Unbelievable: Ron Paul Slams Civil Rights Act

[ShackledNation]

How does your post have anything at all to do with quote cited?

The poster is incorrectly stated that the Act was some sort of bleeding-heart moralization, partisan, unsubstantiated, and subjective.

All of those words are yours and none of them mine. You are drawing incorrect generalizations about my opinions from your own biased preconceptions.

The case law demonstrates that’s clearly not the case.

If case law ruled that government could kill a US citizen without trial and that the constitution supports such acts would you support the legitimacy of said law?

 

[Modbert]

Brown v. Board started things off nicely, and that set a precedent that could have easily led to the removal of the rest of the jim crow laws.

Interesting that you mention Brown v. Board.

Bill Summary & Status - 108th Congress (2003 - 2004) - H.CON.RES.414 - Major Congressional Actions - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

Expressing the sense of the Congress that, as Congress recognizes the 50th anniversary of the Brown v. Board of Education decision, all Americans are encouraged to observe this anniversary with a commitment to continuing and building on the legacy of Brown.

And what was the Roll call?

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2004/roll176.xml

Ron Paul as the sole no.

 

[rightwinger]

And Ron Paul supported the provisions of the Civil Rights Act that ended Jim Crow laws and the like that forced and encouraged segregation. He supported ending all segregation in public accommodations.

The only people discussing that are dishonest pundits who smear those they fear will change their position in power. What is telling is the complete bias and ignorance of people who take things out of context. That is telling of the lack of honest debate here in this country in 2012.

Just as you cannot stop people from doing drugs by making it illegal, you cannot stop people from being racist by doing so. In fact, just as government laws banning drugs lead to an even worse drug situation, so do laws trying to ban segregation lead to more racial tension.

Ron Paul supported ending all segregation in public laws. He was against provisions of the bill that tried to force people to integrate, which simply cannot be done.

We did force people to integrate and it worked. Have you seen a lunch counter that says "No colored" lately? Some acted like integration was the end of society.......within five years nobody cared

Ron Paul is 50 years behind the times

"Federal bureaucrats and judges cannot read minds to see if actions are motivated by racism. Therefore, the only way the federal government could ensure an employer was not violating the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was to ensure that the racial composition of a business's workforce matched the racial composition of a bureaucrat or judge's defined body of potential employees. Thus, bureaucrats began forcing employers to hire by racial quota. Racial quotas have not contributed to racial harmony or advanced the goal of a color-blind society. Instead, these quotas encouraged racial balkanization, and fostered racial strife. Of course, America has made great strides in race relations over the past forty years. However, this progress is due to changes in public attitudes and private efforts. Relations between the races have improved despite, not because of, the 1964 Civil Rights Act."
-Ron Paul

You are ignoring all the negative affects of the civil rights act, such as all women gyms being sued for discriminating against men. In many ways, the Civil Rights Act (minus the end of public segregation and Jim Crow Laws of course) increased racial tensions.

The main problem Ron Paul and people like myself have about the bill is title II, not the whole thing.

Affirmative action was a necessary followup to the civil rights act. As you know, all an employer had to say was ....you can change the laws but you can't make me hire one of them nigras
Forced quotas ensured that integration would take place. Initially, if you wanted a government contract, you had to show you did not discriminate
Those quotas have since been relaxed and the results have been more blacks in the workforce, management and formerly all white occupations. Affirmative action worked and the world did not come to an end

 

[Mr.Nick]

Brown v. Board started things off nicely, and that set a precedent that could have easily led to the removal of the rest of the jim crow laws.

Interesting that you mention Brown v. Board.

Bill Summary & Status - 108th Congress (2003 - 2004) - H.CON.RES.414 - Major Congressional Actions - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

Expressing the sense of the Congress that, as Congress recognizes the 50th anniversary of the Brown v. Board of Education decision, all Americans are encouraged to observe this anniversary with a commitment to continuing and building on the legacy of Brown.

And what was the Roll call?

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2004/roll176.xml

Ron Paul as the sole no.

