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.
let's play this out...kind of a "what if" scenario.
John Doe decides it's a good idea to open up a cafe in a fairly integrated area, similar to a Dallas, TX. But, for whatever reason, he won't serve blacks, and decides to hang a sign on the front door that says, "No Black people allowed". What do you think would happen, outside of any Gov't intervention?
If I were to stumble across this cafe, and noticed the sign, i would think to myself, "this cafe is doomed for failure"...i wouldn't step foot inside, and many of my peers would probably feel the same...
It would seem likely that there would be some sort of privately grouped boycott that would spread like a forrest fire...no doubt, it would bring national media attention, he would be interviewed and given a chance to voice his views.
It would then be up to the American people to choose whether or not to support this cafe...
I ask you, what is so wrong with the scenario i just provided?
He couldnt put the sign up, the Interstate Commerce clause makes it illegal for such a business to discriminate officially. The problem with your argument is that little cafes such as the example you give operate in little localities, small towns or neighborhoods of larger towns/cities. "The American people" arent part of the equation. There are thousands of essentially black only, white only, etc. businesses like your cafe whose "personalities" are defined by their customers, would go out of business if they suddenly were to integrate. But at least it's not mandatable by law.
let's play this out...kind of a "what if" scenario.
John Doe decides it's a good idea to open up a cafe in a fairly integrated area, similar to a Dallas, TX. But, for whatever reason, he won't serve blacks, and decides to hang a sign on the front door that says, "No Black people allowed". What do you think would happen, outside of any Gov't intervention?
If I were to stumble across this cafe, and noticed the sign, i would think to myself, "this cafe is doomed for failure"...i wouldn't step foot inside, and many of my peers would probably feel the same...
It would seem likely that there would be some sort of privately grouped boycott that would spread like a forrest fire...no doubt, it would bring national media attention, he would be interviewed and given a chance to voice his views.
It would then be up to the American people to choose whether or not to support this cafe...
I ask you, what is so wrong with the scenario i just provided?
Just that it ignores the reality that lasted over two centuries. I doubt businesses were going out for discriminating based on race, gender or religion. And while we're a much more diverse and integrated society now, a large part of it has to do with the policies that helped create an environment conducive to it, accomplishing something that wasn't for centuries.
Or, perhaps, we should wait until the minorities become the majority, and then bring this issue up.
let's play this out...kind of a "what if" scenario.
John Doe decides it's a good idea to open up a cafe in a fairly integrated area, similar to a Dallas, TX. But, for whatever reason, he won't serve blacks, and decides to hang a sign on the front door that says, "No Black people allowed". What do you think would happen, outside of any Gov't intervention?
If I were to stumble across this cafe, and noticed the sign, i would think to myself, "this cafe is doomed for failure"...i wouldn't step foot inside, and many of my peers would probably feel the same...
It would seem likely that there would be some sort of privately grouped boycott that would spread like a forrest fire...no doubt, it would bring national media attention, he would be interviewed and given a chance to voice his views.
It would then be up to the American people to choose whether or not to support this cafe...
I ask you, what is so wrong with the scenario i just provided?
Reguardless what you think would happen, the cafe owner doesn't have the right in a free and open society to exclude anyone. As a business owner, the government offers the owner certain protections that are not offered to ordinary citizens.
The entities that were discriminating against blacks in the 60s were private businesses (lunch counters, restaurants, banks. apartments etc). Are you saying we should go back to the practices of that era?
No.
I'm saying times have changed. That if small businesses wanted to do that today, they would have a hell of a time staying afloat.
I'm saying that the federal government should not tell small, privately owned business whom and how to hire their employees when, if the business fails, it will be 100% on them.
I'm saying that there is a much higher % of minority owned businesses these days compared to the 1960's
I'm saying that population demographics have changed dramatically since the 1960's
I'm saying that those laws were good at the time they were put into effect. I'm also saying some laws do not need to be on the books forever.
I'm saying discrimination may have used to be widely accepted but this was 1/2 a century ago. We are not living in those same times anymore.
[quote=rugerjitsu;14259376]i guess i'm not picking up what you're throwing down...
Quote:
it seems he's greatful for the choices he has now, and realizes it was b/c of the Act that he has those choices...
at the same time, he believes that since the Act, Americans have changed...America has changed, and it's time we start putting more belief in the American people.
I think that my reading comprehension skills are pretty refined, so if you would like to quote those passages in his comment that expressly state those sentiments then I would be more than glad to read them. However at this point your additions to his post seem to be more a product of wishful thinking than what was actually written. Perhaps Mr. Burdrige in a subsequent follow-up will make those points. I hope so, as I await his response sent to him but as it stands now, those sentiments were absent from his comments.
Quote:
let's play this out...kind of a "what if" scenario.
John Doe decides it's a good idea to open up a cafe in a fairly integrated area, similar to a Dallas, TX. But, for whatever reason, he won't serve blacks, and decides to hang a sign on the front door that says, "No Black people allowed". What do you think would happen, outside of any Gov't intervention?
From the looks of it he might have a thriving libertarian business.
But for S&G's let's take a real life scenario. When I was a kid, my grandfather, grandmother and great uncle drove to California from Louisiana. At some point during the trip my great uncle came down with severe intestinal distress, it was late at night and we had a hard enough time finding an open station much less one with a "colored" bathroom, this proud, self-sufficient African American man was left with no choice but to **** if his goddamned pants.
As for "changed attitudes" right here in the City of Philadelphia, Gino's Steaks has a no service unless the order is made in english. Now, no one has tested this, but knowing the owner as I do, I know that he isn't going to turn away a European tourist who has trouble with english. The policy is clearly aimed at hispanics (I know because we have discussed the issue) and because language is not a protected class, he skates under the radar of Title II. By the way, he does a bang up business. I won't go there, but plenty of other do.
I'm saying times have changed. That if small businesses wanted to do that today, they would have a hell of a time staying afloat.
I'm saying that the federal government should not tell small, privately owned business whom and how to hire their employees when, if the business fails, it will be 100% on them.
I'm saying that there is a much higher % of minority owned businesses these days compared to the 1960's
I'm saying that population demographics have changed dramatically since the 1960's
I'm saying that those laws were good at the time they were put into effect. I'm also saying some laws do not need to be on the books forever.
I'm saying discrimination may have used to be widely accepted but this was 1/2 a century ago. We are not living in those same times anymore.
What political events and laws evolving therefrom helped those times to change a hell of a lot faster than they would have otherwise, would you say?
He couldnt put the sign up, the Interstate Commerce clause makes it illegal for such a business to discriminate officially. The problem with your argument is that little cafes such as the example you give operate in little localities, small towns or neighborhoods of larger towns/cities. "The American people" arent part of the equation. There are thousands of essentially black only, white only, etc. businesses like your cafe whose "personalities" are defined by their customers, would go out of business if they suddenly were to integrate. But at least it's not mandatable by law.
okay, then what privately owned business are we talking about?
You have not done your research very well and it is obvious you have no clue about Democrat history and racism.
Did I say anything about Democrats in my post?
No.
It is true that there were many southern Democrats who were racists and opposed all civil rights legislation.
They were not people of the left, they were people of the right.
They are now, by the way, all Republicans.
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.
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.
