Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-27-2011, 03:11 PM
 
Location: Texas
37,942 posts, read 17,724,642 times
Reputation: 10366

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freedom123 View Post
Katiana,

I assure you that I am not very young. Either way, counter my viewpoints, not my age. I could say "Katiana, something tells me you're not African-American" to try and discredit your viewpoints on these matters, but wouldn't that sound just as ridiculous?

Being older does not make one more intelligent or insightful than another. My viewpoints come from research and speaking with friends and family members who actually lived during Jim Crow, including older ones who are children of slaves. My great-grandmother is still alive and her father was a slave. She, I and my grandmother have had many conversations about this and they agree with my point of view.

In case you skipped these points, I will post them again:

1. My arguments are based on present-day society's attitudes towards racism.
2. My stipulations on supporting the premise of this thread is being protected from violence and government-mandated discrimination. If those two things are violated, then I do not support it.

In regards to your Colorado example, it is duly noted and I will read your link. That does not change the fact that I would moved to the least racist place at the time. That doesn't necessarily mean it would be Colorado. It might have been Detroit, Europe, Africa or who knows where. I do not want to live among racists and I want to know who they are so I know if I need to get away. I'll leave it to people like you to change society after I've moved away.

It also doesn't change the fact that Colorado was violating the Constitution with these discriminatory practices. You can give me every racism example in the world and I'll continue to point out how the laws on the books weren't being enforced and these additional business limitations weren't needed.

To answer the rest of your points:

1. Desegregation post Brown v. Board: I don't believe in forced integration, I believe in allowing individuals to go to whatever school they choose, and the govt protecting them from violence when making that choice. Since you generally take liberal positions, I wonder if you support the status quo of forced school zones and are against school choice, which is defacto segregation in today's society.

2. White flight: I don't know why people care where white people are moving. African-Americans don't need whites around to have a flourishing neighborhood. If they don't want to live around me, that's just fine. Once again, I want to associate with those who want to associate with me. If people want to move away when I move into the neighborhood, so be it. I would capitalize on it by obtaining their houses at a discount and reselling it to people who want to live in the neighborhood. If anything, white flight helps African-Americans obtain houses at discount prices.

3. Mentality and Jim Crow: Your mentality is that the government creates extra rights to remedy wrongs in society. If a government is powerful enough to create extra rights for some people by taking rights away from others (your ideology), then it is also powerful enough to take those rights away (Jim Crow). That removes the concept of inalienable rights, which is supposed to be universal and equal.

In relation to businesses, customers do not have a right to that business, but an owner does. Mandating who businesses accept is taking property rights away from the owner and assigning property rights to a customer that does not own that company. As a caveat: If states mandate anti-discrimination as a condition of govt protection aka incorporation, I'm fine with that, but not for sole proprietorships that did not ask the state for liability protection.

4. Societal trends taking too much time: This is my biggest gripe with the liberal ideology. Your goals are noble, but if you're allowed to trump rights and laws in the cause of "justice" because it's "taking too long", that negates the whole idea of rights in the first place. We have a method in place to meet your goals, it's called amending the Constitution or using the laws on the books. Either could have been used to effectively remedy the racism discussed in this thread. Today this law-trumping ideology is evident in liberal support of illegal immigrants who break the law to come here.

In the end, our debate is mostly state vs. federal. Throwing libertarianism and property rights to the side, states are allowed under our Constitution to pass Civil Rights laws that require businesses not to exclude anyone by race. So, if you want some common ground this is what I can give you.
nahh you don't know best for yourself. quit trying. Government can take care of you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-27-2011, 03:12 PM
 
