First, we need to have these laws in place because of historical experience in our republic. I do not trust mankind enough to pretend we are that much more civilized, and icertainly would not trust fanciful rhetoric when our rights are on the line. De Jure segregation did not start segregation, it later accompanied de facto segregation.True, but I believe the only ones who would be ostracized are the bigoted business owners, at least in the 21st century. While I may not think its pragmatic to remove the provision at this time, I wouldn't be surprised if we no longer 'needed' such a law in the future. Personally, I believe society (including minorities) would get along great if the law was removed now.
Basic fairness. Fairness necessary in a civil society. That which legal remedy exists for unfairness.
I could point you to a good dictionary to save time if you like. But lets start with allowing people the same service without consideration to race. That'll be enough here. But a dictionary might be something to consider.
civil fairness?, where is that in the law, and i didn't know such a thing, overrides constitutional law.
anytime, you are forced to do something against your will by others, that is involuntary servitude.
I could point you to a good dictionary to save time if you like. But lets start with allowing people the same service without consideration to race. That'll be enough here. But a dictionary might be something to consider.
Most unwritten laws do. Always have. But try to stay focused on the point I was actually making. They denied services without just cause. The behaved unfairly and those abused took legal recourse. This is proper and not unusual.
What someone considers fair or unfair is entirely subjective. Stop being a mindless liberal thinking the words fair or fairness are clearly defined.
Most unwritten laws do. Always have. But try to stay focused on the point I was actually making. They denied services without just cause. The behaved unfairly and those abused took legal recourse. This is proper and not unusual.
you you point to me, where fair is listed in the constitution?
fairness is a state of mind, ....becuase it cannot be determined, becuase what is fair to you, may not be fair to me.
Oh please. While there is a subjective nature to it, there are areas of societal agreement. This is the core of ethics, agreed upon behavior (even when it doesn't line up with one individual's personal morals).
Again, a dictionary would be helpful.
Nonsense. Taxation without representation was all about fairness. Lack of fairness is what often leads to laws. So, people do seem to recognize it.
Nonsense. Taxation without representation was all about fairness. Lack of fairness is what often leads to laws. So, people do seem to recognize it.
no....... its about taking my money, and not giving be anything in return.
so what you describe, overrides the u.s. constitution then?..........yes or no?
no....... its about taking my money, and not giving be anything in return.
Taxation without representation is not in the constitution.
Your being myopic and nit trying to never stand what's being said. Take a deep breath. People live together without ever reading the Constitution or any document and the rules if behavior hey live under dominates o matter what is written anywhere.
But you mix things up in our discussion. Ours started based on how people treat those who break social conventions or unwritten laws. They'll do that despite written laws of any kind.
Didn't say it was. Said it started the enter business, much as most unfair things do. Try to focus on what's actually being said.
What are you taking about. If you serve them, they pay. No one suggest otherwise.
If you talk about you breaking he law, that's a penalty and not a service.
i clearly stated, that if a crime has been committed, you can be forced into involuntary servitude.
nothing is higher than the supreme law of the land, and it states what you wish done, .....as unconstitutional.
So you're simply saying crying about fairness starts the push for laws? I would imagine anyone at all aware of liberals is aware of that.
Yes, the foundering fathers were liberal.
You really should try to comprehend.
lets make it a simple question then.....if you enter my business, and i tell you ..."get out of my shop" i am not serving you , becuase i just dont want to....because your black brown, gay, red, blue , whatever my reason.
1) do you have a right to be served?
2) does government have the authority under the supreme law.... to force me to serve you?
..Classical liberals.
That has nothing to do with what I said.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?