If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
freedom of association
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
This means that a person should be free to associate with whom he chooses, even he discriminates on the basis of race, gender, sexuality, etc.
So if he own a business, why can't he state that no blacks are allowed?
The same applies to private property. If he doesn't want a certain group on his property. he should be free to say so.
So if he own a business, why can't he state that no blacks are allowed?
The same applies to private property. If he doesn't want a certain group on his property. he should be free to say so.
0
Comments
If you don't want someone of a certain race in your house thats fine, it's your property,
if it's a business you have a responsibility to society if you ask me.
What is the fundamental difference in that and real estate?
Work the rest out for yourself.
And a person GOES INTO business for self-interest, not necessarily to 'help society'.
If someone owns a shop that doesn't allow women or the disabled, then what's stopping someone else from owning a shop that permits everyone?
You can't wish any people's prejudices.
It's simply a logical extension!
I thought I already explained that. The principle of freedom of association doesn't extend to "freedom to discriminate". Which part of that are you struggling to grasp?
Those who put toegether what I think is the first form of human rights the US constitution would have been judically active in interpreting it would they not?
If I was to call fire in a crowded theatre would I be expressing my freedom of speech or would I be misinterpreting the right to excercise that right?
In which country?
Well it varies from country. Not every country has identical civil liberties.
"The exercise of these freedoms.......may be subject to such formalities.......,restrictions......that are necessaryin a democratic society, in the interests of public safety."
So no. Freedom of Expression doesn't extend to shouting fire in a crowded theatre.
Depends on the freedom, depends on the country.
I seem to remember having a similar conversation recently.....
I think the essance to understanding thius is to realise that one person and his private property do not live in a void, they exist within a wider society and to some extent must live with regards to that societies standards.
Our society/culture/institutions do not generally tolerate discrimination thus the person cannot be allowed to act in this way.
You surely recognise that any society places boundaries on the actions of its citizens........
Wel seeing as we are dealing with a situation of scarce resources then the existence of this shop does in fact make the existence of a shop with different standards more problematic and less likely........
But if the state says it's OK, then there would be no one to stop him from doing so! Government doesn't ALWAYS have to be representative!
Asked and answered. Cf. Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations.
Of course they would suffer. They'd lose potential custom if they discriminate, leading to lesser revenue!:rolleyes:
This exactly highlights the beneficial role the state can play in aiding social coordination
I don't believe there are many absolute freedoms.
Freedom of expression has limits; you can't libel or slander someone.
Freedom of movement has limits; you cannot violate another's property.
But which would you consider preferable: that the shopowner opens his/her doors to all because s/he his/herself knows that it benefits him/her and his/her business, or that he does so only because the law requires him/her to do so?
Someone might not have a social conscience, but it's a pretty sure bet that s/he has an instinct for self-preservation.
Sole liber, what if we were talking about a small village, only one shop and the shopowner is denying access to the elderly black lady, she has no transport of her own thus very difficult to get to other shops. Would you be so happy to defend the racist shop-keeper then?