View Poll Results: Should the public accommodations portion of the law be repealed?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 70 of 198 FirstFirst ... 2060686970717280120170 ... LastLast
Results 691 to 700 of 1973

Thread: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

  1. #691
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Poor fellows. Having to make profit. Bastards.

    No, you really don understand.
    No, I understand it fine.

    They are forced to serve others.
    They are forced to allow others on their property against their will
    They have violated no one rights by refusing service or access to their property
    You're claiming that the fact that they decided to open a business means aggression against them is fine.

  2. #692
    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 Henrin View Post
    I used the right words.
    Not really no. Read the court case.

    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.

  3. #693
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Not really no. Read the court case.
    I'm using the right words. What I said is how the clause in question is to be used. The two titles being discussed have nothing to do with it.

  4. #694
    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
    i am stating what the founders state.



    The Preamble to The Bill of Rights

    Congress of the United States
    begun and held at the City of New-York, on
    Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.

    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 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.
    Focus. It didn't end there.

    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.

  5. #695
    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 Henrin View Post
    I'm using the right words. What I said is how the clause in question is to be used. The two titles being discussed have nothing to do with it.
    Read the court case. Focus.

    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. #696
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    Read the court case. Focus.
    I'm focused just fine. The case in question did not use the clause correctly.

  7. #697
    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
    Focus. It didn't end there.
    why dont you post the rest then?

    James Madison, Report on the Virginia Resolutions

    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."

    Here is an express and solemn declaration by the Convention of the State, that they ratified the Constitution in the sense that no right of any denomination can be cancelled, abridged, restrained, or modified, by the Government of the United States, or any part of it, except in those instances in which power is given by the Constitution; and in the sense, particularly, "that among other essential rights, the liberty of conscience and freedom of the press cannot be cancelled, abridged, restrained, or modified, by any authority of the United States."
    Last edited by Master PO; 06-23-13 at 11:39 PM.

  8. #698
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Do You Agree with John Stossel?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    I agree 100% with Rand Paul, and I agree 100% with John Stossel.

    What I've found is that if there is ONE news media figure I agree with on almost all fronts, it's Stossel.

    Stossel is right. Anyone who would've kept up with private sector racism would've went belly-up over time.
    This is a sticky subject only because folks are missing the key piece to the puzzle - private sector -vs- public sector. The only way private businesses would have suffered the fall-out from consumers choosing not to patron their establishments is if consumers truly are free to make such choices on their own. This same logic applies even today. But back then during the Civil Rights era that freedom wasn't granted across the board to all consumers. The dialog between John Stossel and Megyn Kelly bore this out. Therefore, since public opinion at the time within both our society and with businessmen was "No Blacks Allowed", there's no reason to believe that private businesses who served "Whites Only" would have suffered economically before, during or immediately after the end of the Civil Rights era.

    However, Stossell, and thus, Rand Paul's argument is meant to apply to today. With that in mind, I suppose given enough public pressure, any private business that chose not to serve a polite, paying customer who met dress code and wasn't being a disruption to other customers wouldn't stay in business for very long. But therein lay the danger. If enough "White-owned" businessmen who were very influential in their communities or in politics for that matter got together and decided "No Blacks (Browns or Reds) Allowed" and they had the right forces behind them (as in law enforcement), do you think the playing field would be level?

    Think that one through because that's exactly how racism was allowed to continue as it did during the Civil Rights era where "Whites Only" was the social and business norm.

    All things being equal, I believe a private business should be allowed to serve whomever it pleases as long as that customer is a paying customer who isn't being a disruption in their establishment. But that's about as far as I'm willing to go with this argument because it's to easy to re-open that door to racism just because one wishes to hide behind "freedom of choice". To that, my vote is "No" to repealing the public accommodations portion of the Civil Rights law. You tear that down and you're re-opened the door to wide spread bigotry.
    Last edited by Objective Voice; 06-23-13 at 11:43 PM.
    "A fair exchange ain't no robbery." Tupac Shakur w/Digital Underground

  9. #699
    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
    why dont you post the rest then?

    James Madison, Report on the Virginia Resolutions

    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."

    Here is an express and solemn declaration by the Convention of the State, that they ratified the Constitution in the sense that no right of any denomination can be cancelled, abridged, restrained, or modified, by the Government of the United States, or any part of it, except in those instances in which power is given by the Constitution; and in the sense, particularly, "that among other essential rights, the liberty of conscience and freedom of the press cannot be cancelled, abridged, restrained, or modified, by any authority of the United States."
    Didn't stop there either. We have over 200 years of history.

    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.

  10. #700
    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
    Didn't stop there either. We have over 200 years of history.
    still in denial..

Posting Permissions

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