Re: Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendment
David Honig writes:
At 02:37 PM 12/23/97 -0500, Colin Rafferty wrote:
You are not being coerced into anything. If you don't want to serve food to Blacks, don't open a restaurant. It's your choice.
Where do you get the right to tell others how they can make a living?
I don't have that right. However, the Supreme Court has said that the Congress has that right.
By the way, you are also not allowed to dump toxic waste in your own backyard. Are you being oppressed?
I am not allowed to place toxic waste, or noise, where it can affect others; I can ingest toxins privately and listen to whatever music I like so long as you don't detect it in your backyard.
Well, racism is hiring decisions is something that is detected in other people's backyards. That's why its illegal.
An employer-employee relationship is like a marriage or any other arrangement between adults -mutually consensual.
In a fantasy world, it is mutually consensual. It the real world, it is seldom mutual.
You prefer a shotgun or otherwise arranged marriage?
I prefer a level playing field.
Colin, do you consider yourself oppressed when someone choses not to date you? What about a rejection by someone who takes out a public advertisement in the paper?
Nope. Of course, this has nothing to do with anything.
Private behavior is private behavior, and trade is a private behavior.
Not in this country. If you don't believe me, check out Article I, Section 8 for one explicit example.
Freedom is only tested when it hurts.
With freedom comes responsibility. Decency is one of them.
But obligate decency at gunpoint is not worth it.
It's called civilization. You should try it some time. -- Colin
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <ocrn2hr3df7.fsf@ml.com>, on 12/23/97 at 05:25 PM, Colin Rafferty <craffert@ml.com> said:
Private behavior is private behavior, and trade is a private behavior.
Not in this country. If you don't believe me, check out Article I, Section 8 for one explicit example.
"To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes" The Commerce Clause is the most abused section of the Constitution use to justify the most heinous and draconian actions of the federal government. You truly are no lover of freedom. "If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lightly upon you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." - -- Samuel Adams - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a-sha1 Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBNKBO3Y9Co1n+aLhhAQLiBQP8Cto38DjPor2/QjANZbwFXFR6fa55M5YB Rd0h25jWefyErzIyC1tPrLJLmyT3muI2U2KVIeusCHh5Jh0t8dgku3cQ8ZhgNeIw 3Ku//Yr+B5XJmKXSAxyGrJCpmTmtxJ2ZtlIx8vryLvqTjlbq/B7GsbIfAIZfQAjb euKsL4dvmPg= =lPC+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Where do you get the right to tell others how they can make a living?
I don't have that right. However, the Supreme Court has said that the Congress has that right.
If you would be so kind as to a) specify that supreme court ruling, and b) identify an online resource where I can obtain the text of that decision, so that I can 1) confirm or deny your allegation, and 2) debate your position intelligently, I would greatly appreciate it.
It has to do with the application of laws, especially Federal, to corporations. Recall that Corporations are legal fictions and, unlike individuals, are not constitutionally vested with inaliable rights. They have been affirmed some rights, including free speech bu the SC, but generally with more limitations.
I am not allowed to place toxic waste, or noise, where it can affect others; I can ingest toxins privately and listen to whatever music I like so long as you don't detect it in your backyard.
Well, racism is hiring decisions is something that is detected in other people's backyards. That's why its illegal.
What if I run a business out of my house? What if I don't need employees (such that I could affort to hire a couple of people, or nobody at all)? If I hire someone who is white because I don't want to hire someone is black, then it is not a loss that is felt within the black community, since I don't *need* to hire anybody in the first place.
Use of your property, as long as its private, were vested with many constitutional rights (many of which now been eroded by decades of SC 'interpretation'). However, once you operate a business upon a property (evidenced by the issuance of a business license) it becomes a 'public convenience' which can (and often is) heavily regulated and restricted. So, operate w/o a business license and incorporation and keep your rights but risk prosection for tax evasion, or license your business and lose many of those consititional protections you covet. Catch-22.
I am not allowed to choose to hire someone based on skin color, and yet the country is riddled by "affirmative" action programs -- which, in the short and brutal version of the description of "AA" is just a system of RACE-BASED PREFRENCES.
I find it very interesting that liberal activists in California, who rabidly insist that racism is wrong, that we must have racial dialogues, that we should all "just get allong," used the court system to fight Proposition 209, which ends affirmative action in that state. The people voted their will, and the activists took to the courts to override the people's will -- in effect, saying that the California voting public is just a bunch of idiots.
They simply showed their true 'liberal' idiological colors. What they really seek isn't guarantees of equal opportunity but equal outcomes under law, what Robert Bork calls Radical Egalitarianism in his recent book, "Slouching Towards Gamorah."
So, back to my home business. Let's say I build computers and sell them around the state. Since I'm not transporting my product from one state to another, the Fed can't constitutionally regulate how I do business.
Wrong, see my explanation, above. --Steve
Where do you get the right to tell others how they can make a living?
I don't have that right. However, the Supreme Court has said that the Congress has that right.
Then that must be right... This is starting to look like a troll. Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul@crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul@cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"
participants (4)
-
Colin Rafferty -
Paul Bradley -
Steve Schear -
William H. Geiger III