Do you have a right to discriminate?

3개월 전


What do you think? And should the government be involved?

Want to help me finally free America from the federal government? http://KokeshForPresident.com

If you are on Steemit, please click the image to watch the video!

Get the MOST IMPORTANT BOOK EVER for FREE in every format including audiobook at http://thefreedomline.com/freedom

Please support FREEDOM! by liking and sharing this video, subscribing, and sharing! Then for everything else: http://TheFreedomLine.com

Whoever has the top comment on this post after 24 hours can claim a free signed copy of FREEDOM! by sending me an email with their address to adam@thefreedomline.com.


▶️ DTube
▶️ IPFS
Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
STEEMKR.COM IS SPONSORED BY
Sort Order:  trending

in the first we don't have the right, since we respect each other, i respect you, you respect me, everybody will have a good environment to live with if we respect and have some compassion to ourself and to others.

of COURSE we can discriminate. #newspeakliberal do it all the time with people they don't like... and yet THEY want to be accepted everywhere, every time

Discrimination is common among human beings and societies run on the ability to discriminate against the 'right' individuals. For instance, all of the people who applied for the job, and did not get in, have technically gotten discriminated against, however, if you were to follow raw consequentialism for society at large, the effects of this particular discrimination will be beneficial.

Seriously @Adamkokesh you have my vote.

I think every has the right to hold a prejudice based on experience, but no one has the right to discriminate someone for something which the person has no control over.

·

Are you entitled to stop me from "discriminating (for whatever reason I choose)? Are you entitled to force me to assemble and/or associate with certain people? By what authority? Who gave you that authority?

·
·

I dont have the right to force you but common decency should show you this is the right way.

·
·
·

"common" to whom? by what standard? Again: by whose authority? "Common" is anything but decent. It's usually constructed by brainwashed, lazy masses of dumbAsses! This is why it's called THE LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR.

·
·

Your are just tooo funny sometimes. (meaning in a nice way you are quite the character)

·

In my own personal opinion I feel most religious people don't hold true convictions to their faith. There are some that do and I would consider a few of these cases across the country where people have lost everything in their lives in defense of their beliefs as one's who do. Do I think it's right that someone who can still get married despite that a certain baker or florist refused to make them a wedding cake or flower arrangements against their religious can ruin those people's lives? Refusing to participate artistically in someone's wedding does not take away that person's right to get married whereas someone forced to participate artistically in someone's wedding does take away their constitutionally guaranteed right to practice their religion. We've never found ourselves in this type of cross over where one constitutional right can cancel out another. I also think that the court ruling is going to go along the line of another court decision whereas a doctor was sued for talking about guns to his patients. The court ruled there was sufficient access to other doctors as to not infringe upon this doctors constitutional right to free speech.

·
·

I have to say this is an incredibly complex topic, and I dont think there is a right and wrong answer. People hold different and contradictory beliefs, and those as you say can cross over, so who is right and who is wrong? As fa as I am concerned as long as we treat people with respect and we explain our beliefs in a rational and polite way without inflicting them upon others then we should be fine. I dont think its up to governments to legislate what we think and believe though. Eventhough I am a great believer in state, I still think it doesnt have a place in deciding what we think, that should be done on a non formal community level.

·
·
·

Wouldn't that be to much like being forced into other's agenda's all the time. You'd literally have to keep moving around not to be forced to do or believe like the community decides you should. It would be like being red living in a predominately blue state....your voice or vote doesn't count. Whereas this decisions primary effect will be on those who decide to make it a big issue in the first place.

We all have the right to express our opinion without damaging the other person, of course, there are people who discriminate and then come and say that they should not discriminate, that's when double standards come in

You should just wait to see what the Supreme Court decision is going to be on these cross-over rights. This is the first time in history that the rights of one group crosses over the rights of another. Religiously held beliefs are protected rights, this does not give them a right not to sell cupcakes, flowers, etc., it just give them a right to not participate in a ceremony that goes against their religious doctrine. They could still be sued for refusing service outside of that scope.

