"Civil rights" - Taken too far

[JohnyMac]

Great thoughts Sledge.

As we all know the war between the states was not over slavery it was about states rights or does the Federal government have the right to tell states what to do. Our Federal government won and has been slowly expanding "their will" over all states for the past 150 years or so.

I do think that Texas is the only state that can secede from the United States of America legally. Check out Article 1, Section 1 of the Texas Constitution. Although it does not specifically state the state can seceded it does state that:

Texas is a free and independent State, subject only to the Constitution of the United States, and the maintenance of our free institutions and the perpetuity of the Union depend upon the preservation of the right of local self-government, unimpaired to all the States.

and then my favorite, Article 1, Section II

"All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit. The faith of the people of Texas stands pledged to the preservation of a republican form of government, and, subject to this limitation only, they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient."

[Burt Gummer]

Reading this thread restored some faith in humanity, thanks guys.

Oh and witch girl, any business who chooses to act on their own ignorant prejudices will weaken themselves financially and disappear over time through competition with it's market opponents, You won't see any more "no chinks allowed" signs on the west coast yet that used to be a big issue which dissipated before these laws were passed.

Also with your stated example where a store holds a geographical monopoly is likely because it's in an economically depressed area (side issue) Your demand for Goods/Services still remains upon his refusal. This will give an other non bigoted enterprising individual the opportunity to earn your money by providing set goods and services. Likely at a higher cost. this excess profit will make him a stronger competitor to your bigoted store owner and threaten his profit margins. and will continue to do so until he gives in or settles for less, stagnates and becomes insolvent.

And the unfairly discriminated against live happily ever after. 

[sledge]

@Sledge - what about that part in the constitution that states that any law that isnt in compliance with the constitution is void. Or something to that effect. A state cannot write unconstitutional laws.

You are correct.  No they can't.  But some states do it frequently enough, as do the Fed many times.  As mentioned, all that is required for these laws to stand is for a judge to rule in a fashion that corrupts the meaning of the words in the constitution and for the citizens of the state to accept it.  In our time, that has become the rule rather than the exception. 

I'm sure that if the founding fathers could somehow visit us today and see what has become of the nation they founded and the Government that has evolved, they would be asking themselves why they went to the trouble in the first place.

 

[JohnyMac]

Burt YOUR BACK! 

Burt has an interesting point...Why does the government have to come in on either side of an issue? Let the market decide who they will shop with. If I saw a sign up that said "We do not sell to insert ethnic/gender/religion here I wouldn't shop there. Me being a true capitalist I would sell my wares to pretty much anybody except red headed women of course. 

On another note: The minority is asking more and more for the government to step in and make the big bad bully's, (the majority), do X or Y. I can hear those minorities say, "My government will show you...You bully!"

From someone who has been on this earth for 58 years now, I have learned that YOU have to take care of the bully PERSONALY. I learned that in elementary school when the class bully was picking on me and the teacher stepped in. Yup it stopped for a minute, hour or that day however "he came back!"

I finally realized it was incumbent on me to end the bullying not the teacher (government). I did and yup got in trouble. But never had to worry about the class bully again...He moved on to the next pussy until that person got it and beat the crap out of him...Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera.

[Well-Prepared Witch]

The big problem you're not acknowledging is the extreme power of privilege.  Most people refuse to acknowledge it because it doesn't fit their personal narrative of how the world works.  Do you really think the civil rights movement would have succeeded without government intervention?  No, because the majority of the population had their privilege firmly entrenched.  Saying business will take care of it is short sighted and woefully ignorant of human nature.  Businesses aren't impartial entities, but organizations run by people - prejudiced, privileged, kind, or kooky.  You can't trust them to do right - just ask anyone who's ever worked for a big corporation.  Those mofos are downright evil.  (But, I digress.)  Businesses won't magically pop up to serve under-served markets.  Otherwise there'd be tons of business in economically depressed or high-crime areas where there's lots of need for grocery stores and clothing stores and such, which would then theoretically improve the area.  Doesn't happen.  Allowing discrimination like this is allowing people (who run businesses) to turn non-straight, non-white, non-Christian people into second-class citizens with government blessing.  It's flat out wrong and it's anti-American in every facet.

