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

Skip to comments.

About your "right" to my service...
Renew America ^ | 2-26-14 | Dan Popp

Posted on 02/26/2014 7:22:13 PM PST by ReformationFan

Today the conservative talkers are jawing about the supposed "balance" between a person's right not to be discriminated against, and a business owner's rights of conscience. But the problem, you see, is that the first thing is not a right. I don't have a right to force people to like me. Or to hire me. Or to sell something to me.

Someone will say that I do indeed have those rights, as created by the Courts or the Congress or Eric Holder (Fleas Be Upon Him). But the government cannot create rights. Only God can grant rights. And a government that does not protect God-given rights (including and especially the right to property) is not a legitimate government.

Further, a government that does not follow the rules we set for it has no authority to make rules for us. The current regime will not even obey its own laws, much less the laws of God or the Constitution.

There is no "balance" between a "right to be served" and a right to do as I please with what is mine. As a boy I saw signs in diners and other establishments reading, "We Reserve the Right to Refuse Service to Anyone." I'm not sure what they were pre-empting. This was in the middle of farm country; there were no black people to exclude. I always assumed that the owners were giving notice to patrons who might disturb other customers with rowdy behavior. Or perhaps their in-laws. It was none of my business, so I never asked.

Would you say that obnoxious patrons have a "right" to be served? Or does the owner have the right to kick them out? What about drunks – must they be served more alcohol? After all, they have a "disease;" and we surely may not discriminate against sick people?!?

Even today I see signs reading, "No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service." Doesn't this discriminate against the poor? And the overheated? Must my "right" to a reasonably sanitary dining environment be "balanced" against someone else's "right" to be served naked if he so demands? What if the would-be customer cannot pay? May the owner discriminate against him because he is "underprivileged?"

This is all nonsense.

Of course I have the right – even if I don't have permission from the lawless lawmakers – to discriminate against anyone for any reason, or no reason. Now that's usually a bad idea. I'm against it. But if a business owner does not have the right to hire and to serve whom he wishes, his enterprise is not really his. He has lost his freedom of association as well as his right of conscience and his property rights. Why? How did he lose those rights? Did he commit a crime?

Yes, he opened a business.

The issue is not your rights against his. The issue is one of imaginary, man-made, feel-good rights versus real rights. People who insist that one person has a right to compel another to serve him are properly called slavers. And slavers have always felt morally superior. The Civil War and the 13th Amendment didn't stop them; they're going to force you to work for them.

We want America to be an "inclusive" country, say the talk show hosts and guests. Well, of course. But we don't want it to be a police state, where people are mere puppets of the perverse and powerful.

Why is it that so few are outraged by government discrimination – against the rich, against conservatives, against business owners, against oil companies, against whomever doesn't pay a bribe to play the game – but so many are in a tizzy about private discrimination? Government discrimination is unlawful and evil. Private discrimination may be good (such as hiring your nephew), or bad, or neither. In any case, the coercive "cure" for private discrimination is violation of real rights.

This, and not a "balance" of real versus fake rights, should be the conservative argument.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: businessowner; danpopp; discrimination; popp; rights; service
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-65 next last

1 posted on 02/26/2014 7:22:13 PM PST by ReformationFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

One of the best summaries I’ve ever read . . .


2 posted on 02/26/2014 7:30:48 PM PST by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan
"We Reserve the Right to Refuse Service to Anyone." I'm not sure what they were pre-empting. This was in the middle of farm country; there were no black people to exclude. I always assumed that the owners were giving notice to patrons who might disturb other customers with rowdy behavior. Or perhaps their in-laws.

LOL Funny but true.

Old Bob at Bob's place didn't like hippies. He would serve them but he would follow them around the store.
3 posted on 02/26/2014 7:31:48 PM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

Look the word up. We live in a fascist regime.

Period.


4 posted on 02/26/2014 7:31:57 PM PST by cuban leaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

Very good job writing this out.


5 posted on 02/26/2014 7:32:05 PM PST by Svartalfiar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

Very good!


6 posted on 02/26/2014 7:35:42 PM PST by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

“People who insist that one person has a right to compel another to serve him are properly called slavers.”

And those compelled to give a portion of their earnings to those who have no rightful claim to it are slaves.


7 posted on 02/26/2014 7:38:44 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (Haven't you lost enough freedoms? Support an end to the WOD now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

The government is slowly dismantling the bill of rights.


8 posted on 02/26/2014 7:40:47 PM PST by oldbrowser (Civil service unions are the real government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

bump


9 posted on 02/26/2014 7:40:47 PM PST by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

Ping for tomorrow


10 posted on 02/26/2014 7:41:11 PM PST by Menehune56 ("Let them hate so long as they fear" (Oderint Dum Metuant), Lucius Accius (170 BC - 86 BC))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

“I quit when medicine was placed under State control some years ago,” said Dr. Hendricks. “Do you know what it takes to perform a brain operation? Do you know the kind of skill it demands, and the years of passionate, merciless, excruciating devotion that go to acquire that skill? That was what I could not place at the disposal of men whose sole qualification to rule me was their capacity to spout the fraudulent generalities that got them elected to the privilege of enforcing their wishes at the point of a gun. I would not let them dictate the purpose for which my years of study had been spent, or the conditions of my work, or my choice of patients, or the amount of my reward. I observed that in all the discussions that preceded the enslavement of medicine, men discussed everything—except the desires of the doctors. Men considered only the ‘welfare’ of the patients, with no thought for those who were to provide it. That a doctor should have any right, desire or choice in the matter, was regarded as irrelevant selfishness; his is not to choose, they said, but ‘to serve.’ That a man’s willing to work under compulsion is too dangerous a brute to entrust with a job in the stockyards—never occurred to those who proposed to help the sick by making life impossible for the healthy. I have often wondered at the smugness at which people assert their right to enslave me, to control my work, to force my will, to violate my conscience, to stifle my mind—yet what is it they expect to depend on, when they lie on an operating table under my hands? Their moral code has taught them to believe that it is safe to rely on the virtue of their victims. Well, that is the virtue I have withdrawn. Let them discover the kind of doctors that their system will now produce. Let them discover, in their operating rooms and hospital wards, that it is not safe to place their lives in the hands of a man whose life they have throttled. It is not safe, if he is the sort of man who resents it—and still less safe, if he is the sort who doesn’t.”

—Ayn Rand, *Atlas Shrugged*


11 posted on 02/26/2014 7:41:33 PM PST by Slings and Arrows (Richard Warman censors free speech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

Excellent summary. You have more brains than the Arizona legislature who failed to defend the law they passed with any coherency.


12 posted on 02/26/2014 7:43:12 PM PST by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

I remember reading that Aloise Hitler ran a Munich beer hall in a building owned by a Jew. When Hitler wanted to knock out some walls to enlarge the place to hold his little fascist get togethers the Jewish owner said no.

Aloise went to his half brother Adolph who was a rising star politician who had friends in High places and forced the owner to let Aloise expand his business which catered to the “right people”.


13 posted on 02/26/2014 7:46:10 PM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan
The government has created the power to force it's citizens to engage in commerce against their will (Obama Care). Why not the power to force business to accept customers against their will and interests? Private citizens and private enterprise are no longer private or free but slaves to the state.

CC

14 posted on 02/26/2014 7:48:00 PM PST by Captain Compassion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan
This, and not a "balance" of real versus fake rights, should be the conservative argument.

Except people are too stupid to grasp it. I tried it today. People's intelligence and attention span are such that all they take away is "That guy is mean. Republicans are mean." Not that I'm recommending caving, but it's tough to educate people the NEA has spent generations dumbing down.

15 posted on 02/26/2014 7:48:20 PM PST by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Captain Compassion

Brave New World is coming true


16 posted on 02/26/2014 7:48:36 PM PST by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan; All
 photo Vegetarian.jpg

Help FR Continue the Conservative Fight!
Your Monthly and Quarterly Donations
Help Keep FR In the Battle!

Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!


17 posted on 02/26/2014 7:54:43 PM PST by musicman (Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Viennacon

Pressure from the NFL and the Marriot among others came down on Arizona, if they can threaten to boycott Arizona can we not boycott the NFL and the Marriot?

There is a boycott of Girl Scout Cookies due to their disrespect for our values and our children. The Girl Scouts are feeling the pinch. The liberal corporations keep insulting our values but the pendulum may start swinging in the other direction.


18 posted on 02/26/2014 7:55:01 PM PST by cradle of freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking; ReformationFan; Captain Compassion

Too late. Once this country accepted the civil rights laws that banned discrimination by private entities, the game was over. If you tried to defend freedom of association now, the leftists would scream that blacks would be turned away from restaurants, etc., which is nonsense.

The problem is that nobody trusts the free market. When a business turns customers away, for whatever reason, it loses out to some other business that doesn’t. It all works itself out beautifully when government doesn’t intervene. Government is the only entity that cannot be allowed to discriminate. The Jim Crow laws were put in place by politicians, not business people.

If we don’t have the freedom to discriminate, then we are not free.


19 posted on 02/26/2014 7:57:00 PM PST by Pining_4_TX (All those who were appointed to eternal life believed. Acts 13:48)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: cradle of freedom

What we’re doing to GirlScouts has them outraged. You’re right, we need to target these liberal businesses and franchises.


20 posted on 02/26/2014 7:57:56 PM PST by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Pining_4_TX

“If we don’t have the freedom to discriminate, then we are not free.”

The govt-media complex wants everyone to be indiscriminate and undiscerning. That way, the citizenry is easier for them to control.


21 posted on 02/26/2014 8:00:01 PM PST by ReformationFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

It’s too late for all these arguments (which is not to say I disagree with them). Too late, and to learn why, look up a legal concept called ‘public accomodations’. That is your culprit that passed while you weren’t looking, or else while you approved of it because it sounded so good and fair.


22 posted on 02/26/2014 8:00:07 PM PST by Revolting cat! (Bad things are wrong! Ice cream is delicious! We reserve the right to serve refuse to anyone!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman
He didn't define "right".

According to Websters 1828 dictionary:

"RIGHT, n.

1. Conformity to the will of God...

2. Conformity to human laws..."

Going down to:

"10. Just claim; immunity; privilege. All men have a right to the secure enjoyment of life, personal safety, liberty and property. We deem the right of trial by jury invaluable, particularly in the case of crimes. Rights are natural, civil, political, religious, personal, and public." (Emphasis added.)

He especially didn't define "the right to property" and what that right might or might not include.

He writes that "...a government that does not follow the rules we set for it has no authority to make rules for us". That's true enough, as are his words "The current regime will not even obey its own laws, much less the laws of God or the Constitution". However, to over simplify, the rules we set for government have to do with voting on issues, directly or indirectly through representatives who are put in position by voting. That's how the civil-political-public rights from the definition above come to exist. Our problem is that we have been losing "votes" for a very long time.

I've over simplified some here to keep this short, but I think he over simplified too.

23 posted on 02/26/2014 8:00:41 PM PST by KrisKrinkle (Blessed be those who know the depth and breadth of their ignorance. Cursed be those who don't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Viennacon

People in the upper levels of society as so out of touch with the core values of this nation.


24 posted on 02/26/2014 8:05:11 PM PST by cradle of freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: KrisKrinkle
“Ultimately property rights and personal rights are the same thing.”

-Calvin Coolidge
25 posted on 02/26/2014 8:05:48 PM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Viennacon

They can force us to serve them but they can’t force us to buy their stuff.


26 posted on 02/26/2014 8:06:15 PM PST by cradle of freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan
The money quote:

Further, a government that does not follow the rules we set for it has no authority to make rules for us.

27 posted on 02/26/2014 8:09:15 PM PST by papertyger ("refusing to draw an inescapable conclusion does not qualify as a 'difference of opinion.'")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

maybe wedding photographers and bakeries should have a sign saying, each couple must have one penis and one vagina otherwise we have the right to refuse service.


28 posted on 02/26/2014 8:09:44 PM PST by ealgeone (obama, border)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Slings and Arrows

Rand was a prophet.


29 posted on 02/26/2014 8:18:34 PM PST by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: cradle of freedom

That’s true and I would never knowingly eat in a restaurant they run. “knowing” is the keyword.


30 posted on 02/26/2014 8:19:19 PM PST by potlatch ("Dream as if you'll live forever...Live as if you'll die today")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

Unfortunately true.


31 posted on 02/26/2014 8:40:28 PM PST by Slings and Arrows (Richard Warman censors free speech.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

This is excellent. Even some FReepers have a tough time grasping the vast difference between feel-good man-made rights and real rights. One of the best summaries I’ve read.


32 posted on 02/26/2014 8:42:29 PM PST by andyk (I have sworn...eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Homosexual ‘marriage’ law is about forcing the citizens to support and service homosexual behavior. I’ve been making this point for years now.


33 posted on 02/26/2014 8:46:29 PM PST by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan
Of course I have the right – even if I don't have permission from the lawless lawmakers – to discriminate against anyone for any reason, or no reason. Now that's usually a bad idea. I'm against it. But if a business owner does not have the right to hire and to serve whom he wishes, his enterprise is not really his. He has lost his freedom of association as well as his right of conscience and his property rights.

Exactly.
34 posted on 02/26/2014 8:50:20 PM PST by Girlene (Hey, NSA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

It is strange that we give people the legal right to opt out of military service, which is an obligation a citizen has to the entire country, because of religious beliefs, yet don’t want to pass a law which gives someone the right to opt out of providing a service to some private citizen because of religious beliefs - but then lefties don’t like the military, whereas they do like gays, so mystery solved.....