Many groups of people have faced discriminatory actions, though the government intervenes on their behalf we never get one hundred percent. Women and minorities still fight those holding onto the fringes of rebellion. It never fully goes away...it's in man's nature just like waging wars.

·

If man's nature is waging wars you will have a hard time explaining how a region of the world has lived in complete Anarchy for 2000 years in peace and did so among 5 different cultures and are over 100,000,000 strong.

·
·

..... I see you on other post commenting exactly on that very subject. I said it's in man's nature, it doesn't have to be all men just like not all men discriminate against women or minorities.

·

I wouldn't say human nature is to wage war. That's a byproduct of our horrific ability to trust other's intentions.

·
·

You wouldn't consider trust to be part of our natural character?

·
·
·

It is, but things aren't black and white. Some people are more trusting than others, people change based on experience. We should be seeking to find common ground rather than getting tied up in contrived fights meant only to divide.

·
·
·
·

I know, how hard could it be to find another baker or florist. I wouldn't want anybody I'd have to force to bake me a cake...who knows what they'd do to it. Common sense would say I want to enjoy this moment in my life not turn it into a fight.

Obviously, it is part of your right to FREE SPEECH! WHILE YOU ARE NOT HURTING ANYONE OFFEND ANY PERSON YOU DESIRE, GOVERNMENTS SHOULD NEVER POLICE LANGUAGE! True freedom is anarcho capitalism, not a minority loving collectivism Orwellian NIGHTMARE! :D

Love to see how you handle different people giving different answers! Eye opening, every time thank you <3

bake the cake.jpg

class consciousness and not class discrimination.

people can also seek freedom individually starting with financial independence and that is a good start

now this is hot... especially when contemplating why Adam Kokesh isn't invited to the LP-NY convention next week. Imagine if Christopher Cantwell opened up a coffee house in NYC and put two big signs in the window:
ADAM KOKESH FOR NO-PRESIDENT, 2020 and
NO JEWISH PEOPLE ALLOWED IN STORE.
right above this giant poster:
talmud snake.jpg

LOL.

talk about publicity!kokesh - end the fed and talmud influence.JPG

·

Because it's the god damn jews that killed sweet jebus.

·
·

yeah, perhaps that, too. baaaah sheeple. but we talking talmud now. not deicide. Get with the program, ok boy?

·
·
·

Phleaze, didn't I sarcasamball all over your old nuts old man?

·
·

The Hillel talmudic Jews think it's perfectly fine and normal to molest children and take child brides, so yeah, there's that. Everything can be traced back to the Synagogue of Satan with their sadistic perversions and monopoly money

·
·
·

So what are you saying? It's the god dman jews that killed sweet jebus?

·
·
·
·

I don't know who killed him since I wasn't there. All I can tell you is what that particular sect believes, teaches, and practices.
I practice Christ's principles in my life and I am accountable and responsible for my actions and choices. Jesus showed us a better way to live and instead of getting engaged in debates with those about whether he lived or didn't live, was man or something else, or died and was brought back to life, none of these arguments are provable or disprovable. It's the word and teachings that are important to me.

·
·
·
·
·

Like turn the other cheek.

·
·
·
·
·
·

You have to pick and choose your battles

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

So what stopped him from expressing that plainly and simply, or was that even something he thought? what the fuck does a teaching do if it's based on Faith and not Reason and Common Sense? The thing is that there is no way to make the conclusion that turn the other cheek means to pick and chose your battles, it's simply about not resisting and letting ANYONE borrow from you. Get the fuck out of here with that "teaching", or contorted fabrication of things that never were said.

Give to them who ask of you, if they make their requests in honesty, and turn away from them who want to borrow from you in a dishonest way.

It's pronunced J-mmanuel.

Discrimination has been and still is very prevalent throughout history and across the entire globe. Discrimination should be discouraged but not governed. In the spirit of freedom and liberty discrimination should not be banned or infringed upon.

