Author Topic: Richard Spencer gets bulied by woman in gym, loses gym membership (Read 26200 times)

Red Spy · May 23, 2017, 06:59:43 PM

Quote from: Rooged on May 23, 2017, 06:56:40 PM

i think you are seriously underestimating the severity of racism and xenophobia in america.
but that's just me

Play it out then

Ad Bot · Advertisement

Timestamp · May 23, 2017, 09:38:56 PM

Quote from: PhantOS on May 22, 2017, 10:40:49 AM

I can't believe people are arguing about this stuff for 23 pages. The woman clearly verbally abused Spencer and therefore she should be the one having her gym membership revoked. I don't know the legality of all this but refusing service because of someone's political or ideological beliefs is handicapped and considered censorship.

Believe me I don't like spencer either but the rules shouldn't bend towards my opinion of who I like and dislike. The discussion ends there.

Also both sides are equally handicapped for obsessing over the semantics of the word 'national socialist.' He clearly falls into the category of white supremacist which is super similar to national socialist, and either way its not even worth debating

this tbqh.

Blockomaniac · May 23, 2017, 11:40:37 PM

Quote from: PhantOS on May 22, 2017, 10:40:49 AM

I can't believe people are arguing about this stuff for 16 pages. The woman clearly verbally abused Spencer and therefore she should be the one having her gym membership revoked. I don't know the legality of all this but refusing service because of someone's political or ideological beliefs is handicapped and considered censorship.

Believe me I don't like spencer either but the rules shouldn't bend towards my opinion of who I like and dislike. The discussion ends there.

Also both sides are equally handicapped for obsessing over the semantics of the word 'national socialist.' He clearly falls into the category of white supremacist which is super similar to national socialist, and either way its not even worth debating

^

Mr Unicode · May 24, 2017, 12:12:05 AM

Ill bet you all the people here going "ITS A PRIVATE BUSINESS THEYCAN REFUSE TO ANYONE THEY WANT" would flip the forget out if a christian business refused to sell a cake to a gay customer.

Darryl McKoy · May 24, 2017, 12:13:33 AM

Quote from: Mr Unicode on May 24, 2017, 12:12:05 AM

Ill bet you all the people here going "ITS A PRIVATE BUSINESS THEYCAN REFUSE TO ANYONE THEY WANT" would flip the forget out if a christian business refused to sell a cake to a gay customer.

That's kind of why I think businesses should be able to deny whoever they want though.

The market they're in will self police through doing exactly that.

Tactical Nuke · May 24, 2017, 12:45:02 AM

let me just add that businesses have and should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason, however if you blow things super out of proportion and start a crusade against a business because they do that (or did that to you) then you're a richard

PhantOS · May 24, 2017, 01:06:28 AM

Being able to refuse customers for personal reasons is objectively bad because the government loses out on sales tax every time a customer is refused service.

The whole free market refuse who you want bullstuff is flawed on multiple levels since businesses are commercial spaces built on public land. It's objectively bad for the customer being refused and objectively bad for the economy. However, if a customer is acting a fool then it's objectively good to remove them from the property, since their bad behavior is going to affect other customers' ability to receive service.

Regulations like these are put in place for the best interest of everybody involved

Darryl McKoy · May 24, 2017, 01:22:22 AM

Quote from: PhantOS on May 24, 2017, 01:06:28 AM

Being able to refuse customers for personal reasons is objectively bad because the government loses out on sales tax every time a customer is refused service.

By that logic anything that prevents higher sales is 'objectively bad'.

Take financial consumer protection regulations for example. Implemented to stop 'over selling' of financial products, especially in instances where the goods don't meet the needs of the customer. They're now 'objectively bad' because they're preventing some sales.

Deus Ex · May 24, 2017, 02:25:14 AM

Quote from: Rooged on May 23, 2017, 06:56:40 PM

i think you are seriously underestimating the severity of racism and xenophobia in america.
but that's just me

I think you're vastly overestimating the severity of "racism" and "xenophobia" in America. and I put those in quotes because those are two words that are so watered down the past few years I feel like they're almost irrelevant except in the most egregious of cases. The vast majority of the population is not tribal or xenophobic, and the people who are attacked for being xenophobic are probably just regular Americans who are concerned for America more than immigrants and other countries, and that's not xenophobic.