I'm glad someone is using the Thomas.gov website...

That site is ******* awesome...

It shows how useless our government actually is - especially since they spend half their time passing resolutions...

 

[dblack]

You bring up a good point that goes back to the heart of the argument. It involves the idea that government can legislate morality effectively. Looking at the drug war, it obviously can't

I have to disagree with you here. We can legislate quite a bit with a strong enough police state. The question is, should we? Do we want government deciding for us what is moral and then forcing us to comply?

 

[Mr.Nick]

You bring up a good point that goes back to the heart of the argument. It involves the idea that government can legislate morality effectively. Looking at the drug war, it obviously can't

I have to disagree with you here. We can legislate quite a bit with a strong enough police state. The question is, should we? Do we want government deciding for us what is moral and then forcing us to comply?

Well we have a Second Amendment to prevent that....

I suppose many would sponsor an authoritarian state as long as it was their ideas or morals being enforced...

I would like to say I would never tolerate such nonsense if my "values" were shoved down anothers throat but I'm a libertarian hence it wouldn't make any sense. I would certainly oppose my morals being shoved down anothers throat. People can do what they like as long as it's within the context of the Bill of Rights....

I find it difficult enough trying to teach liberty to a bunch of present day authoritarians who believe government is great and government knows best...

 

[ShackledNation]

What does Walter Williams think of the Civil Rights Act of 1964? By the way, Walter Williams is black. So surely he must disagree with Ron Paul, right?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqod16fhMPE]Walter E Williams - Discrimination and Liberty - YouTube[/ame]

Nope. He agrees completely with Ron Paul. For those who do not watch the video, he says "Title II of the Civil Rights Act is unconstitutional."

"The true commitment, or the test of one's commitment to freedom of association, doesn't come when he allows people to be free to associate in the manner in which he deems ok. The true test of one's commitment to freedom of association is when you allow people to associate in ways you find offensive, that you find personally offensive."

I don't bring in the opinion of a black economist because I think the fact that he is black automatically makes him an expert on civil rights. I bring his opinion in to try and knock some sense in to many of you on this board that equate opposition to the civil rights act to racism.

One final bit of food for thought: Are there laws outlawing customers from discriminating against employers? No. Not a single one. But do you see white people refusing to go to establishments run by black people because the law does not force them to go there? Again, no. That is evidence enough that you don't need government to outlaw discrimination that is harmful to society.

 

[paperview]

You know what? I think the Republican party should run on a platform of repealing the Civil Rights Act.

Seriously.

I heartily recommend you go for it.

 

[Mr.Nick]

You know what? I think the Republican party should run on a platform of repealing the Civil Rights Act.

Seriously.

I heartily recommend you go for it.

The civil rights act is tyranny..........

You cant force a person to like another person based on, race, religion, sex, sexuality or creed...

I'm not a racist, I just just believe that the government has no right telling others what they need to do.

Business owners have the right to hire whoever they like and for whatever reason... If you believe a business is racist then don't buy their product or service and buy from another you feel more comfortable with.

The notion that the government can just tell someone or a business what to do is exactly whats wrong with this country.

 

[paperview]

I'll help you fund your Crusade.

Go for it.

 

[jillian]

i think they should run on that platform, too.

and then i think the rightwingnuts should do another thread about class warfare.... and how white maie christians are victimized.

 

[WatertheTree]

First off, I right here said they were democrats, southern conservative democrats.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/4610906-post63.html

Not my fault you don;t read the posts.

Second - I'm not talking about texts of these things that are online, idiot. I'm talking about THE ORIGINAL LETTERS and DOCUMENTS. They are still coming out of attics and found in hitherto places. These are NEW TO HISTORY. I am touching the original papers. For a period,I own them. I don't know how you could gather my last post and think it's anything but.

I don't think you even have a clue what I do for business, and I don't care to educate you more.

You have proven yourself unworthy of my time.

Go back to listening to Glenn Beck. (who, by the way, held up one of MY Documents on his show once in his revisionist history extravaganza with the scumbucket liar David Barton. Barton himself has called my office on several occasions. Suck on that.

