Pat BuKKKhanan wants to end all civil rights bills

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

so should the public be allowed to deny business their tax money, tax breaks and the fruits of their tax money for any reason they want?:youthink:



this game is fun:zfg:

????????

I dont understand your analogy

Not to mention businesses do already discriminate who they serve... you go to a club and they don't let you in because you dont fit the dress code you wont cry bloody murder. Bars reserve and use the right to not serve people who are obviously drunk. Etc. etc. It goes on and on.

I dont see the big deal. If someone wants to only serve one race of people, they will probably go out of business with all the lawyer fees they will have to pay to fight lawsuits, and the generally bad publicity. Or their business is in some bumfukk town with absolutely nothing going for it that has to cling to racism to help ignore the fact that their best days are behind them. So dem no worry me. The more racists yell n scream and the deeper the GOP's bond becomes the faster both entities will either have to wake the fukk up or doom themselves to irrelevance. But racists dont scare me. If anything I feel sorry for them. Someone with a shytty restaurant in the middle of Alabama has no power over me.

 

[Supercoolmayo]

Does anyone know about this "pull" that Dead7 thinks black people have

 

[NvrCMyNut]

fukk em. Why you even want to give your money to these racist cac businesses anyway

 

[DEAD7]

So the consensus is govt. would end up instituting and/or enforcing racial segregation should private citizens be able to chose who they will or will not labor for.
Fair enough. I'm in no way a supporter of the govt. doing anything of the sort.



I do get a kick out hearing a rejection of forced labor called "racist ideology" and how this is me "wanting WW3 in order to motivate group economics".
Sh*ts wild.

and I genuinely appreciate being corrected and informed about things i'm ignorant to or naive about.

 

[Type Username Here]

So the consensus is govt. would end up instituting and/or enforcing racial segregation should private citizens be able to chose who they will or will not labor for.
Fair enough. I'm in no way a supporter of the govt. doing anything of the sort.


I do get a kick out hearing a rejection of forced labor called "racist ideology" and how this is me "wanting WW3 in order to motivate group economics".
Sh*ts wild.

and I genuinely appreciate being corrected and informed about things i'm ignorant to or naive about.

We all love you here fam. It's just that you're naive and/or ignorant about a lot of things. You argue mainly from an economic standpoint, and mainly always take the side of the capitalist entrepreneur on all matters. It appears, to me at least, that your concept of individuality liberty starts and stops at the rights of the men running companies and businesses. Social interaction is far much more complicated than that.

 

[Type Username Here]

DOUBLE

 

[OneManGang]

Because we are social beings, and society depends on cooperation to the fullest extent possible. Denying someone services for something they cannot possibly alter is placing subjective intolerance above objective existence. There is NO objective reason why it should be allowed to occur in a society, it's all a matter of subjectivity. Thus, why not go with the route that provides the best path (not perfect) to harmony? Most businesses do not exist in a vacuum. Most utilize public utilities, facilities and infrastructure and are bound by the same social contract.

I dont understand why there is still discussion after this post. Public roads, utilities, etc are used by ALL businesses. How can a business use publicly funded things and not serve all taxpayers?

 

[Field Marshall Bradley]

The arrogance that liberals posses never ceases to amaze.
Some one else's labor is in no shape or form something you or I should have a right to...

If you applied for a business license with the state, there are statutes and legislation in place that prohibit this type of discrimination. You can "refuse" to serve whoever, but if you have a business license, expect to get sued for your refusal

 

[The Real]

Ignore half of reality for CACnowledgement brehs

 

[DEAD7]

Does anyone know about this "pull" that Dead7 thinks black people have

http://www.blackenterprise.com/small-business/african-american-buying-power-projected-trillions/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/10/black-buying-power-to-rea_n_1086369.html

 

[Brown_Pride]

... and you define cooperation as the govt forcing people to do things they dont want to do. Fair enough.

"There is NO objective reason why it should be allowed to occur in a society" Lets try because people are free to choose what they will and wont do(as long as they are not harming another)... but I guess we dont share the belief that people should be free in this way.
I understand your position, but I think the segregation you have in mind is and far from a possible reality today.

People are free, business are legal entities not and should not be afforded the exact same rights as people; period end of discussion. (no it really is)

You can't have your cake and eat it too. As a legal entity a business must abide by the laws and the laws are their to protect the people. This isn't a People right's issue, it's a business entity right's issue.

 

[DEAD7]

People are free, business are legal entities not and should not be afforded the exact same rights as people; period end of discussion. (no it really is)

You can't have your cake and eat it too. As a legal entity a business must abide by the laws and the laws are their to protect the people. This isn't a People right's issue, it's a business entity right's issue.

My point was that these private business's couldnt survive in todays economy with openly bigoted views, and govt. force isnt needed. Moreover, we would be better off knowing exactly who the bigots are, and weening them from the economy.
Some how that spun(sloped) out of control into Govt. instituting and enforcing all kinds of f*cked up laws from the past. Which I'm still not sure would be the case, but concede that its possible, and that theres a better than good chance i'm being naive.

 

[Handsback]

My point was that these private business's couldnt survive in todays economy with openly bigoted views, and govt. force isnt needed. Moreover, we would be better off knowing exactly who the bigots are, and weening them from the economy.
Some how that spun(sloped) out of control into Govt. instituting and enforcing all kinds of f*cked up laws from the past. Which I'm still not sure would be the case, but concede that its possible, and that theres a better than good chance i'm being naive.

Breh we have Senators openly calling Mexicans 'wetbacks', a man who advocated racist genocide campaigning for another, an investigation of a fire chief allowing a black woman to die because he wouldn't give her CPR, and pastors saying the Bible doesn't approve of interracial marriages. This shyt is not as far out there as you think.

Dude you're from Fresno like I am. Start asking those older folks how they got here. No bullshyt, half of them that I've spoken to were forced out of the south. Just yesterday I was talking with my buddy about his trip to Tennessee and how the gas stations there refused to serve him. I'm willing to bet they're still in business.

And how come the libertarian argument is that Jim Crow and slavery (I know it's off topic but the logic is the same) were unsustainable and were ALMOST gonna end on their own? They lasted a hundred and three hundred years respectively until they were FORCED to change, sounds pretty profitable to me.

 

[DEAD7]

And how come the libertarian argument is that Jim Crow and slavery (I know it's off topic but the logic is the same) were unsustainable and were ALMOST gonna end on their own? They lasted a hundred and three hundred years respectively until they were FORCED to change, sounds pretty profitable to me.

It is culture that changes these things. Not laws.
... and the argument is that govt. intervention wasnt the savior in either case.

... and I dont think any of the topic at hand should extend to govt. at any level.

 

[Brown_Pride]

My point was that these private business's couldnt survive in todays economy with openly bigoted views, and govt. force isnt needed. Moreover, we would be better off knowing exactly who the bigots are, and weening them from the economy.
Some how that spun(sloped) out of control into Govt. instituting and enforcing all kinds of f*cked up laws from the past. Which I'm still not sure would be the case, but concede that its possible, and that theres a better than good chance i'm being naive.

if your argument is that they would die naturally anyways then why not legislate that death. If what you're saying is true then in 10 years we can ad the law http://www.dumblaws.com/ and have a good laugh at how not needed it is. IF the problem is naturally going away then why not just kill it? You'll most likely say, "cause we shouldn't give the government power" but if we're giving it power to do away with a problem that's going away then once the problem is gone so is the power...

I don't think you're naive, i just think you've been sold on an idea that sounds right but is not very pragmatic.

On the surface one should not be forced to do anything...and yet when you take society into account you must concede that we give up certain freedoms for civility.