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.
How in hell is what this sad group of wannabe anarchists did considered liberalism? Is everything you don't like now defined as liberalism? I'm a dyed-in-the-wool liberal and these people are idiots who should be called on their idiocy. That cop should go back to the station and get all his buddies to make a visit to that coffee shop part of their daily routine, it would serve them right.
If you are the sort of person who can't being in the presence of those with whom you disagree you aren't a liberal, you're an idiot. If you are the sort of silly naive teenage anarchist who can't handle being in the same room as a cop because of some sort of misguided notion that everyone on the police force is trying to 'hold you down', you are an even bigger idiot.
j33, it might not be "liberalism" but it is a result of liberal education/thought/culture.
Huh? How am I wrong? The coffee shop is not legally obligated to serve police officers or anyone else who isn't in a protected class under the Civil Rights Act.
Regarding Rand Paul, anyone interested in politics who hasn't been asleep for the last month knows who he is.
....There are just soooooooooo many things wrong with this statement.
j33, it might not be "liberalism" but it is a result of liberal education/thought/culture.
...right, and to that end one could argue that redneck gun-touting racists birther sorts who want to 'keep the government out of their medicare' are a result of conservative education/thought/culture and be just as misguided as your assertion above.
I wonder if you would feel the same way if he was asked to leave because he was black or gay?
Liberalism selectively applies concepts of "tolerance" only to those under thier umbrella- screw everyone else. Why does it seem as though liberalism has morphed into fascism?
Yes, I would feel absolutely the same. He was asked to leave by someone connected with the shop, and should do so.
Liberalism tends to have this focus on preventing people from getting their feelings hurt. But generally has no real basis in facts.
The question is always, do you have the right to a cup of coffee at McDonald's. Is it a basic human right, that all companies open to the public should be required to not discriminate at all? Or should they be allowed to discriminate based on only certain approved factors? Like, can you discriminate based on gender(like certain womens only establishments do, insurance/rates), age(children only, or adult only, insurance), appearances(like many clubs/bars, or any other establishment with a dress code), by income(loans, credit cards, housing), etc.
In reality, you have no absolute right to not be discriminated against. And the constitution never gives anyone this right. This right is just a recently "made up" right, and it doesn't really exist, and it is unconstitutional. The federal government, in order to mandate this Civil Rights act, basically redefined many private businesses as being public businesses(as in they would have to be owned or funded by the government), because only a public business can be regulated by the government in this way. The truth is, the federal government should not be able to regulate private banks either. Things like the community reinvestment act is unconstitutional, any sort of quota on a bank or other private institution is unconstitutional. The only task the government has in dealing with private companies, is to prevent fraud and coercion. That is its job. But that is only the federal government. State governments under our Republican form of government(we are not a democracy), have all the remaining power not explicitely defined in the constitution(see the 10th amendment).
You might be able to make the case that the CRA or other banking legislation falls under the "commerce clause". Which is also supposedly where congress gets the power to regulate things like firearms, the FDA, department of agriculture. So you may also interpret the commerce clause as giving the congress the power to pass the civil rights act(since hotels/restaurants could be considered vital for interstate/international commerce). But, that would require a fairly liberal interpretation of the commerce clause, and it is hardly what the founders defined as the intended limits of the commerce clause(the intention of the commerce clause was because of a crisis where Massachusetts had closed its ports to the British, but Connecticut was allowing British ships to port there and profit by selling the goods through to the other states, basically it was necessary for one government entity to regulate trade to prevent abuse by the states, which is also why only the federal government can set tariffs).
If you go by the founders of the constitution/bill of rights(IE where your rights came from), then you have absolutely ZERO rights to not be discriminated against in any private institution. Whether or not that is a good thing or not is another matter. This country has somehow been distorted to believe that it is no longer a Republic, people believe it is now a democracy. If you refer to this country as a republic, as the founders wanted it to be, then people will just refer to the founders in some derogative manner, saying how "well times have changed".
But, these people who say they believe in democracy(and not a republic), will sit around crying when the majority doesn't conform with their views of the world. And they will be talking the constitution this, my rights that.
So the question you really have to answer is, are we a Republic or are we a democracy?
Maybe before you make your decision you should watch this video.
I personally hope we never have a democracy, or anything like it. But we have been heading down that path for a long time now, and I believe we will continue, which will all but assure of our destruction. Its sad that people don't learn from history.
Bars refuse to serve drunks, or people who have caused problems in that bar in the past. Any business can refuse service to "problem people". And fascists are a problem.
I think you may be confusing totalitarians with fascists as many people do. While I may share your libertarian views, you should keep your definitions straight.
Fascism is an economic system. Under Fascism, the business owner is subject to a myriad of regulations and laws he otherwise wouldn't be in a free market. This would include having to serve all members of the public so long as the customers are law abiding citizens. When a business holds itself out to serve the public, that means all of the public, not just some of the public. This is why the business is subject to Fascism and fascist laws. If anything, the cop is merely a customer who happens to enforce fascist laws, although he himself may not be a fascist.
As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer. The word derives from fasces, the Roman symbol of collectivism and power: a tied bundle of rods with a protruding ax. In its day (the 1920s and 1930s), fascism was seen as the happy medium between boom-and-bust-prone liberal capitalism, with its alleged class conflict, wasteful competition, and profit-oriented egoism, and revolutionary Marxism, with its violent and socially divisive persecution of the bourgeoisie. Fascism substituted the particularity of nationalism and racialism—“blood and soil”—for the internationalism of both classical liberalism and Marxism.
Under fascism, the state, through official cartels, controlled all aspects of manufacturing, commerce, finance, and agriculture. Planning boards set product lines, production levels, prices, wages, working conditions, and the size of firms. Licensing was ubiquitous; no economic activity could be undertaken without government permission. Levels of consumption were dictated by the state, and “excess” incomes had to be surrendered as taxes or “loans.” The consequent burdening of manufacturers gave advantages to foreign firms wishing to export. But since government policy aimed at autarky, or national self-sufficiency, protectionism was necessary: imports were barred or strictly controlled, leaving foreign conquest as the only avenue for access to resources unavailable domestically. Fascism was thus incompatible with peace and the international division of labor—hallmarks of liberalism.
Fascism embodied corporatism, in which political representation was based on trade and industry rather than on geography. In this, fascism revealed its roots in syndicalism, a form of socialism originating on the left. The government cartelized firms of the same industry, with representatives of labor and management serving on myriad local, regional, and national boards—subject always to the final authority of the dictator’s economic plan. Corporatism was intended to avert unsettling divisions within the nation, such as lockouts and union strikes. The price of such forced “harmony” was the loss of the ability to bargain and move about freely.
Yes, I would feel absolutely the same. He was asked to leave by someone connected with the shop, and should do so.
The question remains is he obligated under the law to do so in this case? What law whould that be?
We live in a Fascist society and the are a number of laws that would side with the customer over the business owner so long as the business owner was in compliance with all laws applying to his business.
For example, if the cop had no shoes on, he would have to leave per regulations of the board of health. But if the cop is not violating any law while in the shop, then since the shop is open to the public, then the shopowner is obligated to serve him. If this were a private club, then the cop would have to leave.
. Why does it seem as though liberalism has morphed into fascism?
Because it has.
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.
