Civil Rights Act 1964: Repeal?

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

The percentage of Americans who rob banks is miniscule to say the least. That in no way makes the case that we don't need laws against robbing banks.

What a ridiculous comparison

 

[NYcarbineer]

The percentage of Americans who rob banks is miniscule to say the least. That in no way makes the case that we don't need laws against robbing banks.

What a ridiculous comparison

Why? You don't think there are businesses in this country who practice non-discrimination because the law deters them from discrimination, just like a law against robbing banks deters people from robbing banks?

 

[NYcarbineer]

If there's no chance anymore of racial discrimination in business, why do so many conservatives keep insisting that businesses should have the right to refuse service based on race if they want to?

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

The percentage of Americans who rob banks is miniscule to say the least. That in no way makes the case that we don't need laws against robbing banks.

What a ridiculous comparison

Why? You don't think there are businesses in this country who practice non-discrimination because the law deters them from discrimination, just like a law against robbing banks deters people from robbing banks?

I think those businesses have a RIGHT to discriminate via the right to free assembly. NO ONE has a right to rob a bank.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The white nationalists here want to play favorites for themselves, and they can't.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

The white nationalists here want to play favorites for themselves, and they can't.

You don understand that if the CRA were removed blacks could discriminate against whites to , yes?

 

[JakeStarkey]

bear, the WNs think they would just kill uppity blacks, not understanding the rest of white and brown and yellow and red and black America would finish the WNs.

 

[Carla_Danger]

If that we're not a concern, if racists did not want to continue to treat blacks as second class citizens, there would be no one wanting to repeal it. Read the daily news. What is needed is to strengthen the law.

I do read the news. As a whole Americans get along great. Throw out this divisive reminder of the past. It would be a breath of fresh air, a rebirth of sorts.

This must be your first day on this racist forum.

 

[guno]

The white nationalists here want to play favorites for themselves, and they can't.

They know their time is up in America

 

[NYcarbineer]

The percentage of Americans who rob banks is miniscule to say the least. That in no way makes the case that we don't need laws against robbing banks.

What a ridiculous comparison

Why? You don't think there are businesses in this country who practice non-discrimination because the law deters them from discrimination, just like a law against robbing banks deters people from robbing banks?

I think those businesses have a RIGHT to discriminate via the right to free assembly. NO ONE has a right to rob a bank.

Since the law against such discrimination is on the

The percentage of Americans who rob banks is miniscule to say the least. That in no way makes the case that we don't need laws against robbing banks.

What a ridiculous comparison

Why? You don't think there are businesses in this country who practice non-discrimination because the law deters them from discrimination, just like a law against robbing banks deters people from robbing banks?

I think those businesses have a RIGHT to discriminate via the right to free assembly. NO ONE has a right to rob a bank.

You would have the right to rob a bank if there were no laws against it.

 

[Carla_Danger]

Civil Rights Act 1964: Repeal?

That's a really retarded question. However, I suggest you ask black folks for their opinion.

Why is a black person's opinion specifically more important to you than anyone elses you racist piece of shit.

Says the racist POS.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I think those businesses have a RIGHT to discriminate via the right to free assembly. is economic libertarian silliness, as a business operates according to the Rule of Law, which is determined by We the People, not business.

 

[Bush92]

Why would you repeal a law that is working? ...unless of course you didn't like the fact that it was working...

The law is not working in 2014 and unnecessary in 2014, unless are someone who wants to perpetuate the myth of racism.

To call racism a myth is to be willfully blind. Anyone who isn't and has spent any time in the U.S. would have to laugh in your face.

I sort of assumed that POV was lurking in this thread from the start. Racism and bigotry are painfully real, and we should fight tooth and nail to ensure our government rises above such ugliness. But the right to refuse to associate with people you don't like, no matter how inane your reasoning, is an essential freedom and it's foolish to sacrifice it for temporary convenience.

There's a big difference between who you invite into your own home and denying a certain portion of the population access to your business. If the law were to be repealed, I have no doubt we'd see the return of signs barring the entry of certain groups into some businesses. If "We the People" are to provide services and protection to these businesses, they owe all the people access in return.

You have not visited the modern South. Stop living in the past.

