Benjamin Franklin said:
"The US Constitution doesn't guarantee happiness, it only guarantees the pursuit of it"
I did want to follow up my previous post with regards to freedom. I spoke of the necessity to follow the law of the land, and to do what Christ told us. Turn the other cheek, walk an extra mile, give not only your coat, but your cloak as well. I stand by that, but wanted to expound on the law of the land portion. The law discussed has been upheld, wrongly in my opinion, but it is the law of the land.
In the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Congress attempted to reverse the legalized discrimination which had been predominant, throughout the south in particular. This law was passed on the backs of Republicans, who fought to overcome the Democratic filibuster that threatened to kill the legislation. One notable absence from this coalition was Senator Barry Goldwater, (R) AZ. This libertarian Republican, who went on to win the nomination for President, but got crushed in the general election, was against it. One might ask, "why would anyone support discrimination?" It wasn't supporting discrimination, but for those who misunderstand the Constitution, it was easy to point fingers,
The Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and subsequent amendments, are constrictions on the FEDERAL government. They were never intended to constrict individuals, or corporations, or whatever. Sen. Goldwater opposed the law because, it forced individuals, and companies to not discriminate based on certain classes of people. This is a key point which continues to this day.
Discrimination has become a four letter word, and yet we discriminate all the time. WE ALL DO!!! Think I am wrong? Are you pro-union, and chose to not shop at Walmart? That is discrimination. Do you choose to not buy GMO products? That is discrimination. I could go on, but I think the point is made. The problem, primarily in the South, wasn't individuals, per say. it was the law of the land, passed by, well, we won't say which party. Were there racists? Of course. Are there racists, sexists, fill in the blank-ists today? Yes. Can those feelings, be legislated away? No. In fact, for those few who are some sort of -ists, those feelings are reinforced by the government forcing people to not discriminate.
Are you asking if I think businesses should be able to discriminate? I will take the heat, and no doubt be thought an -ist, but yes. Why? I would ask, why not? Anyone who is a serious -ist, to the point of excluding this group or that group, probably will not be in business long. People will exercise their right to not patronize that business. They might exercise their right of free speech to protest the business, That is how a free society works. No coercion by the government to serve those we don't want to serve, and no coercion to patronize businesses we wouldn't otherwise. This is probably the most important part, because while talking about commerce, and free trade, government coercion has been proven throughout history to not stop there. Let me end with a quote by Milton Friedman, Nobel economist.
A society that puts equality before freedom will get neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both.
I did want to follow up my previous post with regards to freedom. I spoke of the necessity to follow the law of the land, and to do what Christ told us. Turn the other cheek, walk an extra mile, give not only your coat, but your cloak as well. I stand by that, but wanted to expound on the law of the land portion. The law discussed has been upheld, wrongly in my opinion, but it is the law of the land.
In the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Congress attempted to reverse the legalized discrimination which had been predominant, throughout the south in particular. This law was passed on the backs of Republicans, who fought to overcome the Democratic filibuster that threatened to kill the legislation. One notable absence from this coalition was Senator Barry Goldwater, (R) AZ. This libertarian Republican, who went on to win the nomination for President, but got crushed in the general election, was against it. One might ask, "why would anyone support discrimination?" It wasn't supporting discrimination, but for those who misunderstand the Constitution, it was easy to point fingers,
The Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and subsequent amendments, are constrictions on the FEDERAL government. They were never intended to constrict individuals, or corporations, or whatever. Sen. Goldwater opposed the law because, it forced individuals, and companies to not discriminate based on certain classes of people. This is a key point which continues to this day.
Discrimination has become a four letter word, and yet we discriminate all the time. WE ALL DO!!! Think I am wrong? Are you pro-union, and chose to not shop at Walmart? That is discrimination. Do you choose to not buy GMO products? That is discrimination. I could go on, but I think the point is made. The problem, primarily in the South, wasn't individuals, per say. it was the law of the land, passed by, well, we won't say which party. Were there racists? Of course. Are there racists, sexists, fill in the blank-ists today? Yes. Can those feelings, be legislated away? No. In fact, for those few who are some sort of -ists, those feelings are reinforced by the government forcing people to not discriminate.
Are you asking if I think businesses should be able to discriminate? I will take the heat, and no doubt be thought an -ist, but yes. Why? I would ask, why not? Anyone who is a serious -ist, to the point of excluding this group or that group, probably will not be in business long. People will exercise their right to not patronize that business. They might exercise their right of free speech to protest the business, That is how a free society works. No coercion by the government to serve those we don't want to serve, and no coercion to patronize businesses we wouldn't otherwise. This is probably the most important part, because while talking about commerce, and free trade, government coercion has been proven throughout history to not stop there. Let me end with a quote by Milton Friedman, Nobel economist.
A society that puts equality before freedom will get neither. A society that puts freedom before equality will get a high degree of both.
Comments
Post a Comment