What do you do for capitalism? and less intervention by government as an individual?.....

I'm a capitalist, and a damn good one at that. And a liberal. A damn good one.

That's all you need to know.

No your not. Your a ******* socialist that thinks that government exists to provide for you. Nevermind all those provisions come at the expense of people who work hard around you.

 

[paperview]

i think they should run on that platform, too.

and then i think the rightwingnuts should do another thread about class warfare.... and how white maie christians are victimized.

Then, at last, we will the see violence inherent in the system.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOOTKA0aGI0]Dennis The Constitutional Peasant - YouTube[/ame]

 

[ShackledNation]

It appears the economic statists have resorted to name-calling again...as is usually the case when you question someone's religion.

 

[Stephanie]

Ron Paul isn't the Republican party and he speaks for himself..

I don't know why he is a Republican..He is a Libertarian.

 

[paperview]

What do you do for capitalism? and less intervention by government as an individual?.....

I'm a capitalist, and a damn good one at that. And a liberal. A damn good one.

That's all you need to know.

No your not. Your a ******* socialist that thinks that government exists to provide for you. Nevermind all those provisions come at the expense of people who work hard around you.

You really should look into getting your medications adjusted for you there at the institution.

 

[Mr.Nick]

I'll help you fund your Crusade.

Go for it.

I suppose I'd rather have racists than our government using people like puppets...

In 2012 I don't believe true racism would be tolerated by society....

I myself don't like ghetto ***** but I would have no problem giving a job to a minority if he or she was qualified for the position.

I would totally discriminate against a flamboyant "taste the rainbow" homo tho.....

It's one thing to be gay and its another to be obnoxious and "in your face" about it.

I bet there are a lot of gays that are embarrassed by those sissies...

 

[paperview]

I'll help you fund your Crusade.

Go for it.

I suppose I'd rather have racists than our government using people like puppets...

In 2012 I don't believe true racism would be tolerated by society....

I myself don't like ghetto ***** but I would have no problem giving a job to a minority if he or she was qualified for the position.

I would totally discriminate against a flamboyant "taste the rainbow" homo tho.....

It's one thing to be gay and its another to be obnoxious and "in your face" about it.

I bet there are a lot of gays that are embarrassed by those sissies...

Don't let those haunting homo-erotic dreams keep you up at night.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Ron Paul isn't the Republican party and he speaks for himself..

I don't know why he is a Republican..He is a Libertarian.

He's just running as a republican...

He's a classical liberal....

The only reason why he ran as a republican is because most republicans (or voters for that matter) really don't understand classical liberalism and immediately write off libertarians as loons.

 

[Mr.Nick]

I'll help you fund your Crusade.

Go for it.

I suppose I'd rather have racists than our government using people like puppets...

In 2012 I don't believe true racism would be tolerated by society....

I myself don't like ghetto ***** but I would have no problem giving a job to a minority if he or she was qualified for the position.

I would totally discriminate against a flamboyant "taste the rainbow" homo tho.....

It's one thing to be gay and its another to be obnoxious and "in your face" about it.

I bet there are a lot of gays that are embarrassed by those sissies...

Don't let those haunting homo-erotic dreams keep you up at night.

I don't have any problem with normal gays - I have a problem with eccentric gays..

Eccentric gays are a disruption to society and they only act fucked up because they want to prove some sort of social point...

Funny how they claim they're just like the rest of us when they're ******* not...

I've met gay tea party members and they were normal people - those flamboyant loud mouthed YMCA fools are anything but normal...

I had to work with one of those idiots who was "openly gay" and this idiot was so open he constantly talked about his sexual encounters loudly and "proudly" at the work place...

The idiot only kept his job because management was too scared to fire his ass out of worries of a lawsuit..

NO company should have to worry about firing a belligerent assclown out of fear of a lawsuit.

If I talked the way he did about my personal life I would have been shit canned in two seconds - but he was gay and he gets protection because of that??

WTF...