quote:

ORIGINAL: WyldHrt

Try telling that to the restaurant owner who refuses to seat someone with a service animal [:D]

quote:

Like it or not, an airline might be "private property" (which, in point of fact, most aren't. They are corporations whose stock is traded on the open market), but when one opens a business that involves providing a service to the public, one agrees to follow certain guidelines and laws.

quote:

Using your overblown "plane to myself" example, it would be OK with you if airlines, being "private property" decided to forgo required maintenance and inspections of their equipment? Should be permitted to decide that someone who is black or gay isn't allowed to buy a ticket? After all, no one should be able to tell them what to do with their property, right?

quote:

ORIGINAL: moonvine

I remember before the ADA passed.  I had a friend in a wheelchair.  He wanted to take me to a particular restaurant for my birthday but couldn't because there was no handicapped bathroom and, at the time, there wasn't required to be one. 

I also remember the screaming and gnashing of teeth by many business owners who did not want to provide ramps and handicapped access restrooms and if they weren't forced to do so most likely wouldn't today.

I guess you could say that wheelchair bound people do not need to go out to eat and they should only patronize the places that provide accessibility to them, but I kind of prefer it the way it is now.

quote:

ORIGINAL: variation30

quote:

ORIGINAL: moonvine

I remember before the ADA passed.  I had a friend in a wheelchair.  He wanted to take me to a particular restaurant for my birthday but couldn't because there was no handicapped bathroom and, at the time, there wasn't required to be one. 

I also remember the screaming and gnashing of teeth by many business owners who did not want to provide ramps and handicapped access restrooms and if they weren't forced to do so most likely wouldn't today.

I guess you could say that wheelchair bound people do not need to go out to eat and they should only patronize the places that provide accessibility to them, but I kind of prefer it the way it is now.

I have no doubt that you prefer things the way they are now. I would prefer it if my life and/or the life of my friends was subsidized, too.

quote:

ORIGINAL: moonvine

I'm not sure how providing a person with an adequate place to go to the restroom or access to your establishment (or workplace, since people in wheelchairs may also work in restaurants) is "subsidizing" them.  At any rate no one is subsidizing Rodney as he passed away some years ago.  Fortunately, before he passed away,  he was able to patronize any establishment he wanted to.

Are you a garden-variety ass, or some special kind?

quote:

ORIGINAL: variation30


that's great. then I would suggest that you make your hotel/restaurant/place of work handicap accessable. I would also suggest that you try to convince as many other people that equal access is a good thing...though I'd only support you if you went about it in a non-coercive manner (speaking/writing to them to try and convince them, boycotts, etc.). the use of legislation is a coercive act...you are forcing people to do something they don't want to do.

quote:

ORIGINAL: variation30

quote:

ORIGINAL: moonvine

I'm not sure how providing a person with an adequate place to go to the restroom or access to your establishment (or workplace, since people in wheelchairs may also work in restaurants) is "subsidizing" them.  At any rate no one is subsidizing Rodney as he passed away some years ago.  Fortunately, before he passed away,  he was able to patronize any establishment he wanted to.

Are you a garden-variety ass, or some special kind?

well, the ADA forced all 'public' services to make certain accomidations for the handicapped. in other words, the government forced private citizens to pay to restructure their businesses to accomodate individuals who were handicapped. if government (public) buildings were restructured, that came out of all the tax payers' pockets. this is what subsidies are...other people, be they the private business owner or the taxpayer, are paying for something that benefits a certain group of individuals.

And I'm sorry to hear about your friend, but I still feel that the ADA is unjust.

I have this one basic principle: no individual should every be forced to do something he or she does not want to do with his or her body or property. I just take it to it's logical ends. I'm not sure how that makes me an ass...

"Even more fortunately, most people believe that equal access for the handicapped is a good thing.   Sometimes stuff like this just has to be legislated before people see the sense in it."

that's great. then I would suggest that you make your hotel/restaurant/place of work handicap accessable. I would also suggest that you try to convince as many other people that equal access is a good thing...though I'd only support you if you went about it in a non-coercive manner (speaking/writing to them to try and convince them, boycotts, etc.). the use of legislation is a coercive act...you are forcing people to do something they don't want to do.

quote:

ORIGINAL: moonvine

All of these places are accessible.  It has been the law since 1990 that they be so.  Why are we debating it almost 20 years later? 

Actually I'm done debating it, got better things to do.

quote:

ORIGINAL: variation30

quote:

ORIGINAL: moonvine

All of these places are accessible.  It has been the law since 1990 that they be so.  Why are we debating it almost 20 years later? 

Actually I'm done debating it, got better things to do.

I'm sorry, but I"m not the kind of person who stops debating something they think is unjust because a president signed a bill. I am still willing to debate the legitimacy of the iraq war, the federal income tax, drafts, sedition acts, etc. despite these things being a law since 'x'.

quote:

WTG Lockt and Wyldhrt [:D]
want to smooch both of you

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lockit

Do you feel the same way about schooling grants that the tax payer funds, of which you so readily seek?  Do tell... I am very curious how you can pose as one for personal freedoms of not paying for those who are disabiled when you can chose to take advantage of these same tax payers to benefit yourself for eduational and monetary gains.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WyldHrt

Variation- I knew you were gonna go there [:D]
My connection dropped whilst I was making a post asking, amongst other things, "and how would you know when the last maintenance on an airlines' planes was done or whether the kitchen of the local bistro was full of roaches?" Requiring such information to be provided would interfere with someone's "private property", no? That said, do you research the cleanliness and food preparation practices of every place you go to eat? Or do you look for the "letter" posted at the entrance, and walk out if it isn't an "A". How would you know if said establishment/ business doesn't serve people of a certain color, creed, whatever so that you could "vote" with your money?

quote:

All that said, your last post has made me give it up. I rarely point to anyone's age as a factor in an argument, but your POV seems long on intellectual theory and short on life experience. Descrimination laws and the ADA are in place for a very good reason, as are laws requiring that businesses that serve the public adhere to specific standards of safety.

quote:

ORIGINAL: variation30

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lockit

Do you feel the same way about schooling grants that the tax payer funds, of which you so readily seek?  Do tell... I am very curious how you can pose as one for personal freedoms of not paying for those who are disabiled when you can chose to take advantage of these same tax payers to benefit yourself for eduational and monetary gains.

yes I do. any 'public' service is, in my opinion, unjust. it relies upon taxation which is quite coercive. this applies to everything from government bailouts to public education.

now let's be more specific. which is worse, forcing private businesses to pay for renovations to accomodate the handicapped or forcing public buildings to pay for renovations and accomodate the handicapped. I'd say the former is. why? well, the public buildings are funded (mainly) through property taxes, local vice taxes, and perhaps even cushioned by a sales tax. the public buildings are paid for by everyone, including the handicapped and should be usable by everyone. Now please let me reiterate, I do think any kind of taxation is unjust, so it's not as if I'm making a rational pro-taxation argument, I'm just saying that if you're going to have a flawed system where everyone is forced to buy into to certain services, they should be able to enjoy them. this is not a rational argument - it's a subjective whim.

private business owners may not want to adhere to the ADA...and since their businesses are funded privately, I don't think they should have any obligations to any federal regulations. if someone wants to cut handicapped bathrooms in order to make room for an extra table to make more money, go for it. if someone wants to sacrifice a table for a handicapped bathroom because they think they'll make more money, go for it.

now onto the subject of my education and proposed hypocrisy. how can I *pose* (because I'm obviously faking it) as one who favors individual liberty but take advantage of tax payer money. well, two reasons...the first is situational, the second is greed. now at the beginning of this, let me say that I think me using institutions built by public funds is unjust...but...I'm going to do it regardless. regarding my situation: I grew up in a small town in blount county alabama. private schools weren't around. due to truancy laws, I had to attend school or be homeschooled. both my parents worked so off to public school it was. so I attended the only city school in my county (which my family helped pay for through their property taxes, might I add). at 17 I went to a private arts school near traverse city in michigan (on a private scholarship). I then went back to alabama and currently reside at the university of alabama as, for whatever silly reason, you have to have a college degree to make money. and yes, I was on a music scholarship for two years while I took all my cores before I jumped ship to a different major (all of which was funded by the tax payer). why would I do this? greed.  you're talking to someone who bought up gm stock at 2.70 and is waiting for the government to pass a bailout of the auto industry so that puppy hits my stoploss at 4.50.  it's kind of a personal mission of mine to profit as much as I can off of government's (mis)management of our lives. it's such a great feeling. I do whatever I can to put as much strain on our horrendously flawed system as I can...I can't wait to eat up this public education and not give back to the system. I can't wait to take out student loans and wait for the dollar to tank (all the while maintaining my buying power because I keep my cash in commodities) and paying back a fraction of what I loaned. I'm doing this for all of us. i'm doing it for me because I stand to profit out of our central planners' incompetence..and I'm doing it for the american tax payer and government just so I can thumb my nose at them and say 'do you see what happens when you find a stranger in the alps?!'.

and to really flesh out that image: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQUdJ6FdUQ0

I'm the guy with the crowbar, the government is the bald guy who owns the corvette, and the dude's old crappy car is the american economy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: variation30
the use of legislation is a coercive act...you are forcing people to do something they don't want to do.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BbwCanaDomme

I'm going to take a wild guess and say you're into objectivism. I love boys in their 20s who read too much Ayn Rand haha

quote:

ORIGINAL: variation30

quote:

ORIGINAL: BbwCanaDomme

I'm going to take a wild guess and say you're into objectivism. I love boys in their 20s who read too much Ayn Rand haha

guess again, sweetheart.