In Rand Paul's world, does a private doctor get to refuse treatment to a black man?

[fhl]

Here's a partial list of organizations that are exclusively for blacks.
Surprise! Blacks get to exclude whites in gov't, also. Does anyone remember when the white dem congressman was told to take a hike by the congressional black caucus because he was white?

http://www.littleafrica.com/resources/organizations.htm

 

[OPTIONAL777]

States are not fully sovereign. They gave up the type of sovereignty when they joined the United States.

I am all for everyone taking an oath to prevent discrimination, and then the federal government enforcing that oath in the business practices of public business.

The racists can have their own private segregated clubs...just not open to the public clubs...

Let them be racists all they want behind closed doors with their klannish buddies...that's not illegal.

However, it is illegal to deny service in a public business, even if the ownership of that business is private.

Someone doesn't like that?

Open up a private members only club for whites only.

"No politician has ever firmly set out to do what they believe in."

Stawman. It may be true that Rand has not, nor will he firmly set out to do what he believes in...but that is not the issue at hand.

"So who really cares about what Rand says and feels? He's one man."

He is running for the United States Senate...that is why everyone who is an American should care...

Quote from PatternRec:

It's fun for you isn't it?

Let's say the food service industry license required practitioners to take an oath. In that oath, it prevents discrimination.

Which ethical standard are they governed by?

See where this is going and why harping on Rand's statements is silly? It's easy to overcome. Especially when you factor in state's sovereignty. Something Libertarians are all for.

So let's say by some miracle Rand took control of the federal government and abolished civil right's laws applicability to private enterprise. So what?

Why?

He would have to uphold state sovereignty. And states would be able to institute their own anti-discrimination laws applicable to private enterprise. So if there are a few lone states that wish to take a purely libertarian view like Rand's, those states would face all sorts of pressure and competition from states that were more protective of civil rights. They likely wouldn't be able to uphold that libertarian view in the face of it. Throw in the rest of the Western world's opinion...

So who really cares about what Rand says and feels? He's one man.

Get over it already. No politician has ever firmly set out to do what they believe in. Government systems are one of compromise.

 

[OPTIONAL777]

How would those wrong actions make Rand's position right?




In any reasonable world, how would the wrong of someone else make someone else and their wrong thinking right?

Quote from fhl:

Here's a partial list of organizations that are exclusively for blacks.
Surprise! Blacks get to exclude whites in gov't, also. Does anyone remember when the white dem congressman was told to take a hike by the congressional black caucus because he was white?

http://www.littleafrica.com/resources/organizations.htm

 

[fhl]

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

How would those wrong actions make Rand's position right?




In any reasonable world, how would the wrong of someone else make someone else and their wrong thinking right?

Personally, I would agree with Paul, that private people should be able to associate with anyone they want without being compelled by the gov't to do otherwise.

But if they're going to make laws and a big deal out of it, it should apply to everyone, not just whites.

 

[OPTIONAL777]

Yes, the law should be applied equally, and when it is not legal recourse can be taken.

So you agree with Paul that a privately owned business that is open to the public has the right to refuse service on the basis of race?

Quote from fhl:

Personally, I would agree with Paul, that private people should be able to associate with anyone they want without being compelled by the gov't to do otherwise.

But if they're going to make laws and a big deal out of it, it should apply to everyone, not just whites.

 

[phenomena]

Funny how it doesn't seem to work that way...

No better than Jim Crow laws....

Racism is fine, as long as it's against whites.... ( or "crackers" as optional calls them)

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

Yes, the law should be applied equally, and when it is not legal recourse can be taken.

So you agree with Paul that a privately owned business that is open to the public has the right to refuse service on the basis of race?

 

[OPTIONAL777]

So you agree with Paul that a privately owned business that is open to the public has the right to refuse service on the basis of race?

Quote from phenomena:

Funny how it doesn't seem to work that way...

No better than Jim Crow laws....

Racism is fine, as long as it's against whites.... ( or "crackers" as optional calls them)

 

[Hombre]

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

So you agree with Paul that a privately owned business that is open to the public has the right to refuse service on the basis of race?

Business or a customer have a right to engage or not to engage in the business with whom they deem suitable based on their biz model . Even if they are white, black, yellow, brown , disabled , Mexican or stupid .
So if a customer is not deemed a good customer for the business they have a right to refuse him/her , Even if he is white, black, yellow, brown disabled,Mexican or stupid .
If the business is not convenient or doesn't offer good service, the customer has the same right not to enter into any contract with that business, even if it is owned by white, black, yellow, brown, Mexican or stupid.

It has nothing to do with race .

I realize that you just want to provoke people and you are not capable to be reasonable but i just decide to post this anyway .

 

[OPTIONAL777]

"So if a customer is not deemed a good customer"

So how do you deem someone is not a good customer based on the color of their skin?

Quote from Hombre:

Business or a customer have a right to engage or not to engage in the business with whom they deem suitable based on their biz model . Even if they are white, black, yellow, brown , disabled , Mexican or stupid .
So if a customer is not deemed a good customer for the business they have a right to refuse him/her , Even if he is white, black, yellow, brown disabled,Mexican or stupid .
If the business is not convenient or doesn't offer good service, the customer has the same right not to enter into any contract with that business, even if it is owned by white, black, yellow, brown, Mexican or stupid.

It has nothing to do with race .

I realize that you just want to provoke people and you are not capable to be reasonable but i just decide to post this anyway .

 

[Hombre]

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

"So if a customer is not deemed a good customer"

So how do you deem someone is not a good customer based on the color of their skin?

You always disregard the color of the skin, silly.
If the customer is a pain in the ass. like yourself, one can refuse to enter into contract with him/you based on the major pain in the ass criteria.
That is why you are not deemed a good customer. No matter how much people trying to explain to you the facts, you are never to be satisfied, you will be complaining no matter what and therefore you are a prime candidate for beeing refused a service.

It doesn't matter what color of skin you are, you are a major pain in the ass so get out and never come back !!!
Get it ?
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE RACE .

Many people , including yourself , with high scores on the major pain in the ass scale are hiding behind their color of skin or their origin .
You know, the same thing you are doing here ....based on the color of the skin... based on the color of the skin.... based on the color of the skinn.... based on the color of the skin...