[APX808]

Ohhhh this chapter is really cool!!
Is when the libtards start calling people who think different "short sighted and woefully ignorant"

[rah45]

The big problem you're not acknowledging is the extreme power of privilege.  Most people refuse to acknowledge it because it doesn't fit their personal narrative of how the world works.

I'm going to assume you're addressing me, since you say "most" and since your inference is that if I support the idea of the market correcting itself based on the actions of individuals pursuing their own happiness, I must be "privileged." Please, elaborate on what makes me privileged.

 Do you really think the civil rights movement would have succeeded without government intervention? No, because the majority of the population had their privilege firmly entrenched.

Yes, I think it would have. It was never really given a chance purely on an economical level. A minority cannot play the game of the bully on the bully's terms. You find your strengths and apply them to his weakness(es). Since we're addressing the civil rights era, did the blacks ever completely stop purchasing products from whites in favor of investing into and developing their own industry? Not really. Could they have done so? Well, yeah. They had farms. There were black individuals who were educated enough and had the knowledge to create machinery to manufacture necessary items, enough to satisfy the everyday needs of black Americans at the time. If the white government had tried to crack down on them, they had the right as human beings to civilly disobey. They had firearms, and could defend themselves if they chose to do so if the government had attempted to bend them to its will. 

They had the power and determination, and organization under M. L. King, Jr. and the like, to accomplish what they wanted to do. They chose to go the government route. They rightfully pursued the recognition of their rights to public transportation, and the ability to effectively participate in our political system. However, they chose to go too far down that route and decided to get as much government "assistance" as they could. They, and we, are still reaping the "benefits" today.

They became used to the government being their daddy, and now the majority of them, especially their descendants, depend on it in some way. I think if they'd realized their own power, their own strength, they'd have picked themselves up by the bootstraps decades ago. They would have taken, not solicited by overreaching government authority, the lives they wanted for themselves and their children, and they would have earned a great amount of respect for doing it. "Protection for minorities" has come to mean getting a free ride on the backs of the majority who works to earn that money. There's nothing noble in this - this is where government interference, and later dependence, gets you.

Saying business will take care of it is short sighted and woefully ignorant of human nature.  Businesses aren't impartial entities, but organizations run by people - prejudiced, privileged, kind, or kooky.  You can't trust them to do right - just ask anyone who's ever worked for a big corporation.  Those mofos are downright evil.  (But, I digress.) 

No one said that businesses were impartial, or naturally good. They are based on people, and people are fallible. Oh, and you do remember that corporations would not be corporations without government, right? You seem to be countering your own point here.

Businesses won't magically pop up to serve under-served markets.  Otherwise there'd be tons of business in economically depressed or high-crime areas where there's lots of need for grocery stores and clothing stores and such, which would then theoretically improve the area.  Doesn't happen.

This makes no sense. An economically depressed area is not what we're discussing. We're discussing group A, the minority, being refused service in the local marketplace by group B, with all other variables assumed to be constant. I don't believe any logical person, from groups A, B or X, would choose to invest in an area that was dying economically unless there was some resource he could exploit. If oil was discovered in that area, for instance, any entrepreneur from any group with the appropriate knowledge and enough capital from investors to get started could begin a successful business. People in group A, if not living there already, begin to enter the area as economic opportunities become available. Entrepreneurs from group A, or from other groups who support A, could then start businesses to support A if group B still refused to support them. There will always be someone to fill in the gaps in the laissez-faire system.

 Allowing discrimination like this is allowing people (who run businesses) to turn non-straight, non-white, non-Christian people into second-class citizens with government blessing.  It's flat out wrong and it's anti-American in every facet.


