Senator Rand Paul supports de-crim for Cannabis

[UncleBuck]

Your wife must be so proud...

we just got really high and watched pineapple express and then fucked. now i'm off to the store to pick up munches while we watch OPB.

life is so tough. have fun sleeping alone in your trailer again tonight!

 

[ginwilly]

*altar

central government played a strong role in slapping the south around when they wanted to be racist dicks, i support that. make those bigoted inbreeds follow the constitution.

doesn't mean we worship central government, we just recognize that it has a place.

People thinking like you, that the central government has this role, is what created the racist south to begin with. You act like people in the south would still be beating darkie if it weren't for the government. Slavery should have never been allowed when we so eloquently state that we hold certain truths to be self-evident, that ALL men are created equal.

Besides, if a business in town was allowed to discriminate in whatever racist, homophobic, etc way I would want to know so I could avoid doing business with them. Your good, but wrong on so many level intentions does not allow us this very important societal lesson. You allow this racist to flourish by pretense.

 

[UncleBuck]

Besides, if a business in town was allowed to discriminate in whatever racist, homophobic, etc way I would want to know so I could avoid doing business with them.

yay!

you could feel happy about doing something principled! meanwhile, the discriminated parties would be deprived the same opportunities as you with no legal recourse!

stupid argument dude. you're saying that you want racists to be allowed to deny people services.*

 

[ginwilly]

Hey Buck, why don't we just skip ahead to the part where you explain why one group of people based on skin color need "special laws" that other people based on skin color do not need has nothing to do with their skin color and anyone who disagrees with you is racist.

 

[NLXSK1]

we just got really high and watched pineapple express and then fucked. now i'm off to the store to pick up munches while we watch OPB.

life is so tough. have fun sleeping alone in your trailer again tonight!

z

Pineapple express sucked... kind of like your life...

 

[ginwilly]

yay!

you could feel happy about doing something principled! meanwhile, the discriminated parties would be deprived the same opportunities as you with no legal recourse!

stupid argument dude. you're saying that you want racists to be allowed to deny people services.*

Of course I do. You argue for the same thing but only if the racist is in a protected group and the victim is not. I think before all of us can be truly equal in a society we have to have equal laws.

Do you give the government more credit than Robinson, Dr. King etc? You realize our government kept racism alive I hope. Society was breaking down barriers while government protected them. Do you actually believe Alabama needs a law to let the Dodger black teammates sleep in the same hotel as their white teammates? Serious question, is that really how you feel?

Buck thinks Usher couldn't stay in the same hotel in Atlanta as his suit girl because of his color without Title II. Why are you so bigoted man?

 

[Dr Kynes]

*altar central government played a strong role in slapping the south around when they wanted to be racist dicks, i support that. make those bigoted inbreeds follow the constitution. doesn't mean we worship central government, we just recognize that it has a place.

"those bigoted inbreeds..." how non-discriminatory of you. you just made the point clear. you can be as racist bigoted and hateful as you like as long as the hate is directed at those deemed acceptable to hate. and you dont even recognize it when i tumbles from your own lips despite appointing yourself the arbiter of who is and is not a racist on this dope forum. so much irony, it hurts.

 

[ginwilly]

"those bigoted inbreeds..." how non-discriminatory of you. you just made the point clear. you can be as racist bigoted and hateful as you like as long as the hate is directed at those deemed acceptable to hate. and you dont even recognize it when i tumbles from your own lips despite appointing yourself the arbiter of who is and is not a racist on this dope forum. so much irony, it hurts.

Buck doesn't realize when I saw race riots and tanks in the street slapping the public down, I was living in Michigan. Chicago and Boston aren't in the south either. The true shift in this country that happened in the 60's was in spite of the government, not because of it, or quite possibly it was because of it but not in the way he says. He's just too bigoted to admit it. Eisenhower tried to repeal our racist laws but he was fighting the party that crafted those laws and they still had the power.

 

[Dr Kynes]

Buck doesn't realize when I saw race riots and tanks in the street slapping the public down, I was living in Michigan. Chicago and Boston aren't in the south either. The true shift in this country that happened in the 60's was in spite of the government, not because of it, or quite possibly it was because of it but not in the way he says. He's just too bigoted to admit it. Eisenhower tried to repeal our racist laws but he was fighting the party that crafted those laws and they still had the power.

shhhh dont tip over his applecart.

only the carolinas georgia virginia and arkansas have racists.

the rest of the country is populated by genteel and philanthropic urbanites awash with fellow feeling and white guilt.

yep. LA has no racial tensions at all, and niether does sanfrancisco, since they are liberal bastions.