Discrimination refers to the unfair service of a particular individual, in which the service is based on the characteristics represented by that individual. Discrimination is an occurrence commonly encountered in human society, it is because of the human tendency to discriminate others.

The analogy you made in this video about a circle of friends seems like a false comparison to me. Choosing friends is a matter of personal preference, and you're right that the government should not impose standards on that sort of thing.

However, which customers you choose to serve is different. The woman you interview mentions that she chooses friends that are similar to her, ones that don't cause drama, and you say that business owners should have a similar ability to choose customers. But when you open a business, you are not bringing people into your life as friends, you are interacting with them professionally, in an exchange of goods or services for money. If a customer can pay and is following the law (e.g. not causing public disturbances at your establishment) then there is no reason to turn them away. It doesn't matter if their lifestyle or identity is "against your religion", or if you think they're unworthy of your services for some other reason, because you're not being forced to live in those ways--only to serve a fellow human being and treat them with dignity and respect, despite differences in belief or lifestyle.

If a business owner can't separate personal belief (or in some cases, bigotry) from the way they conduct their business, they probably shouldn't be conducting a business.

·

Well said @sandpiper, is this guy using good old STEEM.IT to run his hate agenda?
Is that cool around here? Im new...so I ask before getting all the way in.

·
·

Are you trying to discriminate against his hateroidoid self? :D

·
·

You'll have to watch his video and decide what you think he's doing for yourself. I'm not sure what the political culture is on here yet, I've only been around for just under a week.

·

Couldn't have said it better! In the real world, such bad business sense is usually the downfall of the business, unless they hold a government enforced monopoly (called privatization).

·

because you're not being forced to live in those ways....

No one is forced to believe in religion but it's a constitutionally protected right if one does. Just like it's a constitutionally protected right for gays to marry. This isn't about someone walking in and ordering cupcakes or picking up a batch of flowers this is about telling people that they have to participate in a gay wedding against their religious views artistically. This means they work in close conjunction with the wedding designer to prepared and set up arrangements for a gay wedding. Though you and I don't see a problem with this because we are not religious, we aren't held to a doctrine of belief so it's hard for us to comprehend how hard this could really be on them....but in their eyes they see themselves being condemned to hell for it. We have to learn some give and take of respect for opposing views.

·
·

I suppose if someone truly believed they would go to hell for contributing to a gay wedding then i wouldn't want them to be obligated to do so. And I'm sure there are people who believe this (although to me it seems like God would value love and caring for one another "love thy neighbor" over... whatever value people think they're demonstrating by refusing service).
It's complicated, because I can't claim to know what people are thinking. But laws that allow businesses to discriminate on these kinds of basis are risky because they also allow people to discriminate simply because they don't like a certain group of people, and that doesn't sit right with me.

Still, if you are a gay couple trying to marry (this is the most common example so I'll run with it) you probably would prefer to work with a florist/cake maker/whomever who doesn't think they'll go to hell just for helping you with your wedding.
The problem arises when/if there isn't access to those kinds of services from non-discriminatory businesses.

Thanks for the thoughtful comment. There's certainly a lot to consider here

·
·
·

I totally agree with you about them truly believing they will go to hell. What I find the most ironic about religion is the ability according to the Bible to just ask for forgiveness no matter what the sin or violation in the Bible that states it's wrong. Like a killer for example, the Bible says that thou shall not kill so does that mean if someone kills somebody all they have to do is ask for forgiveness and can enter heaven. Same with thou shall not commit adultery but many men do and under religious doctrine all they have to do is ask for forgiveness. When you look at it from that aspect those who commit sins under the guise they can just ask for forgiveness probably do discriminate just because of the lifestyle and not because the Bible says a man should not be with another man or a woman with a woman. I genuinely believe though that people who find themselves losing their businesses, homes and lifelong savings to fight in court against having to create artistically for same sex weddings believe in the scripture whole heartedly. They really believe that heaven and hell exist and they adhere to the doctrine of their religion seriously. That's why I think there are so few of these cases in court, most people would just do it and ask for forgiveness, while a few take following the rules of their doctrine seriously.