Location: Texas
37,942 posts, read 17,724,642 times
Reputation: 10366
Quote:
Originally Posted by Konraden View Post
Individual persons are viewed as having "unalienable" rights. Other rights are enumerated by government. Read: Constitutional law.
lol I keep having to repeat myself. Government does not grant rights. Government does not say you bought that house umm okay you can keep it. Again you trying to redefine rights as privileges.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Konraden View Post
In terms of personal property, such as a homestead, they have limited rights to their property. A business isn't always such.
when you purchase a house, you own the building you do not own the land.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Konraden View Post
Not in this context. Establishments that accomdate the public, such as hotels, bars, and restaurants, were covered under the Civil Rights act of '65 to prevent these establishments from discriminating against costumers based on race. Because these establishments are open to the public, and accommodate them as such, they open to special classification of laws.
I think I get you now. You are quoting what the Civil rights law used to get it through. I do not believe those reasons are constitutional.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Konraden View Post
No one said you lose your rights. A business, not being an individual, has no inherent rights. Everything about a business is structured by the presiding government. If a business wants to open, it has to go through the necessary legal paperwork, follow the necessary regulation, and so on and so fourth. You are not your business, and your business is not you.
Because government overstepped again, waved their hand and said so. The rules and regulations put in to protect the consumer ended up protecting big business instead. Another reason why government should not raise people from cradle to grave. quit backing failure

And yes I do loose my rights. because you say I dont have any doesn't make it true. My employer can set a code of conduct for me. You dont get to decide and neither should government.

You keep going back to business not being a person. How many people does a business have to have before it looses its rights? Government cannot go into a business without a search warrant. So government gets to say which rights are enforced? That's tyranny.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Konraden View Post
A business is not a created work.
not making sense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Konraden View Post
The law in question specifically isolated establishments of public accommodation, which generally don't have created works.
created works, not making snese again government should not be able to take away rights under the guise of helping.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Konraden View Post
Non-sequitur.
not making sense.
I'll repeat this again because you ignore this. It should never be ignored. Bad things happen when you ignore property rights. This has always been the case. Government getting it right once in awhile is another reason to not have them run our lives.
I understand you have good intentions, only because I am on the same moral side as you on this. Guess what, the ones who made laws against inter racial marriages probably thought they were moral too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Konraden View Post
You aren't being forced to work. A business is free to set their own prices. You're attacking strawmen.
again you dont make sense. This is not a strawman argument. First off you cannot set your price on wages, because government has intruded on our freedoms and said you have to pay a minimum wage.

And yes I am being forced to work. If I say I don't want to provide a service to someone based on the race I get punished or I can quit. I do not have the freedom to exercise my rights. Using force to get your way isn't force???

Quote:
Originally Posted by Konraden View Post
Red Herring. Nobody is limiting your property rights by disallowing discrimination laws. A business does not have enumerated rights outside that which a government provides. The individual does, the business does not. If you want to own and operate a business, you have to abide by the laws presented. If you don't like those laws, you change them. These laws enacted were to prevent the discrimination of black minorities in a time of great racial strife. We still have remarkably ignorant people in the world, and allowing "the free market" to handle social issues is asinine.
no its not a red herring, dunno where you come up with this stuff.
Because you said so has been your entire argument, As I mentioned maybe you think because government said so its golden. Prohibition ring a bell? Slavery ring a bell? You're hanging your hat on the wrong side.
But thank goodness for government to come along and make a person 3/5 or a person. Equality here I come!!!!

The only thing asinine is you thinking you know better for me. In the long run, you do not, so you have to use force and coercion to get your way. You have already proven, with your backing of government intervention into our privates lives, that you back failure and immorality. The countless times government has made horrible immoral decisions but this time you think those losers have got it right? Quit relying on government to solve your problems. They have a proven track record of failure.

Your entire argument is your misunderstanding of property rights. You want to allow government to tell people what they can or cannot do by saying government has decided they dont have rights. Silly.

Do some reading on the advances blacks made in employment and advancement a couple years preceding the CRA and compare that to a couple years following.
Sowell - Civil Rights Rhetoric or Reality
Did the CRA help minorities get jobs?
"“The rise in the number of blacks in professional and technical occupations in the two years from 1964 to 1966 (after the Civil Rights Act) was in fact less than in the one year from 1961 to 1962 (before the Civil Rights Act). If one takes into account the growing black population by looking at percentages instead of absolute numbers, it becomes even clearer that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 represented no acceleration in trends that had been going on for many years. The percentage of employed blacks who were managers and administrators was the same in 1967 as in 1964 — and 1960. Nor did the institution of ‘goals and timetables’ at the end of 1971 mark any acceleration in the long trend of rising black representation in these occupations. True, there was an appreciable increase in the percentage of blacks in professional and technical fields from 1971 to 1972, but almost entirely offset by a reduction in the percentage of blacks who were managers and administrators.”
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2011, 03:18 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,316 posts, read 120,167,257 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loveshiscountry View Post
still don't get it?
No. You misrepresented ME, not the other way around. Here is YOUR post discussing how minorities think:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Loveshiscountry View Post
I wonder why I hear this following statement by minorities many more times than whites. "I'd rather know right away if someone is racist" (I'll complete the thought hoping you'll understand better) "than find out down the line I won't be given raises or be promoted after my time and money is invested".
Then you go an accuse ME of being a closet racist for asking you how you know how blacks think. I'd still like you to tell me. It seems there's some division on this thread among those who have stated they are black.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2011, 11:39 PM
 
