Jump to content

Donald Sterling - LA Clippers owner


Recommended Posts

Wasn't Sterling attempting to limit the freedoms of the mistress?

 

The taking away of the right to freely associate here issue is a canard. I don't think anyone here thinks that isn't our right. Sterling telling his mistress what he did say was between them and whatever their relationship was. She obviously set him up and paid him back for the suit the family was pursuing. There's nobody clean here. I knew nothing of Sterling before this incident but consider him a royal ass and a bigot now. I just wonder why all the people who knew he was this way for years never came forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 281
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Zoning laws are created and enforced locally, but they certainly fit your prior definition of something that takes away your property from you. If you don't think Riparian rights are a good example then try Prior Appropriation Rights (Colorado Doctrine) that the states west of the Mississippi go by. There are no absolutes here, and that was what I was pointing out to you. The Fair Housing Act of 1968 regulated who you couldn't discriminate against. It was meant for properties that were not your own domicile and most states allow you to discriminate against people for any reason if you live on the same property where you are renting another unit out. Your idealism can't stand the realism test in this instance.

I don't have idealism, I have logically consistent internal constructs. You're reduced rights to privileges, and are no different than gatorman here, except in degrees. You're equally logically inconsistent.

 

I've made no acquiesce to your zoning laws example, stating that they are problematic, as they do infringe on property rights. I've simply stated that such offenses are more palatable at the smallest scale of government , though I'm still opposed to them. HOA's are a perfectly good market based solution built around the freedom of association and contract law which solve the zoning issue.

 

Prior Appropriation Rights are offensive, and a failure in practice. Simply because a law exists does not make it reasonable, tolerable, logical, or just.

Edited by TakeYouToTasker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

The taking away of the right to freely associate here issue is a canard. I don't think anyone here thinks that isn't our right. Sterling telling his mistress what he did say was between them and whatever their relationship was. She obviously set him up and paid him back for the suit the family was pursuing. There's nobody clean here. I knew nothing of Sterling before this incident but consider him a royal ass and a bigot now. I just wonder why all the people who knew he was this way for years never came forward.

 

I can agree with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The taking away of the right to freely associate here issue is a canard. I don't think anyone here thinks that isn't our right. Sterling telling his mistress what he did say was between them and whatever their relationship was. She obviously set him up and paid him back for the suit the family was pursuing. There's nobody clean here. I knew nothing of Sterling before this incident but consider him a royal ass and a bigot now. I just wonder why all the people who knew he was this way for years never came forward.

The right to freely associate, as it applies to Sterling, is his right to rent, or not, to whomever he chooses, for any reason. Forcing him to enter into a contract with another party, against his will, denies him that freedom.

 

I can agree with that.

See above.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have idealism, I have logically consistent internal constructs. You're reduced rights to privileges, and are no different than gatorman here, except in degrees. You're equally logically inconsistent.

 

I've made no acquiesce to your zoning laws example, stating that they are problematic, as they do infringe on property rights. I've simply stated that such offenses are more palatable at the smallest scale of government , though I'm still opposed to them. HOA's are a perfectly good market based solution built around the freedom of association and contract law which solve the zoning issue.

 

Prior Appropriation Rights are offensive, and a failure in practice. Simply because a law exists does not make it reasonable, tolerable, logical, or just.

 

So, you are saying that it is much more palatable coming from a "home ownership association" than local government? Split hairs all you want, there is a point for reasonable restrictions on private property ownership. I don't think either of us want to smell a Big Mac being cooked next door.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, you are saying that it is much more palatable coming from a "home ownership association" than local government? Split hairs all you want, there is a point for reasonable restrictions on private property ownership. I don't think either of us want to smell a Big Mac being cooked next door.

 

Big Macs smell pretty good when they're being cooked. Just sayin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

So, you are saying that it is much more palatable coming from a "home ownership association" than local government? Split hairs all you want, there is a point for reasonable restrictions on private property ownership. I don't think either of us want to smell a Big Mac being cooked next door.

It's fine to believe that, just so long as you understand that you're advocating for Property privileges, as opposed to Property Rights; and as Property Rights are the single foundational right, you're arguing for privileges as opposed to rights in general.

 

As to HOA's vs. zoning laws, you really don't understand the fundamental differences between willful contract and government coercion?

Edited by TakeYouToTasker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Why was the nba not worried about him until now? They knew his views and turned a blind eye they enabled him.

I knew nothing of Sterling before this incident but consider him a royal ass and a bigot now. I just wonder why all the people who knew he was this way for years never came forward.

