So America isnt allowed to have American prize money..??

sure, but this isn't a team sport with a governing body which is often exempt from anti-trust laws, employment laws, etc. (see MLB being exempt from anti-trust and NFL being able to keep a minimum age requirement). this is about individuals participating in an event with individual prizes with no governing body stipulating any particular rules regarding who can participate. i don't have any problem whatsoever with a US marathon (or any marathon anywhere) deciding to give money to Americans (or another geographic group) only; i, unlike others, think this is a good idea. but i don't see the point it attacking a group of people for asserting their legal rights. i hope another marathon in another city (which hopefully doesn't have an analogous statute as the one in MN) picks up on this. the twin cities clearly have a reason for having such a law and they also are apparently not interested in giving an exemption.

I am not disputing that statement. what i am disputing is not giving them a prize because they are not american. Its like you are punishing them because they are better than you

[quote]Giles Norton wrote:

For the same reason, we have freedom of speech, but that won't stop Wejo - or a reasonable facsimile thereof - from deleting posts he doesn't want on his board. A race surely has the right to award prizes to whomever they choose? I once won a pizza for being the first finisher from my town in a race - nobody whined about that.[/quote

Is Wejo American and if so, is he patriotic? He does in my posts.

Old Man By the Sea wrote:

The marathon organizers have the right to give more prize money to Americans

[quote]

What is the source of this alleged "right to give more prize money to Americans"? Why can't the people of a munipality, acting through their elected representatives, pass an ordinance that prohibits such discrimination in activities that require (1) the issuance of a permit to temporarily monopolize and shut down ciy streets and (2) the assistance of the city's police force to control traffic? If the marathon organizers don't want to abide by that particular city's laws, they can take their race to a jurisdiction in which they are free to discriminate as they desire.

Now this is as controversial a statement as appears on this thread: "Its like you are punishing them because they are better than you". I thought this whole arguement was based on equity. Hope you've used your fast actin tinactin boss.

It is quite simple...is it discrimination for the Baltimore marathon to give special prize money to Maryland residents..??...no thats fine...but when a marathon is trying to encourage American runners buy sweetening up the purse its wrong..??..I say no..it is fine

If I was a student in France and there was a marathon that payed a purse to the overall winner but gave a special purse to the fastest Frenchmen..It would never cross my mind to sue somebody....and if the French had helped me get my education I would be grateful...not lawsuit happy...

Old Man By the Sea wrote:

It is quite simple...is it discrimination for the Baltimore marathon to give special prize money to Maryland residents..??...no thats fine...but when a marathon is trying to encourage American runners buy sweetening up the purse its wrong..??..I say no..it is fine

If I was a student in France and there was a marathon that payed a purse to the overall winner but gave a special purse to the fastest Frenchmen..It would never cross my mind to sue somebody....and if the French had helped me get my education I would be grateful...not lawsuit happy...

you need to take this up with the city then. who cares whether it's discrimination or not. there is a law and it really doesn't matter what you think if you're not a voter in that city. city/state prize money is fine (apparently even at the Twin Cities b/c they have had prize money for MN residents) and american only prize money has been done in the past at some other races, it just can't be done at Twin Cities because of their law. you can debate the efficacy all you want but they're clearly not going to change the law or grant an exemption just for the marathon and a bunch of whiny message boarders. i'd suggest contacting your local marathon and asking them to consider doing something similar to what Twin Cities attempted.

and the reason it would never cross your mind to sue is because you would likely have no legal basis to do so. they're suing to enforce their legal rights. from what i've read of that statute, this is a slam dunk case for them. get over it.

nyariki wrote:

I am not disputing that statement. what i am disputing is not giving them a prize because they are not american. Its like you are punishing them because they are better than you

I am good friends with a race director who went to 'American Only' prize money. Why? The sponsor said so! They said that the race was becoming uninteresting to the community and that the fan turnout was almost gone. The news articles leading up to the race with 'americans only' drew many letters and the crowds on the street were as large as ever. The director was never in favor of american money only, but he said the results (from the sponsor's standpoint)were overwhelmingly positive. It was not punishment in this case, but economics. There was public interest in locals, but not mercenaries who gave nothing to the community. This was words of those writing to the newspaper.

In Kentucky, it's against the law to throw eggs at a public speaker.

In Shawnee, Oklahoma, it's illegal for three or more dogs to "meet" on private property without the consent of the owner.

