View Poll Results: Should the public accommodations portion of the law be repealed?

Voters
123. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    64 52.03%
  • No

    56 45.53%
  • I don't know

    3 2.44%
Page 154 of 198 FirstFirst ... 54104144152153154155156164 ... LastLast
Results 1,531 to 1,540 of 1973

Thread: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

  1. #1531
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    That's not the right in question. What I may not be denied service for is. And the business owner knew and accepted these conditions when he went into business. Is not a secret. You are just way of on how you see this.
    again you have DODGED THE QUESTION....do you have a right to be served?....if so...... state this please....like this on you next post.. [ a person has the right to be served]

    show me were in america, a person waves this rights when he enters the business world.

    how does a person lose rights on his own property?

    these laws you continue to justify...... again are statutory laws.

    Statutory laws are subordinate to the higher constitutional laws of the land.

    Statutory law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  2. #1532
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:34 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,797

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by pbrauer View Post
    I ran an identical poll almost three years ago, since DP has added a significant number of users I thought I would try it again.

    In May 2010 Rand Paul announced his candidacy for U.S. Senate from Kentucky on MSNBC's The Rachel Maddow Show. On the show he got into some trouble because he said he wouldn't support the "public accommodations" portion of the Civil Right Act of 1964.

    That led up to this confrontation with Megyn Kelly on Fox where he said he favors repeal of that part of the law.

    Should the public accommodations portion of the law be repealed?

    Yes
    No
    I don't Know
    of course not
    i like my government protecting my rights and freedoms and the rights and freedoms of my fellow americans.
    empowering bigotry, racism, discrimination, and misogynists etc is simply wrong and has no place in this country.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  3. #1533
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    again you have DODGED THE QUESTION....do you have a right to be served?....if so...... state this please....like this on you next post.. [ a person has the right to be served]

    show me were in america, a person waves this rights when he enters the business world.

    how does a person lose rights on his own property?

    these laws you continue to justify...... again are statutory laws.

    Statutory laws are subordinate to the higher constitutional laws of the land.

    Statutory law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    No I'm not. You're trying to side step the issue, and I won't play along. I stated clearly what the "right" is. Any reasonably intelligent person can follow what I am and am not saying is a right. The right s not to be discriminated against according to race, gender or religion. That is the right I see.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  4. #1534
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    No I'm not. You're trying to side step the issue, and I won't play along. I stated clearly what the "right" is. Any reasonably intelligent person can follow what I am and am not saying is a right. The right s not to be discriminated against according to race, gender or religion. That is the right I see.
    All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

    so you saying you have a right, to not be discriminated against by me?...........so therefore my right to association does not exist then according to you....am i am forced by law to serve you against my will, even though discriminate is not a crime.

    can you show me were the USSC [constitutional law] has ruled you have a right not to be discriminated against by a person /business?
    Last edited by Master PO; 07-10-13 at 05:02 PM.

  5. #1535
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

    so you saying you have a right, to not be discriminated against by me?...........so therefore my right to associ.ation does not exist then according to you.
    Your free to do your own associating. But the business you are responsible for can't discriminate. It was run through congress, signed into law, and upheld by the courts. There is no Constitutional violation.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  6. #1536
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Your free to do your own associating. But the business you are responsible for can't discriminate. It was run through congress, signed into law, and upheld by the courts. There is no Constitutional violation.
    so congress can make federal laws, which violate standing rights..... right to association, and right to property, and the 13th amendment of the constitution.

    where did the federal government, get authority over people and business, becuase i dont see any powers of government over them in our constitution, .....the constitution states"the people will vote" and that's all.....where is this government power, ...can you show it to me .

    THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its [federal]powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.


    james madison--Here is the most satisfactory and authentic proof that the several amendments proposed were to be considered as either declaratory or restrictive, and, whether the one or the other as corresponding with the desire expressed by a number of the States, and as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government.
    We, the delegates of the people of Virginia, duly elected in pursuance of a recommendation from the General Assembly and now met in Convention, having fully and freely investigated and discussed the proceedings of the Federal Convention, and being prepared, as well as the most mature deliberation hath enabled us, to decide thereon--DO, in the name and in behalf of the people of Virginia declare and make known that the powers granted under the Constitution, being derived from the people of the United States, may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression; and that every power not granted thereby remains with them, and at their will. That, therefore, no right of any denomination can be cancelled, abridged, restrained, or modified, by the Congress, by the Senate or House of Representatives, acting in any capacity, by the President, or any department or officer of the United States, except in those instances in which power is given by the Constitution for those purposes; and that, among other essential rights, the liberty of conscience and of the press cannot be cancelled, abridged, restrained, or modified, by any authority of the United States."

  7. #1537
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    so congress can make federal laws, which violate standing rights..... right to association, and right to property, and the 13th amendment of the constitution.

    where did the federal government, get authority over people and business, becuase i dont see any powers of government over them in our constitution, .....the constitution states"the people will vote" and that's all.....where is this government power, ...can you show it to me .

    THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its [federal]powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.


    james madison--Here is the most satisfactory and authentic proof that the several amendments proposed were to be considered as either declaratory or restrictive, and, whether the one or the other as corresponding with the desire expressed by a number of the States, and as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government.
    We, the delegates of the people of Virginia, duly elected in pursuance of a recommendation from the General Assembly and now met in Convention, having fully and freely investigated and discussed the proceedings of the Federal Convention, and being prepared, as well as the most mature deliberation hath enabled us, to decide thereon--DO, in the name and in behalf of the people of Virginia declare and make known that the powers granted under the Constitution, being derived from the people of the United States, may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression; and that every power not granted thereby remains with them, and at their will. That, therefore, no right of any denomination can be cancelled, abridged, restrained, or modified, by the Congress, by the Senate or House of Representatives, acting in any capacity, by the President, or any department or officer of the United States, except in those instances in which power is given by the Constitution for those purposes; and that, among other essential rights, the liberty of conscience and of the press cannot be cancelled, abridged, restrained, or modified, by any authority of the United States."
    Again, you can repeat this a million times, but the court ruled that it doesn't violate the constitution. My suggestion is you read to find out why.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  8. #1538
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:34 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,797

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Again, you can repeat this a million times, but the court ruled that it doesn't violate the constitution. My suggestion is you read to find out why.
    like SOME other libertarians theres no interest in FACTS and REALITY, only opinions and theories.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  9. #1539
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    01-27-15 @ 11:37 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,247

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    Joe the Person can do what he wants on Joe the Person's property.

    Joe's Diner and Joe the Cook/Waiter/Cashier that works at that Diner has to follow the rules of Joe's Diner or Joe's Diner can be fined and/or it's license as a business revoked.
    And from where do these other people acquire the authority over Joe such that they can require he ask their permission to engage in trade on his own property?

  10. #1540
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    01-27-15 @ 11:37 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,247

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    Joe gave them that authority by entering into his business contract with the community.
    If Joe did indeed assent to a contract, then I can understand that he would be bound by the terms of the contract he signed.

    However, if he didn't assent to such a contract, then obviously no such contract exists.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •