• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights Act

Do you agree with John Stossel?


  • Total voters
    51
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

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.
Shooting the messenger doesn't do anything to bolster your argument.
 
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

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.

Also it's disheartening that people would agree to get their rights taken away. Where would it stop? A hospital or pharmacy could refuse a certain race or whatever service. What if it was a white guy in a Hispanic neighborhood? I guess buses should refuse to seat mexicans, could make black bus, white bus, mexican bus. It would be counterproductive to our nation to repeal anything in the Civil Rights Act and quite simply, it is all rooted within bigotry and not a legitimate reason.

If one of you can give me a legitimate reason for why you wouldn't serve a black guy go right ahead. I'm all ears.
 
Last edited:
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

Since he jumped ship to FOX News he can say whatever he wants you mean.

He wanted to make his own show, tailored to libertarian thinking.
It doesn't matter where he does it, as long as he does it.

It's great because we don't have a whole lot out there for us.
 
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

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.
 
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

Most reporters say whatever they want and don't discose their bias. Look at Katie Couric, Meredith Vieira, etc.

We get two or three tv shows and people complain about bias with our crew. :doh
 
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

  • 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?

  • It's not just a matter of calling something a "private club." Requiring a liquor license, as an example, will most often disqualify an establishment from exemption under the Federal statute -- as well as the fact that many states have enacted civil rights laws stricter than those of the Federal government.
  • Re the house example, you're right. Had the seller not talked about his reasoning, it would have been difficult to prove. Who knows whether or not HUD would have pursued it. It might depend on what the final sale price was that the seller DID accept.
  • 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.
 
Last edited:
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

Ask Rosa Parks why she wanted to sit in the front of the bus. Be prepared to listen to her answer.

That's different. Public services should not have any favoritism based on race. They're publically owned. It's different with private business.

Civil Rights Laws are needed. They serve a worthy purpose. And further, they aren't goin' anyplace.

In the public, not the private sector.
 
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

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.

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.
 
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

Also it's disheartening that people would agree to get their rights taken away.
What rights would those be, exactly?
 
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

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?

If they contract with the state, county or city, no they can't.

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.

He's a pretty tough cookie to debate and regularly tries to take his political adversaries one on one, he also allows both sides to present their case.

I'd say he's more fair than anyone else on tv.
 
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

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?

Yup. And if they do, people will stop riding and another non-racist company can scoop up the market.

Though HG makes a good point. If it's a government granted monopoly, then they shouldn't be able to.

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.

Why is he a whore besides the fact that you don't like him?
 
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

That's different. Public services should not have any favoritism based on race. They're publically owned. It's different with private business.

No, no. The poster asked "Why would anyone want to go where they're not wanted?"
 
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

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?
 
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

The right to buy a candy bar where I want?

Seriously though what is it with Paul family supporters and wanting to relegalize racism?

You can't make bigotry illegal.
That's a thought crime and it's dumb.
 
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

No, no. The poster asked "Why would anyone want to go where they're not wanted?"

If it's a public serivce, all races own it and everyone must use it, hence allowing racism here is absurd and unethical.
 
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

I'm not sure what my stance is now. Everybody is bringing good points to the table.
I may be naive but I believe racism is mostly in the past.
John brought up a great point about the mother trying to buy formula. It's cruel to refuse to sell a mother formula. Yes, I support private property rights but what kind of douchebag would do that?
I didn't think the law was the reason why people don't discriminate. I thought racism is dying out and that's the reason.
 
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

Racism is there, people are just scared to show how racist they are. I think every single person alive has some kind of prejudice just most of us aren't straight dicks and won't let that cloud our judgement of what is right or wrong. We have these laws though, because we still got plenty of dicks out there.
 
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

The right to buy a candy bar where I want?
You don't have that right, with or without the CRA.
Seriously though what is it with Paul family supporters and wanting to relegalize racism?
Seriously though what is it with you and the hyperbole? Racism is legal.
 
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

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":
ronpauldonblack.jpg
 
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

That's right Paul supporters don't like to be called racist I forgot, they like to be called "nationalist":
ronpauldonblack.jpg
I accept your surrender.
 
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

Cat got your tongue then?

If you don't believe in the freedom to have and express ugly thoughts, you don't believe in freedom.

If you don't believe in the freedom to associate with others on whatever basis you wish (if they'll have you), even if it's those ugly thoughts, then you don't believe in freedom.
 
Re: John Stossel called for repeal of public accommodations section of Civil Rights A

Why the heck are you bashing Ron Paul?

His ideas actually help the poor, save the economy and ensure our freedom.

Ron Paul is one of tge few politicians that actually care about us.
 
Back
Top Bottom