 

It has been an open secret in the NBA for decades. It's been an open secret in Los Angeles for just as long. But what can the NBA (or anyone) do? He owns the team, it's his private property. They cannot seize his assets or throw him out of the league for his views, no matter how repugnant.

 

The only way the NBA or the outraged players/coaches/employees/fans are ever going to get Sterling away from the Clippers is with a massive swell of support from the people (and sponsors ultimately). Which is why I am lauding this story as more than the typical race-baiting hysteria. This is different on many, many levels.

 

The question is what will Silver do tomorrow morning at 11 am. And, as a Los Angeles resident, what will the fans and protesters do tomorrow before the game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you completely unaware of the differences between contract law and civil/criminal law? Willful contract vs. government coercion?

 

So, any law is government coercion? Voting is meaningless? Zoning laws have come about because we are civilized and want to make sure we don't schit where we eat, or bother our neighbors. HOA are set up to tell us we can't paint our house pink or park our RV in the driveway. When you bought the house you were agreeing to both the zoning laws and the HOA restrictions. Don't try to paint me as ignorant to try to save face. You are wrong here. Face up to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, I guess you don't like the fact I'm calling out a person that is advocating for discrimination and so you are trying to turn it on me and make it look like I'm extremist or not making sense or whatever. I have not seen any firm opinion from you though, just criticism of my style of argument. That's a dodge. How about you stick to the topic and express an opinion on that. I'm thinking you are afraid to do that so you just attack me. That's ok.

Says the guy who responds to issues of property rights and free association with "YOU WANTS TO BRING BACK THE INSTITUTIOmAL SEGREMAGATIONS!!!! RAACCCIIISTTSTTST!!!!!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, any law is government coercion?

Strawman. Any law that infringes on natural rights is coercion.

 

Voting is meaningless?

Non-sequitor.

 

Zoning laws have come about because we are civilized and want to make sure we don't schit where we eat, or bother our neighbors.

Actually, zoning laws came about as a means of enacting institutionalized segregation; ie. a legal instrument to deny individuals their right to property. Learn your history.

 

HOA are set up to tell us we can't paint our house pink or park our RV in the driveway.

Or put a Quiznos in my garage.

 

When you bought the house you were agreeing to both the zoning laws and the HOA restrictions. Don't try to paint me as ignorant to try to save face. You are wrong here. Face up to it.

I'm not trying to paint you as anything. You're the one espousing an internally logically inconsistent doctrine, and claiming that there is no difference between contract law and civil/criminal law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if I'm not mistaken, I believe that California law prohibits anyone from recording anyone else without prior knowledge and consent of both parties. that would make the mistress a criminal in this case, while making the old douchebag, as ignorant and repugnant as he is, a victim with every right to sue the living crap out of her. if this is indeed the case, would any media outlets who use the recording be liable as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with TYTT is the libertarian myth - sounds great, works great.....in your mind....when the rubber meets the road society has decided that actual rules are needed for the common good.

 

Yes - its a balance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strawman. Any law that infringes on natural rights is coercion. Is it your natural right to put a waste disposal dump on your 5 acre homesite in a subdivision?

 

 

Non-sequitor. Why do we vote?

 

 

Actually, zoning laws came about as a means of enacting institutionalized segregation; ie. a legal instrument to deny individuals their right to property. Learn your history. No, zoning laws came about to separate different uses. Don't make schit up.

 

 

Or put a Quiznos in my garage. Neither zoning nor HOA would allow that, but it might be a better location than many they have chosen.

 

 

I'm not trying to paint you as anything. You're the one espousing an internally logically inconsistent doctrine, and claiming that there is no difference between contract law and civil/criminal law. You are the one trying to confuse the issues. Zoning laws normally define the allowable uses of the property and certain standards such as parking spaces per s/f or setbacks. Homeowner Associations place further restrictions on the property, ie. color, s/f, etc.

 

 

 

Trust me, this is an issue that you are better off just letting it go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with TYTT is the libertarian myth - sounds great, works great.....in your mind....when the rubber meets the road society has decided that actual rules are needed for the common good.

 

Yes - its a balance.

This is nothing more than a shallow justification of your own desires to infringe on the rights of others. Nothing gives you the right to do so, and nothing you've said makes it logically consistent.

 

And once again, that's fine, but atleast be honest and admit that you don't believe in rights, but rather privileges.

 

Trust me, this is an issue that you are better off just letting it go.

Can you please post your response in a way that makes it easier to respond, without forcing me to to all the work of cutting and pasting?

 

Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...