Shooting the messenger doesn't do anything to bolster your argument.It's disheartening to think that the majority of people in this forum agree with Stossel someone whom sold out journalistic integrity for personal gain years ago.
He's very open with his bias, as opposed to other reporters.
Since he jumped ship to FOX News he can say whatever he wants you mean.
Since he jumped ship to FOX News he can say whatever he wants you mean.
Most reporters say whatever they want and don't discose their bias. Look at Katie Couric, Meredith Vieira, etc.
- It is completely legal to discriminate. All that is required is to call it a "private" club. So why doesn't this happen more often and I am curious what the people that believe the CRA should stand feel about "private" clubs.
- People will discriminate regardless. Very few situations exist that a person could not be refused service for **some** reason. Retail sales would be an exception. In the case of the house that was presented earlier, all the home owners had to do was refuse the first offer and keep their mouth shut to the reason.
- Why would a person want to frequent a place they aren't welcome? No law exists that requires a proprietor to make a customer "comfortable". If a person goes in place and made to feel "out of place" chances are they would leave and/or not come back to that business.
- Isn't it interesting that the only time it's legal to ask a person race is if it's required by the government?
Ask Rosa Parks why she wanted to sit in the front of the bus. Be prepared to listen to her answer.
Civil Rights Laws are needed. They serve a worthy purpose. And further, they aren't goin' anyplace.
That's different. Public services should not have any favoritism based on race. They're publically owned. It's different with private business.
In the public, not the private sector.
What rights would those be, exactly?Also it's disheartening that people would agree to get their rights taken away.
Ok so then you are saying because the bus system out in the Northern Kentucky area is private owned, they should be allowed to refuse whoever they want then?
Also my comment on Stossel had nothing to do with him being a libertarian and more to do with the fact that he's a whore just like (most) everyone else on Fox News.
Ok so then you are saying because the bus system out in the Northern Kentucky area is private owned, they should be allowed to refuse whoever they want then?
Also my comment on Stossel had nothing to do with him being a libertarian and more to do with the fact that he's a whore just like (most) everyone else on Fox News.
That's different. Public services should not have any favoritism based on race. They're publically owned. It's different with private business.
What rights would those be, exactly?
The right to buy a candy bar where I want?
Seriously though what is it with Paul family supporters and wanting to relegalize racism?
No, no. The poster asked "Why would anyone want to go where they're not wanted?"
You don't have that right, with or without the CRA.The right to buy a candy bar where I want?
Seriously though what is it with you and the hyperbole? Racism is legal.Seriously though what is it with Paul family supporters and wanting to relegalize racism?
You don't have that right, with or without the CRA.Seriously though what is it with you and the hyperbole? Racism is legal.
That's right Paul supporters don't like to be called racist I forgot, they like to be called "nationalist":
That's just more hyperbole.
I accept your surrender.That's right Paul supporters don't like to be called racist I forgot, they like to be called "nationalist":
Cat got your tongue then?
Cat got your tongue then?
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?