Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (9579)	1/23/2006 7:37:05 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541674

If she is alergic to cats is her liberty assaulted by the fact that there is a car in my house? (Or in a bar or club for that matter?) Sure, cats are the same. Cats can endanger some people's health, even their lives. Perhaps more acutely than smoking. If she were severely allergic to cats, she could consider herself assaulted by cats. There are things that are known to cause allergic reactions. Smoke, cats, peanuts, perfume, monosodium glutimate. Enterprises serving the public should warn patrons of any of these hazards. the particulars of the situation have to be considered Yes, the particulars have to be considered. If your hotel and restaurant offer the only accommodations in the area and you exclude people based on race, you endanger their health and safety. They could get stuck in a blizzard and die. You cannot claim the right to exclude them under those conditions. If, OTOH, there are plenty of other choices, I'm prepared to leave that up to the marketplace, too, if a warning is posted. Back in the bad old days of blanket discrimination, I supported forcing businesses to accept all races.