"Second-class citizens?" To whom? That sounds more like weakness of character than a concrete social issue. As long as each group gets the same amount of legal/government respect and Constitutional abilities as the others, it does not matter what groups think about each other. If you're from group A, and someone from group B refuses to serve you, you have two options: 1) take your business somewhere else, or create a demand for that business from someone who WILL serve you, or 2) get butt-hurt about it, cry out for someone to come help you, and wait and see what happens. If I decide that I despise Wiccans, and convince all my buddies in my county to not serve them in their businesses, do you really want to force me to take your business anyway? You really want to HELP me continue to stay in business? How does increasing government power overall to force someone who is your enemy to let you give him your money to help him stay in business going to help you, ultimately? All this is about people getting their feelings hurt and reacting emotionally. If they were to shut the hell up, nut up, and get shit done, they could become self-sufficient economically and have vendors competing for their business.

Edited: Whew! Reading all that blue font was making my head hurt!

[Grudgie]

This is some good meat and potatoes discussion. We need to start attracting more people with non Libertarian mindsets.

[Burt Gummer]

Ok let's discuss the economically depressed & partially repressed market because I think you can tell it's the core issue here.

The big problem you're not acknowledging is the extreme power of privilege.

This economic power (really the wrong word) Influence is bestowed on any business how? Through consent of their patrons who choose to spend their money there. It really is a type of voting system.

You can't trust them to do right - just ask anyone who's ever worked for a big corporation.  Those mofos are downright evil. 

You can. Following Katrina Walmart mobilized a massive fleet of trucks with relief supplies to help the troubled area, to sell and donate. They were turned back by the military.  (oh and let's leave the Walmart hating to an other time.)

Businesses won't magically pop up to serve under-served markets.  Otherwise there'd be tons of business in economically depressed or high-crime areas where there's lots of need for grocery stores and clothing stores and such, which would then theoretically improve the area.
Doesn't happen. 

You're right, ask yourself: Why?

Allowing discrimination like this is allowing people (who run businesses) to turn non-straight, non-white, non-Christian people into second-class citizens with government blessing.  It's flat out wrong and it's anti-American in every facet.

No that's not why, There are entrepreneurs in those area's, only their activities are hampered by regulation because they need "food handlers permits" to open a taco stand. FDA inspections to sell produce. FCC accreditation to start a phone company. Gets raided by the ATF by making a tasty spirit. This reduces the available businesses centralizing the already established pool of market influence. This causes scarcity, and then legislators hamper them out of "necessity". You can't sell this on your property. Because it serves "the public". You can't say this on your property. Because it serves "the public".
They are only doing all that in your best interest you know...

Edit: Typo

[Kentactic]

Allowing discrimination like this is allowing people (who run businesses) to turn non-straight, non-white, non-Christian people into second-class citizens with government blessing.  It's flat out wrong and it's anti-American in every facet.

Are you kidding me? You must believe in white privilege too? On what planet outside left-wing extremist heads, is the listed above, the only discrimination? White, christian, straight people get it as much as anyone. Wake up please.

[crudos]

So some people think it's okay for the government of Arizona to actively promote discrimination, yet think it's not okay for a government to say you can't legally discriminate. In some ways, we (as a nation and as human beings) haven't progressed very far at all.
 

[rah45]

So some people think it's okay for the government of Arizona to actively promote discrimination, yet think it's not okay for a government to say you can't legally discriminate. In some ways, we (as a nation and as human beings) haven't progressed very far at all.
 

Could you please clarify? I find your statement a bit confusing.

Arizona's legislation does not "allow" entrepreneurs to stop servicing the LGBT community. Individuals already possess that freedom if they choose to exercise it. It merely stops the government from having the authority to shut down an entrepreneur's business for acting on his personal beliefs and desires on his own private property. It shouldn't be limited to "gay" anything...it should repeal all laws penalizing private property owners who choose to operate a business on their property in the way they see fit. As long as the laws criminalizing discrimination extend only to publicly-owned property, I have no problem with them.

[Kentactic]

So some people think it's okay for the government of Arizona to actively promote discrimination, yet think it's not okay for a government to say you can't legally discriminate. In some ways, we (as a nation and as human beings) haven't progressed very far at all.
 

In my ideal America the government would have no stance at all. But the government insists on having a stance on everything and arresting anyone who dosent agree. So in this case im glad their stance is to let freedom ring. Its kinda like having no stance because there wouldn't be a law to arrest the people who disagree for once.