White Student Union

[kNicKz]

there shouldnt be unions for white or black people. As long as differences are enforced there will be racial tension. Make a a human union

[OldSkoolball#52]

I want to make a restaurant where bisexual people are not allowed, wouldnt that be totally legit??

How will you run your restaurant then?

[Rasheed1]

Yes, I think so

Edit: Why not? It's your restaurant. You own the property, you own the grills, the stoves, the food, and the building itself. What right do I have to say you have to serve me even if you don't want to?

Didnt America already go through this stage?

you start having whole groups of people locked out of parts of society due to things like race or religion or gender..

How about if the NFL or the NBA owners just decided they didnt want Asians in their leagues... Should that be allowed?

[OldSkoolball#52]

Didnt America already go through this stage?

you start having whole groups of people locked out of parts of society due to things like race or religion or gender..

How about if the NFL or the NBA owners just decided they didnt want Asians in their leagues... Should that be allowed?

It should be allowed and the consumers have the choice to support a product like that or not.


I mean thats really what freedom is.

[joe]

Didnt America already go through this stage?

you start having whole groups of people locked out of parts of society due to things like race or religion or gender..

How about if the NFL or the NBA owners just decided they didnt want Asians in their leagues... Should that be allowed?

It should be allowed, but I think it would be a disastrous decision for them. They would catch so much backlash there's no way it would last.

America did just go through that stage, but the solution to that was always cultural. The laws are a result of the cultural shift, not vice versa. And we would be better off without the laws. Not just because of the laws, but what the laws represent- a different cultural shift- an anti-market, anti-private property attitude in America.

If I own my house, and I don't want gay people in my house, that's my decision. Nobody can tell me otherwise. But somehow when I own a restaurant, our society thinks I no longer get to make that decision. I think that's pretty illogical, don't you?

[MMM]

limited freedom acts more in the spirit of freedom than what some of you are proposing.

limited freedom over exclusionary freedoms

[Rasheed1]

It should be allowed and the consumers have the choice to support a product like that or not.


I mean thats really what freedom is.

Thats not freedom, that discrimination based on something arbitrary like race..

Freedom involves actually doing something, not barring someone else from doing something based on how they look or what their religion is..

[joe]

Thats not freedom, that discrimination based on something arbitrary like race..

Freedom involves actually doing something, not barring someone else from doing something based on how they look or what their religion is..

But you're the one barring someone from doing something. You're now allowing someone to freely discriminate against who they don't want to serve.

The homophobic restaurant owner is not impeding the gay mans freedom by having a "straight only" restaurant. Nobody has a right to receive anything from anyone else. The gay man has a right to not be attacked, assaulted, or killed for being gay. He doesn't have a right to force people to serve him in their own private establishment. It's the restaurant owners right to serve who he wants on his property.

[kNicKz]

Wow, I just finished the video. That was disturbing...

[Rasheed1]

It should be allowed, but I think it would be a disastrous decision for them. They would catch so much backlash there's no way it would last.


America did just go through that stage, but the solution to that was always cultural. The laws are a result of the cultural shift, not vice versa. And we would be better off without the laws. Not just because of the laws, but what the laws represent- a different cultural shift- an anti-market, anti-private property attitude in America.

you're pretty naive to believe this nonsense... You ever heard of Brown v the board of Education of topeka kansas?

Do you know what happened in that case?

Segregation in school was ruled unconstitutional, and the guess what? they had to bring in the national guard to protect minorities as they attended schools.. the state government actually tried to defy the federal government.. and enforcement of the law is what made that situation work


not some fantasy invisible hand of the free market...

If I own my house, and I don't want gay people in my house, that's my decision. Nobody can tell me otherwise. But somehow when I own a restaurant, our society thinks I no longer get to make that decision. I think that's pretty illogical, don't you?

No.. I dont think it is illogical because you have a business which serves and thrives in this society, which is supposedly believes all people are equal. There are certain laws that govern this country when it comes to business and equal treatment regardless of race, religion, or gender is a part of the law..

you can invite whoever you want in your own home, but when you do commerce with the rest of society, you have to abide by certain rules

[Rasheed1]

But you're the one barring someone from doing something. You're now allowing someone to freely discriminate against who they don't want to serve.

The homophobic restaurant owner is not impeding the gay mans freedom by having a "straight only" restaurant. Nobody has a right to receive anything from anyone else. The gay man has a right to not be attacked, assaulted, or killed for being gay. He doesn't have a right to force people to serve him in their own private establishment. It's the restaurant owners right to serve who he wants on his property.

you are playing with fire when you start calling discrimination "freedom"... This country is supposedly built on equality of all men to each other. That means you cannot discriminate against other people based on race, gender, or religion..

