Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
All of those words are yours and none of them mine. You are drawing incorrect generalizations about my opinions from your own biased preconceptions.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.
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?The case law demonstrates thats clearly not the case.
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.
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.
"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."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
-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.
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.
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
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?
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.
I'm a capitalist, and a damn good one at that. And a liberal. A damn good one.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?.....
That's all you need to know.
Then, at last, we will the see violence inherent in the system.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.
You really should look into getting your medications adjusted for you there at the institution.I'm a capitalist, and a damn good one at that. And a liberal. A damn good one.What do you do for capitalism? and less intervention by government as an individual?.....
That's all you need to know.
No your not. Your a fucking 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.
I'll help you fund your Crusade.
Go for it.
Don't let those haunting homo-erotic dreams keep you up at night.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 fucks 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...
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.
Don't let those haunting homo-erotic dreams keep you up at night.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 fucks 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...
