From: phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)
Subject: Re: Oh, I love it, I love it, I love it!
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 92 23:07:09 GMT
Organization: Generally in favor of, but mostly random.
Distribution: ba

In article <ofvog6c@fido.asd.sgi.com> dauber@sgi.com (Jeff Dauber) writes:
    >The company: billy-bob computing, 50 employees. President
    >Billy-bob Bigot.
    >
    >Billy tells his manager, "don't hire no niggers". Manager, in
    >order to keep his job, does not hire any african americans.
    >However, when a qualified african american is turned down for
    >the job, and demands to know why, the manager can say
    >"executive orders". Billy-bob can then deny bias by saying
    >"oh, he misunderstood what I meant".
    >
    >In this way, the ownership of bias can be denied. One's own
    >personal convictions can be hidden amongst the red tape.
    >
    >Another case: Jimbo convenience store, 3 employees. Owner
    >Jimbo Redneck.
    >
    >Jimbo tells his employees that "I don't want none of the
    >faggots in here but don't tell anyone that I said that, or
    >I'll fire you!" He then goes into the back room and lives his
    >hateful little life. In the meantime, the people working the
    >store start turning away homosexuals. When accuse of being
    >biased, they have to say "we refuse the right to refuse
    >service to anyone."
    >
    >Now, the libertarians would say that these people are hurting
    >themselves by exhibiting this bias. However, with a surplus
    >of people in the world, bias only hurts the person on the
    >receiving end of the deal, since one convenience store
    >shopper is much like any other.

Huh? Eh? So? These people lose potential employees and/or customers.
The people involved live up to their biases. So? That's their right.


    >I think that people, in one on one encounters, will behave in
    >a rational fashion. However, as soon as you can distance
    >yourself from the person, you can be as hateful and biased as
    >you want, without ownership for the hatred. And, despite
    >libertarian philosophy, the only people who suffer from this
    >hatred are the people who are on the receiving end.

Not true at all. Let's see, George Redneck, owner of a major
sports team, says, "don't hire no niggers", thusly eliminating
around 50% of the most eligible applicants. His right ot be stupid.
And he is hurting himself.

And this suffering thing -- you imply that if person A refuses to
associate with person B, person B not only is the only one to suffer
(wrong), but somehows deserves the desired association with person A,
based (apparently?) on need.

Well, money ain't everything, right? So person A turns down person
B (for a date let's say) on the basis of whatever, ugliness to race.
Do you deny that person A can deny person B a date for any reason,
say, a date? Or ugliness? Or sexual orientation? Why not a job?
Friendship? Provider of services?

Would YOU, if you were a plumber, the ONLY plumber around for
100's of miles, deny plumbing service to Joe, President of
Roast-All-Faggots-Today club? You would!!! Just because of his
beliefs? Wow, how about that, Freedom of Association in action.
-- 
phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)

"I can't get no satisfaction ...", M. Jagger
"Yeah, right, tell me another one Mick.", P. Ronzone

These opinions are MINE, and you can't have 'em!  (But I'll rent 'em cheap ...)