Originally Posted By ecdc >>Perhaps in a small town things like this can be generally known, but those are precisely the situations where a "we don't like your kind here" situation is most likely to develop.<< Bingo. Ironically, in many parts of the south, the exact opposite of what DAR and Rand Paul are saying would happen. Businesses that provided services to whites and blacks would be boycotted by whites until they refused to provide services to blacks. My friend is writing the history of the Emmett Till case. I really don't think people understand just what the south was like in this country. After Emmett was murdered and his body discovered in the Tallahatchie river (after whistling at a white woman in Money, Mississippi), reporters descended on Sumner for the trial. Locals did not understand why this case attracted so much attention. One commented, "That river's full of n***ers, why you here for this one?" They thought this was a local matter and that no one had any business telling them what to do - including murdering fourteen-year-old black boys.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>And, widespread knowledge of the discriminatory practices will not prevent it if a majority of people agree with it. DAR, are you okay with this?<< This is vintage DAR, and it's common among a lot of conservatives: An inability to see the obvious line from point A to point B. DAR says he thinks businesses have a right to discriminate (he said so directly in post 16, though then he may have tried to backtrack) but then he says he doesn't want a return to 50s-style Jim Crow and segregation. Point A, which DAR supports, leads directly to point B, which DAR doesn't support (and I wholeheartedly believe him and do not think he's a racist, his tantrum aside). Is it really unreasonable to point that out, as I did? We see this in a lot of topics these days, and it goes back to Dabob2's point on why libertarianism doesn't work. People say they think that insurance companies shouldn't be able to exclude for pre-existing conditions, but then they say they don't think government should be able to regulate them. You're holding two contradictory thoughts: Man up and stake out a position - what's the lesser evil, denying people coverage or government regulation?
Originally Posted By DAR You know what I'm not going to change my posting style. You don't like how I say things, how I see things, that's your problem not mine.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>You know what I'm not going to change my posting style. You don't like how I say things, how I see things, that's your problem not mine.<< You're obviously more than welcome to post however you like. But you probably shouldn't throw a tantrum and call people names for things they never did, like calling you a racist, when they point out that your posting style is logically inconsistent.
