I misjudged Rand Paul

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Of course, because saying "let him destroy his own business with stupid policies" is exactly the same thing as demanding separate but equal government services.

In the Jim Crow south, refusing to serve blacks did not destroy your business. In fact, treating blacks as equal customers would destroy your business

That is why the Civil Rights Act was enacted. To ensure that ALL businesses treated their customers fairly. If it was voluntary, it never would have happened

Stop being so pig headed. This isn't 1950 anymore. That shit would NEVER fly again. And you know it.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Then Rand Paul supports what is happening in this picture. It is a private business and they can treat their customes how they like. If the people at the counter don't like it....they can leave

Good stretch, Corky. but you fail at logic as usual. Supporting the right of a private owner to discriminate does not mean one supports the right to harrass them. At the same time, they should leave if they don't like being harrassed and what amounts to borderline assault. The business owner should have the right to refuse business to anyone they choose. That's what private property is all about. It's private. You hate that idea. We know.

I respectfully disagree with your assertion that the owner has the right to refuse to serve people for any reason under any circumstances.

If you're going to request the PRIVILEGE of opening a business whose purpose is to serve the Public and make a profit while doing so, you have to serve the Public.

If you want to start a Private Club. Go for it. But if you're 'open to the public' then you have to be open to the Public and serve them.

You can enforce certain things like dress codes, shirts, shoes, drunkenness. profanity, etc. But you don't have the right to refuse service based on race, religion, sex etc.

A privilege to conduct business...and now we have both sides of the same coin. You both want the government to dictate to people what they can, and can not do with their own property. And there in lies the crux.

On the one hand, we have those who despise private property and on th eother, we have those who believe the government should fully dictate business opportunities to private property owners.

Statist gonna State.

 

[rightwinger]

Nonsense. Blacks had any number of black owned businesses they could frequent. Even if that wasn't so, we don't live in the 1950s anymore and I don't see many time travelling Deloreans on the roads.

Oh My God!

Its 2013....Did you just say that?

Yes I did. It's a historicial fact that blacks were generally excluded from white businesses at the time. It is also a historical fact that blacks bought things. Since blakcs couldn't buy from white stores but still bought things that means...I know you can do this...that's right. Black owned businesses.

Jim Crow was wrong and disgusting to boot, but we can deal with the historical realities of it without inventing conditions that didn't exist just to score political points in an online argument.

2013 and you are supporting separate but equal. In the south it was separate but far from equal. Black businesses were few and far between. In small town America, you did not have a choice of a black and white Woolworths, or a black or white hotel, or black or white restaurants

You ate outside, you peed in the woods, you found a black family who would take you in

This is Rand Pauls "Non-institutional" America

 

[rightwinger]

Of course, because saying "let him destroy his own business with stupid policies" is exactly the same thing as demanding separate but equal government services.

In the Jim Crow south, refusing to serve blacks did not destroy your business. In fact, treating blacks as equal customers would destroy your business

That is why the Civil Rights Act was enacted. To ensure that ALL businesses treated their customers fairly. If it was voluntary, it never would have happened

Stop being so pig headed. This isn't 1950 anymore. That shit would NEVER fly again. And you know it.

Against blacks?

You are probably correct. Against gays or Muslims, you would still find it

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Oh My God!

Its 2013....Did you just say that?

Yes I did. It's a historicial fact that blacks were generally excluded from white businesses at the time. It is also a historical fact that blacks bought things. Since blakcs couldn't buy from white stores but still bought things that means...I know you can do this...that's right. Black owned businesses.

Jim Crow was wrong and disgusting to boot, but we can deal with the historical realities of it without inventing conditions that didn't exist just to score political points in an online argument.

2013 and you are supporting separate but equal. In the south it was separate but far from equal. Black businesses were few and far between. In small town America, you did not have a choice of a black and white Woolworths, or a black or white hotel, or black or white restaurants

You ate outside, you peed in the woods, you found a black family who would take you in

This is Rand Pauls "Non-institutional" America

Appeal to emotion false reality creation LOLberals. It's all they really have at the end of the day.

 

[Steven_R]

No. Separate But Equal would be me saying coloreds can take the rear entrance to use a public building like a courthouse. Separate But Equal would be me saying colored only schools. Separate but Equal would be me saying blacks can sit at the back of the bus and their DMV forms get filed after white forms.

Separate But Equal is not saying business owners have the right to do business with whomever they like, regardless of how distasteful that owner's decisions are. Freedom of association means something or it doesn't.

 

[Edgetho]

Of course, because saying "let him destroy his own business with stupid policies" is exactly the same thing as demanding separate but equal government services.

In the Jim Crow south, refusing to serve blacks did not destroy your business. In fact, treating blacks as equal customers would destroy your business

That is why the Civil Rights Act was enacted. To ensure that ALL businesses treated their customers fairly. If it was voluntary, it never would have happened

In the dimocrap South, with dimocrap Governors, dimocrap Senators, dimocrap Congressmen and dimocrap..... Well, dimocrap everything.

dimocraps fought every piece of Civil Rights Legislation ever brought up. Including the 1866, 1867, 1884, 1957, 1958 and 1964 REPUBLICAN sponsored Civil Rights Acts.

You really need to watch this:

Q: When was the exact moment when the Democrats stopped being racist and the Republicans started?

A: It never happened. The Democrats just stopped being so blatant about it.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=hwqhoVIh65k]Bill Whittle - Racism - Democrats and Republicans switch sides? - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Uncensored2008]

In the dimocrap South, with dimocrap Governors, dimocrap Senators, dimocrap Congressmen and dimocrap..... Well, dimocrap everything.

dimocraps fought every piece of Civil Rights Legislation ever brought up. Including the 1866, 1867, 1884, 1957, 1958 and 1964 REPUBLICAN sponsored Civil Rights Acts.

You really need to watch this:

Q: When was the exact moment when the Democrats stopped being racist and the Republicans started?

A: It never happened. The Democrats just stopped being so blatant about it.

The only thing that changed is the color of the skin of the victim. democrats are still the same racist fucks they always were, they still want to impose all of the racist crap on people - the only change is that people like Hatewinger want Jim Crow to be imposed against whites, they want segregation of whites, they are HUGE champions of denying jobs and employment to whites, based on race.

Changing the color of the victim didn't change the heart of democrats - they are the same vile, racist filth that they always were.

 

[Edgetho]

In the dimocrap South, with dimocrap Governors, dimocrap Senators, dimocrap Congressmen and dimocrap..... Well, dimocrap everything.

dimocraps fought every piece of Civil Rights Legislation ever brought up. Including the 1866, 1867, 1884, 1957, 1958 and 1964 REPUBLICAN sponsored Civil Rights Acts.

You really need to watch this:

Q: When was the exact moment when the Democrats stopped being racist and the Republicans started?

A: It never happened. The Democrats just stopped being so blatant about it.

The only thing that changed is the color of the skin of the victim. democrats are still the same racist fucks they always were, they still want to impose all of the racist crap on people - the only change is that people like Hatewinger want Jim Crow to be imposed against whites, they want segregation of whites, they are HUGE champions of denying jobs and employment to whites, based on race.

Changing the color of the victim didn't change the heart of democrats - they are the same vile, racist filth that they always were.

dimocraps are truly scumbags.

Watch the vid. It's pretty well done