Location: Texas
37,942 posts, read 17,724,642 times
Reputation: 10366
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
No. You misrepresented ME, not the other way around. Here is YOUR post discussing how minorities think:



Then you go an accuse ME of being a closet racist for asking you how you know how blacks think. I'd still like you to tell me. It seems there's some division on this thread among those who have stated they are black.
I never said that. Your statement was though. One statement doesn't make someone a closest racist. You may portray someone who does one thing and force them into a group, but I don't. Sad that people use force to get what they want. Society doesn't grow through force and coercion.

You try to portray a person earlier in the thread as something he is not in order to make your point. Now you say people would rather not know the truth about how someone perceives them.

truth is treason in a government of lies
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2011, 01:37 AM
 
838 posts, read 918,939 times
Reputation: 186
No, Paul made it very clear that he does not want this, at all, he made it clear that our people of any color would not tolerate this. You are attacking the one man running that is a non globalist and would turn around our corrupt government and restore and save our country. Think and this and please do some research.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2011, 01:44 AM
 
3,335 posts, read 2,646,105 times
Reputation: 565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
No. You misrepresented ME, not the other way around. Here is YOUR post discussing how minorities think:



Then you go an accuse ME of being a closet racist for asking you how you know how blacks think. I'd still like you to tell me. It seems there's some division on this thread among those who have stated they are black.

I am with you, Katiana!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2011, 02:22 AM
 
50 posts, read 70,074 times
Reputation: 70
I'll be voting for Ron Paul for President 2012.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2011, 08:47 AM
 
2,618 posts, read 6,144,503 times
Reputation: 2119
Quote:
Originally Posted by IRISH1973 View Post
I'll be voting for Ron Paul for President 2012.
Me too. I'll write him in if I have to. A vote for anyone else is a wasted vote.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2011, 10:10 AM
 
Location: South Jordan, Utah
8,182 posts, read 9,163,113 times
Reputation: 3632
This thread took a month off and then started over, all of the good dialog was just tossed by the side and you all went back into partisan bickering.

I have yet to see an answer to my question.

Why would a bigoted racist spend the past 30 years being almost the lone champion of ending the drug war and releasing ALL people from prison who have committed victimless crimes?

"A system designed to protect individual liberty will have no punishments for any group and no privileges. Today, I think inner-city folks and minorities are punished unfairly in the war on drugs. For instance, Blacks make up 14% of those who use drugs, yet 36 percent of those arrested are Blacks and it ends up that 63% of those who finally end up in prison are Blacks. This has to change. We don’t have to have more courts and more prisons." Ron Paul 2007
http://www.city-data.com/forum/20654936-post880.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-29-2011, 10:51 AM
 
2,028 posts, read 1,881,416 times
Reputation: 1001
Quote:
Originally Posted by hilgi View Post
This thread took a month off and then started over, all of the good dialog was just tossed by the side and you all went back into partisan bickering.

I have yet to see an answer to my question.

Why would a bigoted racist spend the past 30 years being almost the lone champion of ending the drug war and releasing ALL people from prison who have committed victimless crimes?

"A system designed to protect individual liberty will have no punishments for any group and no privileges. Today, I think inner-city folks and minorities are punished unfairly in the war on drugs. For instance, Blacks make up 14% of those who use drugs, yet 36 percent of those arrested are Blacks and it ends up that 63% of those who finally end up in prison are Blacks. This has to change. We don’t have to have more courts and more prisons." Ron Paul 2007
http://www.city-data.com/forum/20654936-post880.html
I've raised the same point in other threads where Ron Paul was accused of racism, and I have yet to receive a response. Maybe that should be the thread ending point raised every time this happens in the future.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top