01-28-2017, 11:58 AM
(01-28-2017, 08:59 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:(01-28-2017, 08:34 AM)Galen Wrote:(01-28-2017, 07:47 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:(01-28-2017, 03:34 AM)Galen Wrote:(01-27-2017, 06:30 PM)taramarie Wrote: and when i say infringe on others rights i mean other Americans rights. Say in the case of the religious baker who did not want to serve gays. That is what i mean. But dismiss me if you want. I know what i stand for.
A libertarian, other than Gary Johnson, would say that was his right to choose who he does business with. I would say he is being stupid but again libertarians in general don't see any particular need to protect the stupid from themselves. Customers can also choose to boycott this baker over the issue and libertarians wouldn't have any particular problem with that either.
Now, I would disagree that Gary Johnson is the only libertarian who is not a bigot. It is possible to believe in the financial notion of unencumbered free markets and the political principle of small non-interfering government without being a bigot. In this, I believe Galen should speak for himself.
You really don't understand do you? Libertarianism recognizes the right of free association which also means that people have the right to choose who they don't associate with. There is no double think involved here. It is simply not the government's place to tell people who they may or may not associate with. If people truly are bigoted then no amount of external force will change this. Indeed, it will create resentment that will eventually express itself in a violent manner most likely.
I'm not particularly an expert in libertarianism. I guess I'll have to ask others on the forum who think of themselves as libertarian to confirm or deny Galen's assertion. Does libertarian thought necessarily demand the right to discriminate? Is bigotry an inherent aspect of libertarianism?
Everyone demands the right to discriminate, not just libertarians. No one thinks they should be denied a choice in the race of the person they marry. No one thinks that gays should be required to accept dates from straight people and vice versa. In those cases, everyone accepts the libertarian belief in the right of free association.
I think most strict libertarians would tend to side with Galen on this issue: people should be allowed to conduct business with who they want, without government intervention. Without laws passed by the state requiring segregation, probably all libertarians believe that competition would have put businesses wasting space on segregated lunch counters out of business, in favor of more efficient businesses that used a single lunch counter for all their customers.
Personally I'm more toward the minarchist side and further away from the pure anarchocapitalist side. While I agree that things would most likely work out fine under Galen's model, I'm okay with a local government - under the fiction that the government is a voluntary organization - having licensing laws that require businesses to serve all customers.
However, I'm not okay with the government violating first amendment rights by requiring the bakers to put a swastika or a congratulatory message for a gay couple on the cake if they don't want to. The customer who wants those things on his cake can go to a like minded baker, or buy a blank cake and put the decoration on himself.