Hey Adam,

Liking the content! I'm recruiting content creators to bring on the team for sponsorship by my company if you're interested feel free to reach out to me at: brian@bitcoinhatclub.com

Thanks and keep up the good work.

  • Brian

It's okay to discriminate, but only If we discriminate based on the actions of the individual.

·

What about a group of people who worship, follow and do the "deeds" as prescribed by the Koran?

·
·

But that group is split into fragments, just as a lot of other religions are.
It's a matter of perspective I think. I'm sure many Muslims discriminate against radicals, as they should.

·
·
·

many times the situation calls for a probability broach. ...like dealing with a stray pit bull who might wander on your property where your 3 little children are playing. Think about it DPL, and puke your "politically correct" impulses.

Now I'm not saying we need to shoot the damned dog, but i am certainly going to get my kids up off the ground, out of the way and lure the dog into the garage until I can get Animal Control to come take him away. right?

DISCRIMINATION. I live for it.

Descrimination is always fine...until it happens to you!

Everyone has the right and entitled to one's opinion but I must say we should all follow the golden rule: "Do unto others what you don't want others to do unto you."
pic1.gif

·

ah. yes. PEOPLE, PLEASE DISCRIMINATE WHEN CHOOSING TO HANG OUT WITH ME... do business with me, ride in the car with me. ad infinitum. thank you. I shall offer you the same courtesy. Jesus and His Apostles taught me well.

·
·

I didn't know if you actually got the point of my comment or you are just overly exaggerating it. Thanks for the comment anyway!

Of course everybody has the right to discriminate, we have the right to express our mind our opinion but we should be very careful also when discriminating so as not to damage the person. Discriminating is good to an extwnt at least you can do it to bad people but we should be very careful doing it so as not to damage the person like i have said.

Same questioned asked, brings out the same people with all the hate in their heart. But discrimination will happen either way because people, I presume, still control their thoughts and emotions. I personally don't discriminate a person or at least try not to. I find it that each person-- regardless of race, color, background, etc.-- are different. But the real question to this question is why would you even discriminate? and why would you even have the right to? it seems that people don't even comprehend the reasons behind their discrimination its just usually accepted because of what they heard (or read) on various media outlets or even at home.

OK discrimination is fine till some extent like some people are telling here for job an all and some more might be but it should be there on humanity basis , caste or something like these. And after all everyone knows the limits but some ignores and some don't. And at-last it becomes a matter of perspective.

·

Is English your first language?

·
·

no . And may i know why ? Btw pardon my language was just sharing some piece of information. Hope others wont focus on my language much ,instead of content. :)

·
·
·

If it isn't your first language, I know to "go easy" on debate.

·
·
·
·

? does language matter? when topic isn't vocabulary? until and unles u cant make out wat m trying to say. funny peeps :) language is just a language i just used english because its mutual for many :) like both of us .

·
·
·
·

resteem boy :D

Obviously, it is part of your right to FREE SPEECH! WHILE YOU ARE NOT HURTING ANYONE OFFEND ANY PERSON YOU DESIRE, GOVERNMENTS SHOULD NEVER POLICE LANGUAGE! True freedom is anarcho capitalism, not a minority loving collectivism Orwellian NIGHTMARE! :D

·

What about verbal abuse, threats, and such things? Are they only words when words incite violence and spread hate, sow discord and promote war? What about when words are used to dehumanize and strip any kind of dignity from people? Can you yell at people from a few inches away spitting down their throat how much they hate, and they have no right to literally kill you with their fists to your face, would you not deserve those consequences?

I can, you can, but not everyone, its everyone's own choice or its everyone's freedom.

Posting anda bagikan sangat bagus dan menarik untuk saya

Any action that doesn't cause harm to another sentient being is a right.

