user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Newest Ballots
Newest Blogs
Private Ballots
Joke Ballots
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
Oh get a life son, you complain like a 2 year old when you can't get his way...You are without a doubt pathetic.
You don't like the idea of such a place, then don't go, simple as that or should I say, simple as YOU...
^Address the ballot, Bigot.
"You don't like the idea of such a place, then don't go"
Sigh.. I couldnt go whether I like the idea or not, thats the POINT you UTTER moron.
You may want to include me in the the "fuck you" list as i frankly don't see much of a problem in that ruling.
People get banned from clubs for all sorts of reasons: because they dont dress cool, because they smoke, because they're fugly, etc. It's a private business and the manager has the right to set his own rules. Remember that that bar has a very specific clientele.
As an heterssexual bloke i couldnt care less about a ban in such a place, I dont feel diminished in any way.
^Presumably you would also support a landlord who enforced the old "no blacks, no Irish, no dogs" rule in his pub then?
And I wont extend a "f**k you" to you Seamus, as I havent noticed you actively promoting racist/sexists attitudes across the site, unlike the first user to comment on this ballot.
However, I will call you an idiot, as surely only an idiot could read this case and either not envisage, or simply not be bothered, by its implications.
^Bad analogy. Do not mistake a commercial strategy with pure abject yobness.
As for the rest, what can i say kingalfredthegreat? Maybe just hope that the next time i take my gf out for a romantic dinner at the Waldorf you kung-fu the manager's arse for me when he tells me I can't enter the dining room "without a soirée jacket"...
Voted : Sexual apartheid
This ballot is a tough question to address since on the one had I do not wish to restrict the freedom of the bar owner to choose which clients he wishes to serve however I do not want to restrict the individuals freedom to enter any bar he/she wishes.Yet I side with the bar owner because the indivdual can always go to another bar but once the owner is forced to serve all and anybody his freedom to choose is restricted forever.
Seamus
I think its common knowledege that the average white guy walking into your bar will have more disposable income to spend than the avergae black guy. Also, there may be a market for single race bars, as many racist white people would like to enjoy an all white atmosphere. So thats two good commercial reasons for setting up a bar that excludes ethnic minorities. Now is it ok for me to exclude blacks?
Corrupt
I think the best thing to do is ask yourself this; would you support a law that allowed homophobic bar owners to turn away homosexual customers? i.e. a "heterosexuals only "bar?
Voted : Sexual apartheid
That's bang out of order.
Equality should mean equality.
And out of interest, how are they going to prove whether someone's hetero or homo?
Fucking stupid law, never mind the fact that it's utterly indefensible and socially divisive.
As for the "rowdy groups of heteros", why don't they just employ a bouncer to eject troublemakers like any other bar?
KATG:
Yes I would support such an establishment because the owners of businesses must have the right to chose who they wish to conduct business with otherwise we are infringing on their right to own property.If the bar owner pays all the bills on the place and if it fails bears all the finacial responsiblities why should he have to listen to the government about who does or does not get drink in his pub?
Yes I realize that will allow businesses to discriminate against any group they chose but if the public really resents such discriminatory policy then the business will either fail or another bar will open up to serve the needs of the excluded groups.
Well, if you aren't being disingenous then I respect the fact that your arguments are consistent, at least, unlike most people you will meet (particularly on this site). Most of the liberals on this site will probably support this gay bar but wouldnt support a heterosexual equivalent, hence the disgusting hypocricy they represent.
On a different tangent then, you talk about the rights of the bar owner to serve whom he likes. Are you certain (as you appear to be suggesting) that this right should supercede the right of an individual to receive *individual* rights rather than be treated as part of a group? I.e. judged by personal merit rather group merit?
Corrupt: but how about if the pub had banned blacks? Or women?
Never mind public resentment causing the business to fail, there would be howls of outrage over the overt discrimination.
Equality MUST mean equality.
Besides which, KATG already dealt with your suggestion.
The old "No dogs, no blacks, no Irish" approach did little more than encourage people's prejudices. And Botha's South Africa is a good example of how state-approved exclusion can end up.
"say "I told you so" to all the liberals on the sight who are so blinded to the path their misguided, prejudiced views are taking our society down." lol, that's a bit extreme.
