CreateDebate


Debate Info

4
4
Yes. No.
Debate Score:8
Arguments:7
Total Votes:10
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes. (3)
 
 No. (3)

Debate Creator

Assface(406) pic



Are anti-discrimination laws good?

Even as they conflict with and vitiate core constitutional principles like freedom of religion and freedom of association?

Yes.

Side Score: 4
VS.

No.

Side Score: 4

I'm very on the fence with this one.

Shouldn't private businesses be allowed to discriminate against whomever they'd like to?

But then again, who will stop the entire country from excluding a racial, sexual, or anything-ual minority?

Side: Yes.
Assface(406) Disputed
1 point

If that's what the entire country truly wants, on what principle should they be stopped?

Side: No.
1 point

I mean, if everything were up to a vote, then of course racial laws would be non-existent.

But, unfortunately, the 13% (the minority) get's completely screwed.

Side: Yes.

Those types of laws protect everyone and those laws are good ones.

Side: Yes.
2 points

There will never be enough anti-discrimination laws to actually eliminate discrimination.

The Civil Rights Act, which included not allowing businesses to discriminate based on race or stuff like that, was also countering two centuries worth of discriminatory legislation. The problem with racism in this country had mostly to do with the law, not with the individuals. Slavery is a legal status. Jim Crow Laws and Separate but Equal laws allowed for States to enforce discrimination in both the public and private sector.

While it's true that much more business owners were probably racist than business owners today, it's not exactly that blacks had nowhere to go.

I find that today anti-discrimination laws are completely worthless and only harmful towards minority groups. They turn employment into a demographics based process instead of a skills based process. As well, they allow for certain groups to be treated better than others. And the handicapped are less likely to get jobs just because they are "walking lawsuits."

And even for the time back then, the duty of the Federal government should have just been to eliminate public sector based discrimination, which was the basis for most discrimination. While it wouldn't have eliminated all private sector discrimination, it would have allowed for the private sector to attract its market based on where the money flow was. The Bus Boycott was a major blow to bus companies for most of their business came from blacks. Yet there was legislation and corrupted government getting in the way of a easily successful boycott.

People are best left free and unregulated. Once you have government regulating our property based on personal beliefs instead of individual based logistics, you fuck up everything we worked for when eliminating tyranny in the first place.

Side: No.
0 points

A little discrimination is good. It keeps people in their place ;)

Side: No.