In Rand Paul's world, does a private doctor get to refuse treatment to a black man?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by OPTIONAL777, May 23, 2010.

  1. Where did anyone get the "right" to eat on another person's property? Does Ron Paul have a right to be in the Congressional Black Caucus? What about Lebron James playing in the women's basketball association?
     
    #131     May 26, 2010
  2. Yes you do - you said it's ok to be racist in private. And you were saying that people who wouldn't criminalize private racism were doing so because they themselves were racist. Therefore you must be racist too.

    And just here you've supported a racist law which allows racist clubs to exist. Either racism should be illegal or it shouldn't - just hiding behind closed doors doesn't make racism any more acceptable, surely? Why can't other people join the club too, isn't that their right?
     
    #132     May 26, 2010
  3. Yes, precisely. Which has little, if any difference to what is now called "Libertarianism".

     
    #133     May 26, 2010
  4. I like that people are actually acknowledging this fact. The term "liberal" was hijacked by socialists. Real liberalism based on optimal social freedom and laissez faire economics.
     
    #134     May 26, 2010
  5. Also, no one wants to acknowledge the inconvenient fact that only 1.5% of Americans owned slaves, yet 25% of free blacks owned 10 or more slaves with just over 50% owning at least one. Also that slavery was also being practiced in America before whites every showed up. It was also being practiced in Europe.
     
    #135     May 26, 2010
  6. PatternRec

    PatternRec Guest

    Now, now.

    Simply site where in the Civil Rights Act where your example of a music teacher scenario is prohibited or site case precedence.

    That's all you have to do. If you take to time to do it you will learn not only about the Civil Rights Law but also about interstate commerce law.

    You'll be surprised at what you find and where, when, and how it might actually be legal. They are a number of tactics that one can employ to "legally" discriminate. That's why you need to cite the law so you can see the loopholes.
     
    #136     May 26, 2010
  7. Yet again, lets trot this elephant in the room out. People are not noticing it. Worse, some believe that the nature of humanity has changed in the last 50 years.

    Were it not for government bayonets, most of what we see today would not be possible in terms of tolerance.
     
    #137     May 26, 2010
  8. When the views are inhumane, not serving humanity (which does include black people) then it applies to the inhumane actions of everyone equally, even communists...or even libertarians.

    The actions matter, law governs behaviors, not a political affiliation.

    A doctor can hate black people, but the ethical responsibility is to treat them is there...and if the doctor refuses on the basis of color...his license to practice should be revoked.

     
    #138     May 26, 2010
  9. "You'll be surprised at what you find and where, when, and how it might actually be legal."

    Might actually?

    Funny...

    Go ahead, open a business to the public, then deny blacks the right to be served...see what happens.

    The court will (and has) decided what will actually happen when there is discrimination on the basis of race...

    Roll the dice...take your chances on what "might actually" take place in a courtroom...

     
    #139     May 26, 2010
  10. Simply continue to demand something you are not going to get...see how that works out...

    I already know how it works out...you will huff and puff and blow the house down...

     
    #140     May 26, 2010