In Hartford, CT, transporting a cadaver by taxi is punishable by a $5 fine.

In Michigan, it's illegal for a woman to cut her own hair without the permission of her husband.

You can ride your bike on main streets in Forgan, OK, but it's against the law to ride it backwards.

If you tie an elephant to a meter in Orlando, FL, you have to feed the meter just as if the elephant were a car.

California law forbids sleeping in the kitchen....but allows cooking in the bedroom (!)

In Columbus, MO, it is a misdemeanor to pass the mayor without tipping your hat.

It's illegal to throw an onion in Princeton, TX.

Kentucky law requires that every person in the state take a bath at least once a year.

It's against the law to pawn your wooden leg in Delaware.

Will Duluth/Minneapolis make this august roll call?

because chuck d says it is a slam dunk doesnt make it so..thankfully!!...

So your a expert on French law as well..??..impressive

Get over it.

Have a great day

Philosopher,

You are my type of guy.

I live in Silver Spring Maryland and I know that you are not a mayor. However, I tip of my hat to you. Good job.

1) Constitutional protections are in place for anyone in the country. If a foreign national is arrested, he/she has the same 4th and 5th Amendment rights. Exceptions exist for terrorists and few specific cases.

2) The Constitution should not really apply in the case of prize money IMHO. It is a contract between a private organization (and it does not matter that they are renting the public roads) and the individuals in the race.

prize money can be considered employment and it wouldn't take much of a lawyer to make a strong argument in this direction. the federal government has also become increasingly interested in national origin discrimination and although this civil suit is apparently made under city and state law, i wouldn't be suprised to see a Title VII action initiated also.

Old Man By the Sea wrote:

Typical post by someone who cant debate..call names...try and personalize disagreement..then whats next is anyone who doesnt agree with you is a racist...if you cant debate STFU

If you look at my previous post (see below), you'll see I was debating. I called you "old" for 2 reasons. #1 - it's in your name. #2 - Your comments sounded old, as in stuck in your ways and not particularly open minded. Obviously I don't know your age.

Previous post:

He didn't say you used the word "black." He said "your argument is akin to saying that blacks can work in other places so it's not a problem that I won't let them work at my particular establishment." He's pointing out, through analogy, that your reasoning is discriminatory.

I don't have this whole "American only prize money" thing sorted out in my head yet. But whether or not civil rights are being violated or not, by it's definition, "American only" prize money is discriminatory.

I understand the need and desire to support American distance runners. But I also understand that road races are a source of income for all sorts of runners. For me, I guess it comes down to a simple question: are races/directors legally allowed to award money in any way they see fit? If the answer is "yes," then outside of fighting to change the legal system, that's the end of the discussion. If the answer is "no," then in what ways are they NOT allowed to dole out money at races?

Could they only award prize money to:

Anyone who is NOT Kenyan or NOT African?

Those runners who have NOT previously run faster than 2:18?

Men? Women? (even though men & women were running the race)

Runners of a certain height? Weight? Age? Hair color? Race? Religion?

You get the point (I hope): Because it's their race, can they discriminate in any way in the distribution of prize money?

BDG

I was at this resteraunt last night and there was a sign that said "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone." Now they served me, but I don't think the policy is right so I am speaking with my attorney about it.

Miles and Miles wrote:

I was at this resteraunt last night and there was a sign that said "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone." Now they served me, but I don't think the policy is right so I am speaking with my attorney about it.

Although they don't put the whole thing up there, for legal purposes that phrase has added at the end "without prejudice or discrimination." Such a policy must be enforced even-handedly. Simply by putting up a sign doesn't give a public place the right to keep out certain elements (such as Alaskan natives) without a valid, business related reason.

Miles,

You have inspired me to file my own suits against the food service industry. The Constitution guarantees me the right to order a burger and a beer whilst wearing no shirt or shoes.

If I can't order a McValue Meal while half nude, then why are we in Iraq? Power to the people!

Miles and Miles wrote:

I was at this resteraunt last night and there was a sign that said "We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone." Now they served me, but I don't think the policy is right so I am speaking with my attorney about it.

Miles you're an idiot. What are you speaking to an attorney for?

It was a joke jackass.

I am going to the White House and I want to demand that I be let into the Oval Office, don't we have ANY freedoms in this country. I will be bringing my attorney with me.