 

[Bush92]

I think those businesses have a RIGHT to discriminate via the right to free assembly. is economic libertarian silliness, as a business operates according to the Rule of Law, which is determined by We the People, not business.

Your investment your business. You can allow or not allow anyone you want. You will pay the consequences for losing that portion of the consumer market. If a Black man wants to ken a cafe and put up a sign "NoWhites Allowed", he should be able to.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Your business operates within the Rule of Law, no exception. Private property is not absolute in a society. However, this is a democratic society within a republican constitutional form of government. So try it.

 

[Pogo]

If that we're not a concern, if racists did not want to continue to treat blacks as second class citizens, there would be no one wanting to repeal it. Read the daily news. What is needed is to strengthen the law.

I do read the news. As a whole Americans get along great. Throw out this divisive reminder of the past. It would be a breath of fresh air, a rebirth of sorts.

"Rebirth"??
No actually I think the word you're looking for is "denialism". An essential tool for you Revisionistas I understand.

 

[Bush92]

[

I sort of assumed that POV was lurking in this thread from the start. Racism and bigotry are painfully real, and we should fight tooth and nail to ensure our government rises above such ugliness. But the right to refuse to associate with people you don't like, no matter how inane your reasoning, is an essential freedom and it's foolish to sacrifice it for temporary convenience.

The left needs victims. It is essential to your psychosis. You live in a world of haves vs. have nots. From what I see we have overcome race in this country as a major obstacle to economic success. Now it's all on the individual. To say that racism is a nation problem in this country is a myth.

Reports: S.C. restaurant refused to seat black patrons

A black South Carolina man says a restaurant in North Charleston refused to seat his party of 25 family and friends and asked the group to leave after a white customer complained of feeling threatened, according to reports....

Reports S.C. restaurant refused to seat black patrons[/QUOTE]
Your point is? So a group was acting like a bunch of fucking savages and were asked to leave. Race had nothing to do with it. Again, the psychosis of the left.

 

[Bush92]

The percentage of Americans who rob banks is miniscule to say the least. That in no way makes the case that we don't need laws against robbing banks.

Robbery is a crime, a businessman making his own decisions is not. Nice try.

 

[Bush92]

Voting Rights Act of 1965 has already been declared unconstitutional.

That's patently false. While the SC did rule against potions of the bill, it left most of it standing.

Chief Justice Roberts closes his opinion by explaining what the decision does not do. It does not overturn the Voting Rights Act's ban on discriminatory voting rules. Furthermore, it does not directly affect the preclearance requirement in Section 5, which leaves Congress the opportunity to draft new rules -- based on current conditions -- to determine which states or local governments should be subject to preclearance. The decision allows those affected by voting rule changes to sue under Section 2 of the act, but that is a longer and more expensive process that places the burden of proof on those challenging the changes.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...court-decision-on-voting-rights-act.html?_r=0

They gutted the part that gave the Act teeth. They gave an advisory decision to Pelosi and Reid in 2010 to change it. But Democrats had to pander to Black voters out of fear of losing votes.

 

[Pogo]

[

I sort of assumed that POV was lurking in this thread from the start. Racism and bigotry are painfully real, and we should fight tooth and nail to ensure our government rises above such ugliness. But the right to refuse to associate with people you don't like, no matter how inane your reasoning, is an essential freedom and it's foolish to sacrifice it for temporary convenience.

The left needs victims. It is essential to your psychosis. You live in a world of haves vs. have nots. From what I see we have overcome race in this country as a major obstacle to economic success. Now it's all on the individual. To say that racism is a nation problem in this country is a myth.

Reports: S.C. restaurant refused to seat black patrons

A black South Carolina man says a restaurant in North Charleston refused to seat his party of 25 family and friends and asked the group to leave after a white customer complained of feeling threatened, according to reports....

Reports S.C. restaurant refused to seat black patrons

Your point is? So a group was acting like a bunch of fucking savages and were asked to leave. Race had nothing to do with it. Again, the psychosis of the left.[/QUOTE]

Where the fuck do you get "acting like a bunch of fucking savages" out of that story? Waiting patiently for two hours is "acting like a bunch of fucking savages"?

Or was it the word "black"?