Woman doesn't want black delivery man in her home. Internet has some opinions.

[nixkid]

Her house her right.

Its also Lowe's right to refuse to accommodate a stupid request from a customer.

 

[Thames]

Can't you? Last I checked "racist" wasn't a protected class.

It's pretty pathetic that some of you are defending this lady and arguing that Lowe's should be forced to serve racists (I'm not referring to you dontsnitch).

I actually understand the manager's decision. He probably figured the easiest thing to do was simply appease the dumb old idiot and move on. I also understand Lowe's having a policy to not appease dumb old idiots, though I wonder if that were properly articulated to individual stores (I suspect not).

The best part of the story was the guy's delivery partner basically saying "Fuck you, I'm not going to help with the delivery now either." Good for him for standing up for a friend.

I certainly don't think they should be forced to serve racists. But I can somewhat see the point he's trying to make.
I realize you have a tricky history with the rights of black people in the U.S, and as such I can perhaps understand why these laws are in place. But in a strict philosophical sense, I'm against it.
Perhaps even in a practical sense. Because as I see it, if a business owner hated e.g. danish people (probably a swede), I would like that to be out in the open, so I could avoid supporting his business. Laws that force him to hide those viewpoints are kind of counter-productive imo.

I think a private entity should be allowed to refuse anyone for whatever reason they want. So the market participants can decide if such a business should be furtherer supported (again, I do realize that you have some historically very racist states, that needed some more persuasion when it came to not supporting those businesses, so that black people also would get de facto rights in those states. But still.... forming an opinion is hard for me).

 

[cincymma79]

she's a bitch
but it's her house
end thread

 

[dontsnitch]

Why do you jump straight to the conclusion that the consequences I

 

[JadeOwl]

she's a bitch
but it's her house
end thread

Not quite. What's up for debate here is not the fact that the woman is a bitch or whether she should allow the people she's prejudiced against into her home.

The issue here is the response of the manager. If a racist customer asks you to accommodate his/her racism in order to do business with him/her, what is the proper course of action?

 

[dontsnitch]

Can't you? Last I checked "racist" wasn't a protected class.

It's pretty pathetic that some of you are defending this lady and arguing that Lowe's should be forced to serve racists (I'm not referring to you dontsnitch).

I actually understand the manager's decision. He probably figured the easiest thing to do was simply appease the dumb old idiot and move on. I also understand Lowe's having a policy to not appease dumb old idiots, though I wonder if that were properly articulated to individual stores (I suspect not).

The best part of the story was the guy's delivery partner basically saying "Fuck you, I'm not going to help with the delivery now either." Good for him for standing up for a friend.

As far as I understood you cant refuse service to anyone, unless they are restricting your rights. Once you provide a service you must not discriminate, and this would include non-protected ideologies. Otherwise you could just discriminate against protected classes and cite any conceivable reason.

 

[nixkid]

But you can lose your job and your ability to provide for you family, which are pretty severe consequences.

It's kind of like saying that if you say X you will be thrown in jail, then explaining that it is your absolute right to say X, and you are free to do so, except the fact that you will end up in jail. It's a bit of having your cake and eating it.

And how would you go about fixing this? Have the government prevent private companies from firing people over 'free speech'. Prevent the masses from boycotting products/companies that coddle racists/homophobes/etc (which is why these companies are quick to act in the first place)? So what if Lowes decides that accommodating this woman's request is reasonable and I decide that I don't want to do business with Lowes because of it? Is the government going to force me to buy shit from Lowes so they aren't punished for 'protecting speech'? You can't enforce this without infringing on someone else's rights.

 

[cincymma79]

Not quite. What's up for debate here is not the fact that the woman is a bitch or whether she should allow the people she's prejudiced against into her home.

The issue here is the response of the manager. If a racist customer asks you to accommodate his/her racism in order to do business with him/her, what is the proper course of action?

the customer is always right, even when they're wrong

 

[dontsnitch]

And how would you go about fixing this? Have the government prevent private companies from firing people over 'free speech'. Prevent the masses from boycotting products/companies that coddle racists/homophobes/etc (which is why these companies are quick to act in the first place)? You can't enforce this without infringing on someone else's rights.

There is nothing to fix, I'm simply pointing out that I never really understood the logic of this particular thought. Free speech with consequences is a bit of an oxymoron.

 

[nixkid]

As far as I understood you cant refuse service to anyone, unless they are restricting your rights. Once you provide a service you must not discriminate, and this would include non-protected ideologies. Otherwise you could just discriminate against protected classes and cite any conceivable reason.

