Bake the Cake, but Don't Sell the Gun
Hypocrisy rears its nasty head ... again
So for those of y'all who aren't in the know, a 20 year old Oregon resident has filed lawsuits against both Dick's Sporting Goods and Walmart, citing illegal age-based discrimination. He went in intending to purchase a Ruger 10/22 .22lr rifle like the one below:
Based on the new company policies of both establishments, they refused to sell it to him. The responses from the partisan hacks are to be expected, but when compared to a recent, high-profile, case, point out the obvious hypocrisies of both sides. I have seen many conservatives supporting his actions to force the businesses to sell to him against their will and their private property rights. Libertarians or individualists give the classic "their business, their rules" shrugging response. Progressives are against it, oddly citing private business rights.
"Bake the cake explanation"
There have been quite a few cases of discrimination against customers. This one involved a gay couple who were denied a cake from a baker who's personal feelings were at odds with that. Colorado sided with the couple, but the case is in the supreme court still as far as I can see and of course the progressives are for it, the conservatives are against it, and the libertarians still give the classic "their business, their rules" shrugging response.
We need principles, not partisanship
If you think the desires of the customers trump the rights of the business, stick to it and argue it.
If you think the opposite, stick to it and argue it.
When you completely flip-flop and cite the other defense depending on the specific circumstances rather than the principle of the issue, then your credibility it severely damaged in the eyes of anyone who values logic and consistency.
I was just thinking this same thing! They are so "tolerant" and "pro choice", unless you're talking about the right to arm yourself!
absolutely right, and the same can be said for the statist right: all about freedom and right to choose until someone freely chooses not to sell someone else a gun. All I want is for the hypocrisy to be known.
I hear that
I seen this coming that someone would feel discriminated and push a case against them. Companies need to be companies and should know better than taking the law into their own hands or where would our rights be. What's next Subway will stop selling cookies & soda to over weight people?
If that is what you got from my response that is the exact opposite of my intention. I am saying that a business (which is operated by private people who sell private goods on private land) has 100% say in who they sell to or what they sell. If the baker doesn't want to bake, that is his right however stupid. If Walmart doesn't want to sell, that too is their right no matter how stupid.
Also rights do not come from the law or from government.
I respect your opinion but yeah i value customers right to customers always right over a company. We came a long way from whites not serving or selling to blacks or other races as well as vice versa long time ago and those philosophies that companies can target who they can sell to will bring that back. I'm from a "One Nation" government and believe all people should be treated equal and companies try to have too much control and is why I'm a fan of decentralisation.
but a company is owned by people correct? By that logic, their desire for someone to purchase a product is higher priority than the rights of a store owner to their own property and being able to exchange it voluntarily.
I do not know what country you are from, but I would guess not American because white's only restaurants and segregation were mandated by state governments, not a function of the free market and the rights of property owners to exchange voluntarily. A great example of the free market being freer is Phillip Payton Jr who was one of the first black landlords in NYC. He bought buildings and sold apartments to black people which either made neighboring buildings depopulate (thus making them easier for him to buy) or pressured other NYC landlords to evolve their business practices and sell to black people. The profit incentive is the superior method for persuasion against racism as he illustrated. Money is money no matter who it is from so to not do business with anyone for a superficial reason is literally throwing away money. In the case of the racist neighbors and landlords, their were bought out by those who could adapt with the times, making NYC the most racially integrated it ever was, and probably ever will be.
All that is to say that you have incorrectly labeled segregation as a failing of the market and that might merit a new examination.
Curated for #informationwar (by @truthforce)
Relevance: Exposing Hypocrisy
Our Purpose