Badspot · May 24, 2017, 04:07:32 AM

Quote from: Rednakin on May 23, 2017, 12:38:00 PM

I mean if you can't control who you provide services to because any control could bring about racial segregation, should you stop moderating the forum then? If someone is being an starfish and spamming the forum, we should just tolerate that because banning them would set a precedent that any private forum admin can ban you from their forum because you behaved in a way the admin arbitrarily decided was wrong?

Not a comparable situation. Spencer didn't do anything to disrupt the gym. The equivalent on the forum would be if someone on was minding their own business posting about Blockland and I banned them because of a completely unrelated post they made on another forum. Legal or not, it's morally wrong to use your power as a business owner to attempt to police all aspects of your customer's lives.

crazies alt · May 24, 2017, 05:22:17 AM

badspot its 4 am

PhantOS · May 24, 2017, 05:45:01 AM

Quote from: Deus Ex on May 24, 2017, 02:25:14 AM

The vast majority of the population is not tribal or xenophobic, and the people who are attacked for being xenophobic are probably just regular Americans who are concerned for America more than immigrants and other countries, and that's not xenophobic.

'concerned for america' is a poor excuse to be tribal or xenophobic. i think there's a clear line between 'undocumented immigrants are a problem' and 'mexicans should leave our country.' the former is an obvious fact and the latter is an insulting and tribal generalization

concern for your country is a legitimate concern, but if that overwhelms the need to think rationally ie. witch hunt then its less of a concern and more of an attack. thats all racism is- feeling threatened unnecessarily and taking out your fear on people who don't deserve it

Quote from: Deus Ex on May 24, 2017, 02:25:14 AM

I think you're vastly overestimating the severity of "racism" and "xenophobia" in America.

There are more racially-motivated attacks in this country every year than there are religiously motivated terrorist attacks. With that in mind i'm sure the severity of "racism" and "xenophobia" can be considered somewhat high

cooolguy32 · May 24, 2017, 06:24:37 AM

Quote from: PhantOS on May 22, 2017, 10:40:49 AM

I can't believe people are arguing about this stuff for 16 pages. The woman clearly verbally abused Spencer and therefore she should be the one having her gym membership revoked. I don't know the legality of all this but refusing service because of someone's political or ideological beliefs is handicapped and considered censorship.

Believe me I don't like spencer either but the rules shouldn't bend towards my opinion of who I like and dislike. The discussion ends there.

Also both sides are equally handicapped for obsessing over the semantics of the word 'national socialist.' He clearly falls into the category of white supremacist which is super similar to national socialist, and either way its not even worth debating

this

Deus Ex · May 24, 2017, 10:10:51 AM

Quote from: PhantOS on May 24, 2017, 05:45:01 AM

'concerned for america' is a poor excuse to be tribal or xenophobic. i think there's a clear line between 'undocumented immigrants are a problem' and 'mexicans should leave our country.' the former is an obvious fact and the latter is an insulting and tribal generalization

concern for your country is a legitimate concern, but if that overwhelms the need to think rationally ie. witch hunt then its less of a concern and more of an attack. thats all racism is- feeling threatened unnecessarily and taking out your fear on people who don't deserve it
There are more racially-motivated attacks in this country every year than there are religiously motivated terrorist attacks. With that in mind i'm sure the severity of "racism" and "xenophobia" can be considered somewhat high

Who the forget says "mexicans should leave our country"? A very small minority of people believe that. Again, you are conflating concern about immigration for xenophobia. Stop it. Bad PhantOS.
What racially motivated attacks? Now you're just pulling stuff out of your ass

OrangeMan� · May 24, 2017, 10:28:05 AM

Quote from: Deus Ex on May 24, 2017, 10:10:51 AM

What racially motivated attacks? Now you're just pulling stuff out of your ass

Did you miss the thousands of black men being gunned down by police officers every month?