Can you cite the law that says a business can't refuse service?

Title II of the Civil Rights Act is what outlaws businesses from discriminating based on "race, color, religion or national origin". Doesn't say that business can't refuse service at all..just that they can't refuse service based on "race, color, religion or national origin".

 

[ncordless]

There is nothing to fix, I'm simply pointing out that I never really understood the logic of this particular thought. Free speech with consequences is a bit of an oxymoron.

Only if you fail to understand what free speech means.

Freedom of speech is freedom from the government preventing you from speaking and/or punishing you for the content of your speech. It is not a right that can be enforced against private parties.

You have no right, nor have ever had a right, to speak without any consequence whatsoever. Such a right would be ridiculous, and would ultimately suppress others freedom of speech.

 

[JadeOwl]

But you can lose your job and your ability to provide for you family, which are pretty severe consequences.

It's kind of like saying that if you say X you will be thrown in jail, then explaining that it is your absolute right to say X, and you are free to do so, except the fact that you will end up in jail. It's a bit of having your cake and eating it.

Again with the jail! Who is talking about sending anybody to jail?

As for the "losing your job" argument, this is where the consequences thing kicks in. Making publicly know that you hold views that are abhorrent to the society you live in will make you a liability to any business that employs you. The rest of society has no obligation to accommodate your bullshit or continue to do business with you.

 

[nixkid]

There is nothing to fix, I'm simply pointing out that I never really understood the logic of this particular thought. Free speech with consequences is a bit of an oxymoron.

Its not an oxymoron. Its the only realistic way for a free society to operate.

 

[dontsnitch]

Can you cite the law that says a business can't refuse service?

Title II of the Civil Rights Act is what outlaws businesses from discriminating based on "race, color, religion or national origin". Doesn't say that business can't refuse service at all..just that they can't refuse service based on "race, color, religion or national origin".

I can't cite anything, I could very well be wrong on this.

Are you saying I can refuse service to people I find ugly? that are too fat? That look like Liberals? Seems pretty easy to refuse the protected class citing anything you want.

 

[Medusas Weave]

And how would you go about fixing this?

You would fix it by doing exactly what I said. Be tolerant, not intolerant.
You can be tolerant and completely disagree with someone on every level of your being but not feel the need to punish or denigrate them for it.

How do you stop the social media persecution groups? Most likely in time opposite side will fight back. Good people will see that these SMPGs are the villagers with pitchforks and torches, they are the ghosts setting crosses on fire in people's yards, they are the mccathyians adding names to the black list, they are saying "look a witch, burn her"
-that is who they are and soon people will wake up and fight back

But a better answer is that we tolerate people and forgive people and let people live who we don't agree with, without forcing them to lose their jobs and etc.
We have to do it. If not, it is the same silliness we have seen over and over again.

I think it sucks that the Lowe's guy got fired over this. It is ridiculous.

 

[dontsnitch]

Only if you fail to understand what free speech means.

Freedom of speech is freedom from the government preventing you from speaking and/or punishing you for the content of your speech. It is not a right that can be enforced against private parties.

You have no right, nor have ever had a right, to speak without any consequence whatsoever. Such a right would be ridiculous, and would ultimately suppress others freedom of speech.

Can you give me an example of what not having free speech would look like?

 

[Allan__Martel]

exactly this.

it's really this simple.

dont like her request? dont service her.

Dosent work like that.

Dont like a gay cake request? Dont service her.

We saw how that went.

 

[nixkid]

I can't cite anything, I could very well be wrong on this.

Are you saying I can refuse service to people I find ugly? that are too fat? That look like Liberals? Seems pretty easy to refuse the protected class citing anything you want.

Yes, you can.

And yes some businesses have been known to try to work around protected class restrictions with dress codes.

 

[dontsnitch]

Again with the jail! Who is talking about sending anybody to jail?

As for the "losing your job" argument, this is where the consequences thing kicks in. Making publicly know that you hold views that are abhorrent to the society you live in will make you a liability to any business that employs you. The rest of society has no obligation to accommodate your bullshit or continue to do business with you.

It was an analogy, no one is going to jail. I assumed that such a scenario would be contrast to our current free speech society.

 

[ProBoxingInsidr]

i didnt read the story, but i dont see the big deal. black man knocks on the door.

delivery guy: "hello, we have your furniture. where can we place it for you?"

woman: "I dont want black men in my house."

delivery guy: "OK, is your driveway ok?"


case closed.