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.
By the way, all the way back on page 6 of this now 15 page thread I asked if you would have or did oppose the Civil Rights Act. I guess I should've clarified - do you still oppose? How about it? Anyone?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest
forcing people to associate through threat of violence does not advance society.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest
Long story short, you would have or did oppose the 1964 Civil Rights Act?
Well whoever owns the RV park should decide who gains admittance.
For what it's worth, if they were paying on time and didn't create a disturbance, ownership probably just penalized itself in getting rid of good reliable tenants.
I support the RV park owner's right to be a complete idiot for rejecting a potentially good tenant. He or she (the owner) deserves to be with his or her own kind.
Obviously that is your interpretation, and completely contrary to the facts.
You would sacrifice personal freedoms in exchange for some insane herd mentallity that defines EVERYONE as being the exact same. The problem is that progressives are too busy calling everyone a racist, for every little thing, to actually care about people being color blind.
If everyone were Libertarians, we'd have fewer racial issues. The collective IQ would certainly jump 20 points.
Ask yourself, Steven...do you honestly think that anyone who advocates denying goods and services to people because they have the wrong skin color is going to have any chance whatsoever in the political arena beyond some office in a backwater hillbilly town? Be honest.
By the way, all the way back on page 6 of this now 15 page thread I asked if you would have or did oppose the Civil Rights Act. I guess I should've clarified - do you still oppose? How about it? Anyone?
I oppose the same sections Barry Goldwater opposed for the same reasons. I have posted Barry's explanation in the past. I favor the civil rights of all up to the point they wish to violate the natural rights of others. There should be no right to trespass on the property of others.
The Civil Rights Act did not just apply to corporations.
Corporations are made up of people many corporations consist of a single individual.
I oppose the same sections Barry Goldwater opposed for the same reasons. I have posted Barry's explanation in the past. I favor the civil rights of all up to the point they wish to violate the natural rights of others. There should be no right to trespass on the property of others.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 refers to public accommodations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest
The Civil Rights Act did not just apply to corporations.
Agree.
Quote:
Originally Posted by whogo
Corporations are made up of people many corporations consist of a single individual.
Corporations lack a heartbeat, a legal fiction incapable of exercising rights. The model was designed to avoid accountability, liability & responsibility.
If this is a mobile home park, he can't discriminate in renting (regardless of what his mother-in-law thinks). However, he said that he's "closing down" the park, so isn't everybody SOL?
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.
This entire rant of yours is nothing more than an attempt to rid yourself of the "bigot" label and transfer it to someone else.
Your entire rant is nothing more than falsely playing the race card.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahzzie
I've seen the righties try this tactic more times than you can count. You know people see right through that, right?
I've seen the tabloid posters like you falsely testify out of ignorance. You know people see right through that, right?
You have your hands full running your own life. Stay out of the lives of others when no ones rights have been violated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahzzie
Like I said earlier, the vast majority of Americans favor laws that force businesses which serve the public to treat people equally without regard for race.
So you were okay with slavery? Good to know. Always best that the racist is out in the open. (I doubt you'll ever understand this)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahzzie
We establish these rules so that everyone has equal access to goods and services.
As far as government agencies yes. Everyone pays into the pie, that's what it's for.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahzzie
Without that we would quickly devolve into a disfunctional society.
We the people combat societies ill not government. Government isn't moral so why rely on Jim Crow when Jim Crow caused the problem in the first place?
The Civil Rights Act came after the fact. The tide had already turned because we the people made the difference, not government.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahzzie
I know these rules are distasteful for folks like you but you need to learn to live with what the majority wants.
That's called mob rule. When 51 percent tell the other 49 percent what to do. How about you quit forcing people to do what you want when no ones rights have been violated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahzzie
Isn't that what you righties always say? The majority rules?
As a whole, hopefully not. But there are plenty of republicans who are just as lost as you are, and have that same thirst for forcing their will on others, as you do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahzzie
Also, this "private property" argument is nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt by right wing business owners who wish to deny services to people based on nothing more than skin color.
Property rights is one of the cornerstones of our foundation. Read up on it.