 

[ginwilly]

shhhh dont tip over his applecart.

only the carolinas georgia virginia and arkansas have racists.

the rest of the country is populated by genteel and philanthropic urbanites awash with fellow feeling and white guilt.

yep. LA has no racial tensions at all, and niether does sanfrancisco, since they are liberal bastions.

And the only reason they are racist is because we haven't tweaked our laws just right yet.

 

[NLXSK1]

And the only reason they are racist is because we haven't tweaked our laws just right yet.

The same government that UB worships for its great benevolence was the government that forced blacks to sit in the back of the bus and segregation...

Details details...

 

[UncleBuck]

The same government that UB worships for its great benevolence was the government that forced blacks to sit in the back of the bus and segregation...

Details details...

the central government made the laws for city busses in the south?

that's plainly retarded. so in other words, no real surprise.

 

[Dr Kynes]

And the only reason they are racist is because we haven't tweaked our laws just right yet.

this is a wise thing.

 

[PurpleBuz]

"I think society has done a much better job at curbing racism than the government. What our government has done is brought about unequal laws in a country founded on equality."

I agree

"I didn't expect to find so many that worship at the alter of the central government"

I don't

The hooters example is still a Baaad example.

 

[Rob Roy]

Of course not I am myself, I can use my body for money gain, but I am not selling my body because at the end of the day I walk away as myself at least legally in this country. My point of distinction between owned property in a public business and a persons body is in specific reference to why a prostitute can rightfully refuse service to another person as opposed to a piece of property as a part of a public which can be legally owned, sold or traded.

If you are unable to see the distinctintion between a business open to the public and something that is private then just say so and lets move on.

I can see the point you are trying to make, but I can offer an argument against it.

Something that is "open" to the public ? That's relevant to ownership how? Just because a statutory law was passed, basically saying that now the government can dictate what a person does with their property doesn't change the meaning of the word ownership does it? If another entity can make decisions about your property without your permission, haven't your rights of ownership been taken or reduced?

I think the point is WHO owns that something? The public or a private individual? If a private individual owns the business, what business does anybody else have telling them what they will or will not do with it? Implicit in the word "ownership" , is the ability to make decisions about the thing owned without any outside unwanted influence.

My point is if a person owns something and another abridges their right to make decisions about the property in question, the abridgement becomes a kind of theft. It reduces the ability of the owner to use the property in ways the owner prefers to.

Here's where you miss my point - It is wrong to use your property to initiate aggression against another. It is NEUTRAL to make decisions about your property that exclude others from using it. that right is inherent and an integral part of "ownership".

When a person wants to disassociate from anybody, forcing them to associate IS an ACT OF INITIATING AGGRESSION.


You are differentiating property rights based on outcomes you perceive as good. Statutory laws that force people to associate under threat of harm are the root of alot of problems.

 

[ginwilly]

"I think society has done a much better job at curbing racism than the government. What our government has done is brought about unequal laws in a country founded on equality."

I agree

"I didn't expect to find so many that worship at the alter of the central government"

I don't

The hooters example is still a Baaad example.

Fair enough Purple, if I could take the Hooters back I would just to move the discussion along instead of focusing on one business.

I stand by my point that it's cool to discriminate as long as the discriminator/discriminatee is approved. You can't possibly NOT be a bit racist thinking one needs help that another group doesn't based solely on someone being in that group.

Buck has openly said blacks need help that no other ethnic group needs while calling people racist who disagrees with him. The irony is lost on him, I think you get it, I just used an example that redirected your focus.

 

[PurpleBuz]

I just used an example that redirected your focus.

debate tactic often used by politicians

 

[ginwilly]

debate tactic often used by politicians

wasn't on purpose, promise. I'd much rather you addressed the point that somehow racially driven laws help curtail racism.

 

[Mr Neutron]

"those bigoted inbreeds..." how non-discriminatory of you. you just made the point clear. you can be as racist bigoted and hateful as you like as long as the hate is directed at those deemed acceptable to hate. and you dont even recognize it when i tumbles from your own lips despite appointing yourself the arbiter of who is and is not a racist on this dope forum. so much irony, it hurts.

I attempted to give you a +rep on that one, gotta get to spreading it around more.

 

[UncleBuck]

It is NEUTRAL to make decisions about your property that exclude others from using it.

and property owners have that right, you dumb crybaby. it's called being a private club.

but if you are a business that claims to be open to the general public, that's a different story. we saw what happened before title II when many businesses excluded others. the outcome wasn't neutral, ya dumb fuck. the outcome harmed the discriminated parties, you myopic whiny bitch.

learn your basic history before you spout your nonsense teenage angst philosophy, mirriam.