Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
At least he's not shitting on someone elses floor....no wait.
Couple Fined For Refusing To Host Gay Wedding Shuts Down Venue
- Thread starter sheskunk
- Start date
At least he's not shitting on someone elses floor....no wait.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
I think these were from Georgia....but
- "All persons licensed to conduct a restaurant, shall serve either white people exclusively or colored people exclusively and shall not sell to the two races within the same room or serve the two races anywhere under the same license."
- "It shall be unlawful for any amateur white baseball team to play baseball on any vacant lot or baseball diamond within two blocks of a playground devoted to the Negro race, and it shall be unlawful for any amateur colored baseball team to play baseball in any vacant lot or baseball diamond within two blocks of any playground devoted to the white race."
jahbrudda
Well-Known Member
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
so you don't think higher prices, reduced competition, and barriers to entry cause harm?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
good thing the federal government stepped in to end those harmful local laws.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
comparing civil rights to nazi germany again? get some perspective, ya fucking racist.
did you forget that no one is made to interact? because no one is forced to open a business, and those that do are free to make it a private one.
i'll take that as a compliment coming from a racist idiot like you.
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
So does the person have the right to demand service when the place is closed?comparing civil rights to nazi germany again? get some perspective, ya fucking racist.
did you forget that no one is made to interact? because no one is forced to open a business, and those that do are free to make it a private one.
i'll take that as a compliment coming from a racist idiot like you.
Since in your retarded world the customer decides the business' practice after all.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
so the customer decides whether the business is a private club or not?
nope.
shitty analogy from a dumb irishman.
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
According to you the customer decides who and when the store clerk will serve.
Plus you can already refuse service for any number of bullshit reasons, just not if it's solely because they're a queer, spik, zipperhead or jiggaboo.
I disagree with all racism and take anyone's money, but forcing the racists to hide it isn't really a solution either.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
no, you must be listening to some racist dipshit's idiotic analogy.
civil rights just means no discrimination based on skin color and other protected statuses.
civil rights was a solution though. they even stopped publishing the green book the next year.
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
No, Civil Rights just means racists can't be overtly racist and thus easy to avoid.
Racism is laying on the ground dying dude, stop beating the nearly dead horse.
skunkd0c
Well-Known Member
negros are not hated like they used to be in England anyway
the modern negro is able to attain jobs and buy eye phones
so have been accepted into the community as a valid consumer of things
The type of people that are guests on the Jeremy kyle show are more despised these days and along with pedofiles are the main target of abuse from society
these Jeremy kyle people spend all their money on glue, weed and chicken nuggets
they have little economic power so are hated in today's society
pinkjackyle
Well-Known Member
if im not mistaken kikel is yiddish for circle correct ? and kikleh is little circle i believe yes ? so if someone were to say , that kikleh looks just like its kikel , would that be a compliment ?
Last edited:
Harrekin
Well-Known Member
How the fuck would I know?if im not mistaken kikel is yiddish for circle correct ? and kikleh is little circle i believe yes ? so if someone were to say , that kikleh is looks just like its kikel , would that be a compliment ?
Lol.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
You present all 3 as if they are linked perpetually. They aren't necessarily. They are also an attempt to steer the conversation away from the point I'm trying to make about who holds property rights over themselves and their justly acquired property.
Higher prices can be a result of high demand and scarce supply. They can be present in both a free market and unfree market but not always for the same reasons. For instance weed prices are high due to prohibition, other prices could be high due to seasonal variations, high demand etc. What's your point ?
Reduced competition is the epitomy of a one size fits all coercive government. They are the ultimate monoploy held in place by force. If you are concerned about reducing competition, you might consider why government never lets the free market compete with the so called "services" that government provides.
Barriers to entry can definitely result in harm. Again, most barriers to entry into a given business can be traced to regulation and other coercive government restrictions.
You still haven't answered who can use force to make another serve them? You say you did, but you really didn't. You ran as fast as a man with a load of shit in his pants can run from that question.
I say nobody should rely on force to make another serve them, if they do they are in some part enslaving the other person.
You say its okay to make some peaceful people serve others that use threats of force against them.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Actually it means a bit more than that.
It means that in typical coercive government stupidity fashion, your heroic nanny state "cured" the forced segregation that it had long enforced with forced integration. Both sides of that coin involve no free choice for people to interact on a peaceful and consensual basis do they clown shoes?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
while your model was in existence before civil rights, blacks faced higher prices, had less competitors to choose from, and were routinely barred from entry.
do you think any of these things cause harm?
post 225, repeated verbatim in multiple posts after that.
i answered your question, now it is your turn to answer mine, which you have been running from for hundreds of posts now.
racist coward.
Wait a second, the only statement you made in post 225 was this :while your model was in existence before civil rights, blacks faced higher prices, had less competitors to choose from, and were routinely barred from entry.
do you think any of these things cause harm?
post 225, repeated verbatim in multiple posts after that.
i answered your question, now it is your turn to answer mine, which you have been running from for hundreds of posts now.
racist coward.
So that was your answer to who can use force to make another serve them.
Apparently racist cowards can?
That doesn't make any sense at all, are you sure it was post 225?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
some posts are gone now. it's post 221 now.