1LT Aaron Barr 1104183 <div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>This came up from another discussion about whether or not private businesses banning concealed and/or open carry of firearms should be permitted and it led me to question the validity of non-discrimination laws in the private sector. Let me first say that I do NOT believe that the government should be allowed to discriminate; government must follow the Constitution, which mandates equal treatment under the law per the 15th Amendment. Second, I do NOT support discrimination and view it as a sign of intellectual laziness and a lack of intelligence and education. <br /><br />According to the Founders, the purpose of government is to secure our unalienable rights. Amongst these is Property, beginning with self-ownership and extending to our labor and its product. If I own a business, is it not my right to earn and spend money as I choose, even if it includes discrimination? After all, it is my money, isn't it? If I choose to discriminate in the businesses I patronize, that's my right. <br /><br />Anti-discrimination laws inherently violate the right to property of business owners by forcing them to spend money in violation of their own inclinations. The way the government gets around this is by saying that if you want to profit from the public then you must involve the whole public without discrimination.<br /><br />But is this really needed today? Does anybody believe that any publicly traded corporation would openly discriminate and say they were doing so? Would any of us patronize a business that said it wouldn't hire or serve people of color or women etc.? <br /><br />Ultimately, I think we're better than this. We don't need the government to dictate our behavior nor is it government's job to inculcate morality, whatever that morality may be. 2015-11-12T12:28:40-05:00 1LT Aaron Barr 1104183

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>This came up from another discussion about whether or not private businesses banning concealed and/or open carry of firearms should be permitted and it led me to question the validity of non-discrimination laws in the private sector. Let me first say that I do NOT believe that the government should be allowed to discriminate; government must follow the Constitution, which mandates equal treatment under the law per the 15th Amendment. Second, I do NOT support discrimination and view it as a sign of intellectual laziness and a lack of intelligence and education. <br /><br />According to the Founders, the purpose of government is to secure our unalienable rights. Amongst these is Property, beginning with self-ownership and extending to our labor and its product. If I own a business, is it not my right to earn and spend money as I choose, even if it includes discrimination? After all, it is my money, isn't it? If I choose to discriminate in the businesses I patronize, that's my right. <br /><br />Anti-discrimination laws inherently violate the right to property of business owners by forcing them to spend money in violation of their own inclinations. The way the government gets around this is by saying that if you want to profit from the public then you must involve the whole public without discrimination.<br /><br />But is this really needed today? Does anybody believe that any publicly traded corporation would openly discriminate and say they were doing so? Would any of us patronize a business that said it wouldn't hire or serve people of color or women etc.? <br /><br />Ultimately, I think we're better than this. We don't need the government to dictate our behavior nor is it government's job to inculcate morality, whatever that morality may be.

2015-11-12T12:28:40-05:00 2015-11-12T12:28:40-05:00 Capt Seid Waddell 1104199

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Once the government starts regulating a thing it is virtually impossible to get the government out of that business.

2015-11-12T12:32:26-05:00 2015-11-12T12:32:26-05:00 PO3 Private RallyPoint Member 1104212

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>we can wish ..... but the government will not let it go ...

2015-11-12T12:35:48-05:00 2015-11-12T12:35:48-05:00 LTC Private RallyPoint Member 1104219

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>"Anti-discrimination laws inherently violate the right to property of business owners by forcing them to spend money in violation of their own inclinations." That is wrong. Anti-discrimination laws obligate most business owners to accept payment for goods or services from most people. Anti-discrimination laws do not force businesses to incur debt.<br /><br />Anyone who wants to set up a discriminatory business can do so by making a private club and subsisting on dues and fees from members; imagine a racist Sam's Club or Costco.<br /><br />This is supposed to be a classless society, and anti-discrimination laws help us to become "a more perfect Union."

2015-11-12T12:38:55-05:00 2015-11-12T12:38:55-05:00 LTC Stephen F. 1104246

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>In general <a class="dark-link bold-link" role="profile-hover" data-qtip-container="body" data-id="717504" data-source-page-controller="question_response_contents" href="/profiles/717504-1lt-aaron-barr">1LT Aaron Barr</a> I believe that private sector anti-discrimination laws need to be balanced with the rights of business, medical facilities and doctors, educational institutions, and places of worship, etc. freedom to serve/produce what they believe they should.<br />Rational discrimination makes perfect sense and should be supported: this includes restricting the blind from driving cars or flying aircraft, ensuring that only people who are too small from getting on rides where they could fall out; ensuring that people who can not physically stand up to the rigors of military service are screened out either before joining or if discovered in IET during initial training. Conservative groups and liberal groups should not be forced to have members of especially leaders who disagree with the respective positions. Places of worship should be able to determine the criteria for employment and ministry <br />Irrational discrimination based on color, creed, gender should continue to be illegal. Discrimination on hiring of people with disabilities can make perfect sense if that disability would conflict with safety of the disabled and others, etc.<br />One day I hope that statutes will be examined to see which conflict and an organized effort to right size the laws including resolving conflicts within the law - tax law, penal code, etc.

2015-11-12T12:46:36-05:00 2015-11-12T12:46:36-05:00 LTC Private RallyPoint Member 1104265

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Sadly many people do continue to discriminate, and removing laws against discrimination will result at best in a few minirities being denied service at a restaurant and at worst in women, the disabled and other marginalized groups being discriminated against for employment.

2015-11-12T12:52:46-05:00 2015-11-12T12:52:46-05:00 CPT Jack Durish 1104743

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>I think that everyone should love one another. However, I know there are some who don't and I hate people like that.<br />That being said, we have to ask ourselves: How can we punish a belief. If a person chooses to be a bigot, isn't that their right just as much as it's my right to refuse to do business with bigots?

2015-11-12T15:56:33-05:00 2015-11-12T15:56:33-05:00 2015-11-12T12:28:40-05:00