If you want to have a white's only establishment? you need to make a private club with invitation only through membership like golf clubs and swim clubs do.. that is about the only way you can have white only or black only or whatever it is you want..

I personally dont see the value nor do I understand the need to lock certain people out of your business or establishment based on race or religion or gender

[OldSkoolball#52]

limited freedom acts more in the spirit of freedom than what some of you are proposing.

limited freedom over exclusionary freedoms

Its too bad white culture (the most indisputably successful in history) in America cant just be like "our way or gtfo". Compromising it for others does nothing positive except make loser liberals feel like they helped some handicap child.

There is nothing redeeming about black gang culture or entire regions of the country speaking spanish and being undocumented. Anyone should be able to live here, but as long as theyre on board with European culture. Thats why Asians typically do well, they give their kids white first names and adopt the "when in rome" attitude. Black people name their kids LaSheeqwi and Mexicans come here and dont even learn the language, and then when they dont make money its Republicans faults. Asians are minorities too, never hear them blame Republicans. Blacks and hispanics tho... its always someone elses fault.

[joe]

No.. I dont think it is illogical because you have a business which serves and thrives in this society, which is supposedly believes all people are equal. There are certain laws that govern this country when it comes to business and equal treatment regardless of race, religion, or gender is a part of the law..

you can invite whoever you want in your own home, but when you do commerce with the rest of society, you have to abide by certain rules

In America, all people are supposed to be equal in the eyes of the law. Not in the eyes of private citizens. In fact, discrimination legislation makes us very unequal in the eyes of the law. You can fire a white employee much easier than a black employee, because the black employee can more easily sue you for discrimination. Sadly this backfired on black people because now employers are hesitant to hire you guys for fear of being sued.

you're pretty naive to believe this nonsense... You ever heard of Brown v the board of Education of topeka kansas?

Do you know what happened in that case?

Segregation in school was ruled unconstitutional, and the guess what? they had to bring in the national guard to protect minorities as they attended schools.. the state government actually tried to defy the federal government.. and enforcement of the law is what made that situation work


not some fantasy invisible hand of the free market...

I do agree that as long as we have government schools/transportation, they should be unsegregated. However, bringing up segregation in school doesn't say anything about the market, considering the segregated schools were public to begin with. I'd argue that if we had strictly private schools from the start a lot of that mess could have been avoided.

[Rasheed1]

In America, all people are supposed to be equal in the eyes of the law. Not in the eyes of private citizens. In fact, discrimination legislation makes us very unequal in the eyes of the law. You can fire a white employee much easier than a black employee, because the black employee can more easily sue you for discrimination. Sadly this backfired on black people because now employers are hesitant to hire you guys for fear of being sued.

What does firing a white guy versus firing a black guy have to do with anything other than your own personal bigoted ideas..

Is it easier to fire a white guy than it is a white woman too? should they be barred from your restaurant too?

You cant live in a society and get to do whatever you want at all times without regard to the rest of society... It would make for a poor society

being able to discriminate against people based on things like race religion and gender is not freedom...

I do agree that as long as we have government schools/transportation, they should be unsegregated. However, bringing up segregation in school doesn't say anything about the market, considering the segregated schools were public to begin with. I'd argue that if we had strictly private schools from the start a lot of that mess could have been avoided.

please spare me the libertarian fantasy BS... that philosophy is a fantasy, that cant exist in the real world..

you cant live in a society where nobody has any responsibility or commitment to anybody else...

you cant have total freedom to do whatever you want and still reap the benefits of a 1st world society..

individualism to that degree is absurd..there is no invisible hand of free market... in fact there is no free market... Libertarians fail to understand that regulations are needed in order to curtail GREED and COLLUSION...

[joe]

you are playing with fire when you start calling discrimination "freedom"... This country is supposedly built on equality of all men to each other. That means you cannot discriminate against other people based on race, gender, or religion..

If you want to have a white's only establishment? you need to make a private club with invitation only through membership like golf clubs and swim clubs do.. that is about the only way you can have white only or black only or whatever it is you want..

I personally dont see the value nor do I understand the need to lock certain people out of your business or establishment based on race or religion or gender

But discrimination is part of freedom. I recognize the way that comes across to those who disagree with me on this point, but that is my belief. I think they misinterpret where I'm coming from based on the "shock and awe" of seeing someone defend anti-white restaurants.

In truth I'm not defending anti-white restaurants, and I wouldn't go to one if they existed.

But- I defend the right of people to have one if they want. Not only because I believe in freedom, but because I believe in private property. And in fact, I think this is true equality. It's an equality of peoples *rights.* We all have equal rights. What some people choose to do with those rights, we may disagree with at times.