No, I don't agree with an ordinance banning all heteros... I also don't know the details that lead to this ban, with this pub.
There is something to be considered for pub's vs clubs... Clubs services cater to masses with drink and dance... usually citing "hate free, all welcome".
A pub ,with a much smaller clientele, on the other hand... it absolutely SUCKS when a herd of bachelors, bachelorettes or a hetero birhtday party pops in! Quite often it's their first visit to a gay establishment. Until you have experienced it, you haven't a clue...
Are they drunk, or sober? Friend, or Foe... who knows!? But what we absolutely do know, beyond a shadow of a doubt... They are not there just to have a casual drink...they are there to *SEE*, what unfolds from there is always a mystery, and a risk!
I've experienced this literally dozens and dozens of times...
For god sakes, If I have one more drunken, petite, big titted, blond fondle the inside of my thigh while parroting "you just haven't met the right girl yet"... 
by MO_ on Mon May 28, 07 10:18am
[+]
^So you are saying it is acceptable to discriminate against an entire group based on ones personal experiences of said group? I've been come onto by gays guys before. Now, as it happens that doesnt particularly bother me (im egotistical enough to take it as a compliment) but if IT DID, would I be justified in campigning the government to pass a law banning ALL homosexuals form the clubs me and my pals frquent?
Voted : Silly idea
I don't see how they could keep out closet heteros if they tried, so the whole idea is silly.
Although women who try to pick up gays must be confused.
"No, I don't agree with an ordinance banning all heteros"
My last portion of my statement, above, big titted blond, was largely in jest... although, in my twenties, this was about a three time a week occurrence.
Ever get a call in the wee hours of the morning to pick up a friend, whom went to a pub for a beer, out of an hospital emergency room? For me, twice... although, more than 10 years ago. Both incidents, from a group of guys, whom just came to *SEE*!
by MO_ on Mon May 28, 07 11:10am
[+]
KATG
Yes I do think the bar owners right to choose who he/she serves supercedes the right of the individual to be judged on his/her actions and not as part of a group because the reason why the bar owner wishes to prevent a person from entering his establishment is irrevelant.He owns the place and gets to decide who can or can not enter;just like you own your house and have the right to determine who can or can not enter your home.
^That used to be the argument for allowing segregated housing not just in the South but in states like California as well. Proposition 14 (supported by then actor Reagan, among others) allowed Californians the freedom to sell homes or lease apartments to only whites, or only non-Jews.
Voted : Sexual apartheid
While I am sensitive to the problems of anti-gay harassment as explained by McFeely, this is a rubbish ruling. There are other ways to handle this issue than with a blanket ban for an entire category of people. If I were Australian, I'd challenge the ban in an appellate court. This is an absurd result legally.
What next? Would the Neo-Nazi bikers over the "Wolf's Lair Bar and Grill" like to toss out all of those Hebrews who create such a damper on the festivities? Would the skinheads like a "No N**ers and Vietnamese" ruling for their watering holes? Would neighborhoods with a certain percentage of fundamentalist Christians and Muslims like no alcohol served at all? How about single sex straight juice bars for the same?
You just opened Pandora's box with this ruling, mates.
"Yes I would support such an establishment because the owners of businesses must have the right to chose who they wish to conduct business with otherwise we are infringing on their right to own property.If the bar owner pays all the bills on the place and if it fails bears all the finacial responsiblities why should he have to listen to the government about who does or does not get drink in his pub?"
Corrupt: this is a good Libertarian position and I'm sympathetic, but this is actually a case of the government endorsing an interference with the rights of others to make use of a public establishment, as this was never set up to be a private club. Had the tribunal butted out and allow the hotel owner to go its own way with this, I might be more inclined to agree, but they actually went much further and meddled themselves.
Felix
The way I see it the court is just affirming the bar owner's rights rather than meddling in the affair.Also because a place is a public establishment does not mean that you have a right to enter,as seamus points out clubs,bars etc keep people out of all the time for a number of obsurd reasons.
People, if you support this idea, then do you also support an Albertan pub owner who wanted to ban lesbians from kissing in his bar? Because that's right also, isn't it?
by aya on Tue May 29, 07 8:35am
[+]
|
|