Continue like this, contributing with good content so that we can continue growing our community steemit, greetings

do it every time when one gets married or divorced.

Congratulations @adamkokesh!
Your post was mentioned in the Steemit Hit Parade in the following category:

  • Pending payout - Ranked 10 with $ 330,11

Yes, of course we can and should discriminate in this sense:

"to distinguish by discerning or exposing differences : to recognize or identify as separate and distinct e.g. discriminate right from wrong: especially : to distinguish from another like object e.g. discriminate the individual voices in the choir"

Merriam-webster.com

The idea that human being shouldn't use their natural wisdom and discernment is globalist propaganda.

That was really interesting. As a black South African I don't know where to stand with this issue, since I've never been to the states. However it's because I learnt in history studies that race was conceived by the British as a mean to establish ideological power. It's interesting to note that the British once used this power selfishly and now that it has spread globally it's awkward to believe that the world is still using this colonial tool as a means of identification..

The Law passed in Indiana allows a business to do what they have always done, reserve the right to deny your business. Some restaurants used to have No Shoes, No Shirt, No Service. The issue comes from those radical groups that seek out Christian businesses in the hopes they won't go against their beliefs so this group can sue them out of business. How is that fair? For example, a baker once denied a same sex marriage cake because it went against their beliefs. They were sued out of business for denying making a cake because it went against their morals.

I paused this video at 1:52 in an attempt to answer this question. A Progressive would say that the government needs to protect the rights of a minority, a conservative would defend the religious beliefs of the business owner and a Libertarian would say let the market decide. This of course means that if you choose not to serve them then you risk losing business, of course why would a gays go back to that business when it was forced to serve them by the government and the same goes for the progressives who would boycott a business that refused to serve because of religious freedoms. So really your fucked anyway you look at it, there best choice is to keep their mouths shut about why they are refusing the business.

At 2:45 you are comparing Apples to Oranges A business is open to the public and the public is everyone. The city and State where you apply for a business license can have stipulations on your business and usually do. As an example some cities do not allow construction work to begin to early. You have laws prohibiting loud noise after 10pm. Friendships do not come under the pervue of state and city government unless you are a felon.

In my opinion

Everyone has the same rights. Therefore, in fact everyone should not discriminate and be discriminated against. Because discrimination can lead to conflict and will lead to groups that ultimately lead to disunity. Discrimination can also cause feelings of envy, jealousy. Therefore discrimination is not necessary because it will only have a negative impact.

Sory sir
I also write in my blog about **PRO - FREEDOM and ANTI - WAR ** ( I HOPE THAT PEOPLE WOULD UNDERSTAND THE WAR WILL BRING DARKNES AND PEACE CONTINUED TO BRING A GREAT LIGHTING ) if you do not mind visiting for a little advice on my writing. I hope many people are motivated by you @adamkokesh and my prayers are always accompanying
Thanks for this @adamkokesh

WE NEED TO OUTS THE GOVT. SMALL GOVT IS ALWAYS PREFERABLE!

Unfortunately, people always hate what they do not understand.

If you have a right to discriminate you lose the right to be offended.

What's the point in so aggressively defending the "right" to discriminate? It just seems like a weird battle to choose with a potential hidden agenda.

·

Why do you think the Founders put the First Amendment, first? RIGHT TO ASSEMBLE... or disAssemble. What was their point? uh... They didn't want to be owned by the Roman Catholics or the Anglican Church. duh.

·

Because if you don't stand up and defend your rights, who will. None of this shit mattered 10, 20, 100 years ago and nobody ever gave things like this a second thought. Then, the corporate controlled media starting projecting these thoughts about flags, the color of milk, cake bakers, out into the public and all of a sudden, the most ridiculous and insane things become the "news". There is an attack on America and the war is being waged mentally first

What kind of sample size is that? How about you spend some time interviewing a few people with an actual option instead of trying to suck it out of that random clueless woman. She clearly didn't had think about that sort of thing more than a few seconds in her entire life.