Ron Paul 2012
- Thread starter zazahzle
- Start date
So refusing to serve someone wearing a malcom x shirt would be ok?
beardo
Well-Known Member
That might help the economy...I think I would go out and buy a couple grams of heroin is if it was legal.
Windsblow
Well-Known Member
Hell F'ing no. THough I believe your probably a moron and not a very good Capitalist if you do there is no way it would be OK.
I would serve Adolf Hitler a beer with a smile, and chat him up for a tip. If I had a largely Jewish customer base I might not feel the same way. My point was if you felt uncomfortable serving someone wearing a Malcom X shirt then it should be your right to refuse service. What about a Bin Laden shirt? Where is the line?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
i was thinking the right to refuse service would be used in cases where the customer was unruly, violent, abusive, etc.
wouldn't think it would be utilized in cases of attire, but who knows.
funny story, i once donned a kkk outfit as a high schooler so my friends could film me (not sure why, we did a lot of stupid shit). i went into a kfc to get some food and i shit you not, i was in line behind a nun.
i have never been in line behind a nun, ever. except for that day. very odd.
Windsblow
Well-Known Member
Sorry that sentence was structured improperly. I was agreeing with you that you have the right to refuse or serve anyone. But refusing some is more exeptable than refusing others. I don't agree with the double standards.
The court actually ruled that disruptive clothing is grounds for refusing admittance to a funeral. A grave yard is about as public as a bar or restaurant. It was applied to punk rockers who were dressed like freaks. If you wore a Bin Laden shirt into a redneck bar it would be disruptive and I doubt anyone would defend your right to be served while wearing it even in the courts. Malcom X is considered to a terrorist by many and represents a very negative ideal. Many people consider GWB Jr to be an evil person and when people think of them it makes them angry. If someone wears a gangster rapper shirt into an establishment isn't that sort of like supporting gangsters, robbing, and pimping? Wouldn't someone standing in the middle of McDonalds talking about robbing and pimping be disruptive? There is a huge grey area. Where does peoples right to refuse service start and the good of society by allowing everyone the same rights of usage to anothers privately owned business start?
I understood. The right to refuse has to be based on whatever personal beliefs someone holds. Ron Paul would say that the free market would sort it out. He would be right. If I refused every black person who came into my business they would go elsewhere. I would lose business and help to build my rivals. I would be harming myself more than anyone else and I wouldn't do that. Word would get out and the people that felt I was doing something wrong wouldn't shop at my store anymore.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
all VERY good questions. i think you start to answer this in your next reply (based on the personal beliefs of the owner) and i would venture to extend it into another thing you touched upon, which is if it impinges on the rights of others.
empirical evidence proves otherwise. there were plenty of shops before the civil rights act that had no problem staying in business with a 'no blacks' sign on the door.
like a lot of libertarian principles, it sounds good on paper..."the free market will sort it out". but it works out differently in reality.
sorry to be so civil. i will amp it up to increase interest at the next possibility.
beardo
Well-Known Member
I know of a business with a sign like that that was their until at least 1999, now i'm curious if it could still be their.
Windsblow
Well-Known Member
I disagree.... How did the Civil right movement come about. It came about bacause the majority of the country (or market of ideas) decided they wanted it. Laws are created by people and the Government is just people, run by people. Nothing in this country happens unless the market place of ideas decides that it is going to happen. The civil right act was not a bill passed in the dark of night. It was passed with support of the vast majority of the country.
We don't live in a dictatorship where one paternalistic being decides what is good for us. We as a nations do.
Free Market principles (thought not perfect and ideally manifested) made the civil rights movement happens.
So whether or not people stayed in business during a time of segregation doesn't prove that market forces won't decide winners and loser. Because it always does. Market forces are inescapable.
Libertarians don't rely on paper theory policy, quite the opposite. Statist poltics like the American left and right rely on martini napkin theory. We, as libertarians, rely on docunmented behaviors of history and a knowledge of how the laws of nature work and then try to obey them.
To deny that market forces don't determine just about everything, especially socially developed constructs such as institutionalized segregation. Is to believe in, what I think, is nothing more than an all powerful and mystical flying spaghetti moster.
londonfog
Well-Known Member
clearly you need to learn more about Malcom X after his pilgrimage to Mecca.
londonfog
Well-Known Member
Let it happen to you and then tell me if you feel the same way
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
a "no lying thieves" sign on the door would have the desired effect.
londonfog
Well-Known Member
What case was this ?????
deprave
New Member
Denzel Washington =! Malcom X
londonfog
Well-Known Member
Denzel did a great job in the movie, but I would suggest "The Autobiography of Malcolm X" by Malcolm X, Alex Haley ....That would give you a better idea of the man
Similar threads
