Should a black restaurant owner be forced to serve members of the Ku Klux Klan?

[Soca Taliban]

Two different issues, race and behavior.

Proper question:

Should a black restaurant owner be required to serve someone who's white with no other reason for refusal than that the customer is white.

Answer: It should be left up to states to decide. No federal jurisdiction for passing a law that forces the issue. I personally would choose to live in a state where the answer is yes.

How about, it should be left to the individual owner to decide whom he wants to serve. I never understand why people are willing to trade force the fed to force from the state.

 

[dean.engelhardt]

The question does not give enough details to give a correct answer. If the restaurant is open to the general public and the KKK member isn't disrupting normal business, the owner can be forced by civil court to serve him. I believe in private property rights, but I understand that when you open your property to the general public to conduct business, you enter a new legal realm.

If the restaurant is open only to member, or if the KKK shows up wearing a KKK hood, the owner has rights to boot him. The term "forced to serve" leaves much to the imagination also. Does it mean the KKK member filing a civil suit? Or does it mean the KKK member using his own physical force to get a meal.

In a more real-life question: If David Dukes walked up to a hotdog vendor on a New York City street, does the vendor have a right to refuse to serve him?

A black principal, in Ann Arbor Michigan, segregated white children so that they could not attend a field trip to see a black rocket scientist. This is a different set of circumstances, but does bring up the same set of question concerning race.

 

[furface]

I never understand why people are willing to trade force the fed to force from the state.

Then you simply don't get it. State rights are a central issue to both Ron Paul and Rand Paul's politics.

The right to live in the type of community you wish is fundamental. It's arguably more important than the much bantered "individual rights."

 

[Aratus]

assuming the more extreme factions of the k.k.k and their tendency
to hide behind masks and hoods, many black entrepreneurs may have
already served these same said individuals and not known that they
were, for the organization when being illegal is an instance of domestic
terrorism. i assume famous k.k.k members who are known by our press
corps like to publicity hound. the aspects of a confrontational situation
being a contrivance for someone with an agenda as well as the infamous
history behind the scenes has me being libertarian in an entreprenural way.

 

[Soca Taliban]

Then you simply don't get it. State rights are a central issue to both Ron Paul and Rand Paul's politics.

The right to live in the type of community you wish is fundamental. It's arguably more important than the much bantered "individual rights."

I understand it completely. State's rights??? I think you mean State privileges. Trading a federal tyrant for State tyrants still goes against the cause of liberty.

 

[TheBlackPeterSchiff]

Meeh, I never been big on states rights. So its wrong for the Federal govt to be tyrannical but ok for State govt's?

 

[furface]

Meeh, I never been big on states rights. So its wrong for the Federal govt to be tyrannical but ok for State govt's?

Move to another state. That's the way it's supposed to work. Quit trying to force your views on how government should work on other people. It's a revolting form of aggression.

 

[UtahApocalypse]

A black principal, in Ann Arbor Michigan, segregated white children so that they could not attend a field trip to see a black rocket scientist. This is a different set of circumstances, but does bring up the same set of question concerning race.

He also no longer has a job.

 

[TC95]

No. No one should be forced to serve anyone.

Ditto.

 

[Romulus]

Good question from the OP. Any establishment reserve the right to refuse service to anyone.

Even if a black man running a hot dog stand on a public sidewalk, and a skin head comes up and says, give me a hot dog, you n$88$R. He has the right to refuse his service. PERIOD.

 

[pcosmar]

Then you simply don't get it. State rights are a central issue to both Ron Paul and Rand Paul's politics.

The right to live in the type of community you wish is fundamental. It's arguably more important than the much bantered "individual rights."

I get it, but I dislike the "States Rights" term. States don't have rights. Individuals have rights.

I prefer State Sovereignty, And I believe that is a more accurate term.

 

[CharlesTX]

Brings a whole new meaning to No Shoes, No Shirt, No White Hoodies, No service.

 

[furface]

I get it, but I dislike the "States Rights" term. States don't have rights. Individuals have rights.

I prefer State Sovereignty, And I believe that is a more accurate term.

That's fair enough. You may be arguing semantics, though. From a constitutional perspective, the key word is "power."

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The issues are what these things boil down to:

1. Make abortion illegal or not - a state power

2. Make guns illegal or not - a state power

3. Make racial discrimination illegal in the private sector or not - a state power

4. Recognize same sex marriage - a state power

 

[Imaginos]

If I run a restaurant, I will not serve La Raza along with KKK.
Both of them are racists and both of them suck.
And it's my property, so suck it.

 

[pcosmar]

That's fair enough. You may be arguing semantics, though. From a constitutional perspective, the key word is "power."



The issues are what these things boil down to:

1. Make abortion illegal or not - a state power

2. Make guns illegal or not - a state power

3. Make racial discrimination illegal in the private sector or not - a state power

4. Recognize same sex marriage - a state power

Not exactly. I believe that all states agreed to and are bound by the Constitution.
There are individual protections included that the states agreed to. The 2nd amendment for example. Militia organization could vary from state to state, but the Right to bear arms is untouchable.

The only real issues of difference would be those things not specifically enumerated in the Bill of rights. Those things that are left to the states or the people. (10 amendment)

 

[furface]

Not exactly. I believe that all states agreed to and are bound by the Constitution.
There are individual protections included that the states agreed to. The 2nd amendment for example. Militia organization could vary from state to state, but the Right to bear arms is untouchable.

The only real issues of difference would be those things not specifically enumerated in the Bill of rights. Those things that are left to the states or the people. (10 amendment)

The only difference between you, neocons, and the biggest government solution for every problem liberal is the different ways you each choose to violently force your ideas onto other people.

 

[puppetmaster]

The only difference between you, neocons, and the biggest government solution for every problem liberal is the different ways you each choose to violently force your ideas onto other people.

sorry your way of base here......

 

[torchbearer]

How is that?

it forces a white owner to serve black panthers, or they are discriminating and will be sued/and or shut down by the government.

apparently the civil rights act is a one way street.

 

[furface]

sorry your way of base here......

You want to force other people to accept guns in their societies. You have basically the same philosophy as neocons who get worked up into a tizzy about how people in the Middle East live their lives.

If we ever want to mainstream libertarianism, we're going to have to get rid of this type of hypocrisy.

You can't have it both ways. Roe V Wade is wrong. DC V Heller is wrong. They're both wrong, and to say that one is right and the other is wrong is just moving around pieces in the same screwed up puzzle.

 

[Theocrat]

Another Question as Food for Thought

Should Blacks be allowed to own restaurants? If you see the inherent problem with that question, then the problem with the thread question should now be apparent.