35 posted on 02/26/2014 9:03:19 PM PST by Intolerant in NJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

Excellent!!


36 posted on 02/26/2014 9:07:02 PM PST by Jane Long (While Marxists continue the fundamental transformation of the USA, progressive RINOs assist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

Concise and correct.


37 posted on 02/26/2014 10:38:38 PM PST by TChad (The Obamacare motto: Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan
Yes, he opened a business.

One step more - he incorporated.

The ruling is against the corporation.

The corporation is a wholly owned subsidiary of the corporate State that does business.

An unincorporated business is not bound by corporate policies (i.e. statutes and regulations and administrative court rulings).

Ths distinction is not just important - it's everything.

38 posted on 02/27/2014 12:46:00 AM PST by Talisker (One who commands, must obey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

A business owner still has the ability to set prices. Unless he posts publicly a price list he can establish the price for any individual job at any level he wishes, particularly when there are custom elements to the product. If a photographer or baker doesn’t want the job, it can be priced so high the potential customer won’t buy.

Of course the government is already setting prices in medical care. It may not be long before we have a national wage and price control board, particularly when the dollar crashes and hyperinflation begins.


39 posted on 02/27/2014 12:52:36 AM PST by Soul of the South (Yesterday is gone. Today will be what we make of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

Can a gay owned print or graphics shop deny making a Churches literature about the sin of homosexuality?

Can a gay owner caterer deny catering a churches conversion therapy seminar?


40 posted on 02/27/2014 1:45:16 AM PST by NoLibZone (The bad news: Hillary Clinton will be the next President. The Good news: Our principles are intact.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman
Does this mean that I can go into a Muslim restaurant and order a ham sandwichand and sue him if he refuses to sell me one?
41 posted on 02/27/2014 2:44:44 AM PST by dearolddad (/i>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

Holder says State AGs are allowed to act on their “rights of conscience”. But woe to the average Joe citizen who demands the same.


42 posted on 02/27/2014 3:44:30 AM PST by freeangel ( (free speech is only good until someone else doesn't like it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

“But if a business owner does not have the right to hire and to serve whom he wishes, his enterprise is not really his.”

~~~~~~~~~ O ~~~~~~~~~ O ~~~~~~~~~ O ~~~~~~~~~ O ~~~~~~~~~

“You didn’t build that. Someone else made that happen.”
— Baraq Hussein 0bama


43 posted on 02/27/2014 3:54:03 AM PST by Peet (Oderint dum metuant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

I’ve used this same reasoning myself. Unfortunately, most people have shut their brains off and allowed the government to do their thinking for them.


44 posted on 02/27/2014 4:18:56 AM PST by RWB Patriot ("My ability is a value that must be earned and I don't recognize anyone's need as a claim on me.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

They have no right to force me to serve them, but they have a law that forces me to serve them.

My choice in that society:

1. Change law
2. While waiting for law to change: Rebel in the meantime or Follow law in the meantime.

Is there a choice I’m missing?

I agree that I don’t have a “right” to a hamburger at Burger King. I have the right to “pursue” getting a hamburger at Burger King.


45 posted on 02/27/2014 4:20:30 AM PST by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Viennacon

You have more brains than the Arizona legislature who failed to defend the law they passed with any coherency.

...brains had nothing to do with it...the NFL with its Damoclean threat of a Super Bowl takeaway sealed the deal...


46 posted on 02/27/2014 4:39:52 AM PST by IrishBrigade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan

“...a government that does not follow the rules we set for it has no authority to make rules for us.”

This should be taught in every school in America. The government can only get its authority from the consent of the governed. If not, stop calling it a “free country.”


47 posted on 02/27/2014 4:41:20 AM PST by txrefugee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dearolddad

Of course, the Muslims will never have to go against their religion. They are members of Islam, the only protected religion in the USA, because they could start beheading people if you offend them.

Unfortunately, Christians don’t have that clout. However, we can refuse to support those companies that blackmailed Gov. Brewer in order to get their way.
That includes the bullies at the NFL.


48 posted on 02/27/2014 4:45:17 AM PST by txrefugee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: cradle of freedom

if they can threaten to boycott Arizona can we not boycott the NFL and the Marriot?

...get back to us on how that boycott of the NFL goes...


49 posted on 02/27/2014 4:50:39 AM PST by IrishBrigade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ReformationFan
Even today I see signs reading, "No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service."

Those signs are one lawsuit away from being prohibited.

50 posted on 02/27/2014 5:00:11 AM PST by Cyber Liberty (H.L. Mencken: "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-65 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

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