will ever try to pass legislation that forces the Catholic Church to ordain woman as Priests...

A few people did try to take them to Court in the UK over what they saw as a breach of Anti-Sex Discrimination Law...

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Self expression?

Well, self determining who one provides their own services to.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, self determining who one provides their own services to.

You think stifling discrimination is wrong because it stifles discrimination?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
You think stifling discrimination is wrong because it stifles discrimination?

Discrimination or Civil Rights?

No, in a liberal democracy private and public facilities and businesses should not have a right to discriminate. furthermore, in a true liberal democracy in order to protect citizen from the tyranny of majorities, it should be illegal for the rights of minorities to be taken away by a popular vote.

A private company or business should have that right if they please.

A government or publicly traded one shouldn't.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
I wonder if they will ever try to pass legislation that forces the Catholic Church to ordain woman as Priests...

A few people did try to take them to Court in the UK over what they saw as a breach of Anti-Sex Discrimination Law... Well, seeing as Catholicism is a worldwide religion, in many countries, and also seing as most countries have secular governments, I dont see how that could ever happen.

I think its wrong, but its still a pointless question. Employers don't have to hire anyone they don't want to.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
No, in a liberal democracy private and public facilities and businesses should not have a right to discriminate. furthermore, in a true liberal democracy in order to protect citizen from the tyranny of majorities, it should be illegal for the rights of minorities to be taken away by a popular vote. Isn't that just the majorty deciding for the minority of business owners, for example?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
You think stifling discrimination is wrong because it stifles discrimination? I have no idea what you mean.

Originally posted by KidRock
A private company or business should have that right if they please.

Hunting down living people for sport?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Isn't that just the majorty deciding for the minority of business owners, for example?

Better than the minority of business owners deciding for everyone else.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos

Better than the minority of business owners deciding for everyone else.

Arguable. Certainly worse than people deciding for themselves, though.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Arguable. Certainly worse than people deciding for themselves, though.

Most people aren't smart enough to decide for themselves. Case in point, the current economic markets.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Most people aren't smart enough to decide for themselves. Case in point, the current economic markets.

Most people are also not smart enough to lead.

Either way, it's a very valid decision for an employer. He should certainly be able to decide who he gives money to in exchange for services. Just as the person should be able to decide who he gives services for, in exchange for money.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Most people are also not smart enough to lead.

Dodging. Leadership can be created. You're stuck with John Q. Public no matter what.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Either way, it's a very valid decision for an employer. He should certainly be able to decide who he gives money to in exchange for services. Just as the person should be able to decide who he gives services for, in exchange for money.

Arguable and I think it works the other way around

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Not so long ago it was quite common for restaurants, shops, hotels and other commercial outlets to refuse service to people because of skin colour. Such a thing is now outlawed under anti-racism laws, however, does this not impinge on the rights of other citizens to serve who they want and employ who they want?

Is it wrong for the owner of a hotel to refuse to give a room to a man because he is black and is it wrong for a shop manager to refuse to employ hispanics?

Also, while this is the Private Sector what about the Public Sector?

Should Local Authorities be able to establish schools for people of different ethnicities and choose who can work in what sort of Public-Owned enterprises?

Is it wrong? yes.

Is it legal? depends..business have what they call:

"We reserve the right to refuse service"

Meaning, that they can deny you a sale. But is not as easy as that...the business must have some reason why they deny the service. For example (as a business owner) let's say your regular customers feel affected by a certain individual in your store and ask you to not sell anything to that individual. You have a valid reason.

Did you ever saw the movie "Do the Right Thing"? The scene in which the guy walks in blasting music with his boom box inside a pizza parlor is a clear example of refusing service to certain individuals...even if they're different color.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Not so long ago it was quite common for restaurants, shops, hotels and other commercial outlets to refuse service to people because of skin colour. Such a thing is now outlawed under anti-racism laws, however, does this not impinge on the rights of other citizens to serve who they want and employ who they want?

Is it wrong for the owner of a hotel to refuse to give a room to a man because he is black and is it wrong for a shop manager to refuse to employ hispanics?

Also, while this is the Private Sector what about the Public Sector?

Should Local Authorities be able to establish schools for people of different ethnicities and choose who can work in what sort of Public-Owned enterprises?

there are obviously examples where some sort of discrimination is neccessary...for example it would hardly be fitting to have a male as a counselor for female rape victims

i don't agree with the idea of the met police actively discriminating against white applicants because they want more ethnic officers for predominantly ethnic areas of London...

as for discrimination with regards to services...i'm sure alot of small businesses probably do do it...albeit by making up a "legitimate" excuse that's actually just a lie because they don't want to serve someone due to prejudice...some still do it blatently though...i remember the case of a man who ran a small hotel in the highlands who said he wouldn't allow 2 gay men to stay in his hotel.

Originally posted by jaden101
there are obviously examples where some sort of discrimination is neccessary...for example it would hardly be fitting to have a male as a counselor for female rape victims

i don't agree with the idea of the met police actively discriminating against white applicants because they want more ethnic officers for predominantly ethnic areas of London...

as for discrimination with regards to services...i'm sure alot of small businesses probably do do it...albeit by making up a "legitimate" excuse that's actually just a lie because they don't want to serve someone due to prejudice...some still do it blatently though...i remember the case of a man who ran a small hotel in the highlands who said he wouldn't allow 2 gay men to stay in his hotel.

I agree with comment above. Certain prejudices are necessary in certian cases.

But employers fundamentally do not have the right to discriminate against either employees or customers in a liberal democracy since they are violating the fundamental rights of said people. If you run a private place of commerce, it is within the sphere of the public market and unless a particular individual has done something to you that justifies you denying them either the Liberty to do business with you or the ability to pursue happiness by being employed by you, you are denying those people those rights.
If you don't think it's just to pass punitive laws to restrict that kind of behavior than let the federal government handle it like it does states that don't comply with federal laws and have them deny you any and all tax right offs and subsidies and basically just wipe out your business economically.

but that's not how it works in reality is it...because all a company of business has to do is invent a legitimate reason...for example...dress codes in certain clubs

members only golf clubs...(same with those that do not allow female members)

companies and organisations can invent these kinds of reasons for not allowing patronage of certain people and use them illegitimately to hide illegal prejudices such as those based on race

I would imagine so....the only way to know for sure is research the most current court cases and see what was decided(stuff like this changes day to day sometimes)...certain companies(ones that are large enuff and have high turn over..high turnover means low wages..lol) have someone employed (a paralegal) to spend each and every day keeping up on current cases to advise lower management on how to handle personnel and discipline issues...I found that very annoying but very helpful as I never got sued or wrapped up in arbitration...dont do management any more though to many damn hours..lol..plus I like to drink to much nowadays...HAHA