mcgraw_wv

Many time before I have been asked on this message board to explain Ron Paul's stance on how he could possibly be against the civil rights movement and how that would lead to restaurants for whites and restaurants for others, etc...

Last night, laying in bed watching Seinfeld, I saw the perfect clip to explain his position.

Seinfeld On Abortion - YouTube

You see Ron Paul claims that with the amendment, you didn't get rid of racism, you simply made people hide their ism whatever that may be. As you see in the above clip there was a restaurant full of people willing to hand the owner hundreds of dollars to enjoy his services, all while not knowing that he supports a view point that is completely opposite of their own.

What this achieves is not equality or fairness, what this does is hides the fact that when you enjoy the services of a restaurants owner who is racist, you support his causes, becuase they take those profits to support their view points.

In the modern movement, imagine a restaurant owner who despises Gay people. The government tells him them they must allow Gay people in their place of business, so they do, they accept in total 10,000 in net sales from homosexuals over the course of a month, they then take that profit and donate to legislators to ensure that Gay marriage remains illegal.

In the end, the gay couple enjoy the supposed "right" to eat at an establishment which privately despises them, they hand their money over in exchange for services which results in more support for anti gay propaganda...

Wouldn't it have been easier if the owner could just state his views on a Door? And then the consumer has all the information and power to decide, "Do I want to support this establishment which doesn't allow Gay to easy here"

Sure some people would be attracted to that idea, many would shun the business all together, and the most likely result is that business would be at such a competitive disadvantage that they would not be able to compete with other restaurants near by who do not openly discriminate.

Harry Boy

Why does this new age America tolerate same culture neighborhoods, why do we still have "china towns" why do we allow "black neighborhoods" why do we allow "italian neighborhoods" etc etc, why are "Chinese Restaurants" still allowed why are "Italian Restaurants" still allowed why aren't Swedish people called "Sweden Americans" why aren't Greeks called "Greek Americans" why don't we ever see American Indians running elevators on TV Commercials, why are all of these racist things allowed to exist in our new Slobbering American Society.

__________________
Harry Boy (Genius)

In The Absence Of Law And Order Society Will Surely Destroy Itself

chicowalker

So, ron paul's argument is that he actually wants to help those who would be discriminated against?

I assumed he took a more libertarian position -- that the owners should have the right to do what they want with their businesses. That's a far more principled position, imo, and a more defensible one.

One interesting thing about your / Paul's point is that many people get upset when boycotts are organized over social issues. Gays did boycott businesses here in SoCal for helping defeat gay marriage, and a lot of folks on the right screamed foul, that somehow business and politics must be kept separate (when it suits them, obviously).

I'm not saying you or Paul would feel the same.

mcgraw_wv

He doesn't want to help or do anything for anyone, including allowing people to do with their business what they wish too, which would include discriminating.


He and I are 100% confident that if a business came out and said "We will not do business with Gay people", that in the long run, the people who run from doing business with them will so dramatically outnumber the people who flock to do business that the business could not survive.

Imagine WellsFargo coming out and saying they refuse to do business with Latinos.

Some people will flock to do business with them, many many more people in my opinion would leave them as they would not want to support that racist viewpoint.

Ron Paul does not want to force businesses, also known as Private Property, into doing anything they don't want to do.

It's a Freedom message.

I was simply using that Clip to showcase what the consumer facing effect of that stance would produce. A valuable bit of information to help you determin where you want to spend your money at.

chicowalker

right -- as I would have thought (and did say), "...a more libertarian position -- that the owners should have the right to do what they want with their businesses..."

Wolfpack

The Ron Paul detractors just can't get the understanding to sink in. He's not supporting racism, he's saying that in America you have the right to be a racist if you want to be.

And fact is that in this day and age, any business that discriminated against black people or Jews or whatever would never survive so the government intervention isn't really necessary.

chicowalker

Not sure that's true.

With gay marriage now legal in several states, we've seen businesses refusing to provide services to gay couples marrying. Maybe they'll go out of business or change their ways, but it's not clear yet.

This isn't as much of an issue, imo, when it's a non-essential business in an urban area.

But should a gas station in a rural area be able to deny service to a black family driving through, causing them to be stranded? Should blacks or gays be refused food or lodging when they are traveling, as they were 50 years ago?

Maybe the country has changed enough that those businesses would go out of business, but what if it hasn't? And even if it has, what do you do in the meantime about those blacks, gays, Jews, whoever who can't buy gas, can't get food, don't have anywhere to sleep?

I understand the principle behind what he says. I'm not sure the reality it would result in is as benign as you and mcgraw make it out to be.

scout

I lived in a number of rural towns in Texas and I can say without reservation that your theory is wrong.

Wolfpack

Oh really? What establishments down there engage in systematic discrimination? Please give some specific names of businesses and their discriminatory policies. TIA.

Patters

McGraw, we understand the ideological purity of Ron Paul and the logic behind it.

The business owners in the Bible Belt will easily respond to pressure not to serve gays, and gays will be forced to move out. In other areas, this could affect blacks, Muslims, the disabled, Latinos, and so on. It could even affect whites in some areas, though given that whites own most businesses they would probably not be hurt as much.

But, as far as your point goes, the fact is that when people integrate they tend to lose some of their ignorance and prejudice. Allowing legalized discrimination will lead to ghettoization, force minorities out of some communities, and bring us back to the time when segregation was legal, in the days of Jim Crow.