Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Dr. Sivana; Milagros

This is not going to be a popular viewpoint, but the Bill of Rights states that we shall have freedom of association. No matter how distasteful it is to most folks, a private business should not be forced to hire anyone or serve any person it chooses not to hire or serve.

The great free market economists agree on this one. Discrimination always comes at a cost, and most businesses would do business with anyone whose money is green. It is government that destroys equality of opportunity. It was the Nazi government that forced people to stop engaging in commerce with Jews, much as our government is trying to stop people doing business with Chick Fil A.

If this hateful Muslim chooses to discriminate against Jews, then the market will take care of that. His hotel will suffer for it. Allowing government to force association when it comes to private enterprises is a slippery slope.


15 posted on 08/01/2012 9:37:10 AM PDT by Pining_4_TX ( The state is the great fiction by which everybody seeks to live at the expense of everybody else. ~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: Pining_4_TX

Let’s test your theory. Put a “NO COLOREDS” sign in the window of your business and tell us how it turns out.


17 posted on 08/01/2012 9:48:51 AM PDT by beelzepug ("Blind obedience to arbitrary rules is a sign of mental illness")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Pining_4_TX

They may not be able to use discrimination to sue, but the inconvenience, and cost of any loss or damage to the items they brought with them. The fact that they did not have an opportunity to relocate at such a short notice.

if the hotel has signs saying no Jews allowed, it never would have happened. They need to post these signs....and see what that does for their business.


23 posted on 08/01/2012 10:03:26 AM PDT by Dudoight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Pining_4_TX

I believe the 14th Amendment has been used to supersede the freedom of association clause.


36 posted on 08/01/2012 4:55:51 PM PDT by Bratch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Pining_4_TX
This isn't government, it's a civil action. Are you suggesting that the Jews who reserved their rooms and then were expelled have no recourse in the courts? Though I question your broad statement about free market economists, I would suggest this is precisely the cost those economists might be talking about in the case of a contractural breach.

Not to suggest that if he threw out blacks, I'd oppose prosecution, but that's not the case. This is a civil dispute, apparently nothing about throwing Jews out of the hotel violates civil rights legislation.

BTW, if this were a private business, they could bar Jews and anyone else. When you open your doors to the general public, you've lost that defence of privacy.

37 posted on 08/01/2012 5:01:00 PM PDT by SJackson (I used to eat a lot of natural foods until I learned that most people people die of natural causes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson