Libertarianism & Civil Rights Enforcement
Two days after becoming the newest symbol of “Tea Bagger” politics, republican Senatorial candidate Rand Paul of Kentucky thrust himself, his party, and the “Tea Partying” movement into an uncomfortable conversation about the federal government’s role in prohibiting racial discrimination and about a period of history that most politicians consider beyond debate.
Rand Paul finds himself embroiled in a growing national controversy over his view that federal civil-rights law shouldn’t bar businesses from practicing racial discrimination. At issue is his stated belief that while government was right to prohibit discrimination in public agencies and by organizations that receive public funds, private businesses should have the right to make race-based decisions about which customers they serve.
Paul believes, as many conservatives believe, that the government should ban bias in all of its own institutions but cannot intervene in the policies of private businesses. Paul argues that those businesses take a risk by maintaining, in this example, racist policies. Patrons can decide whether or not to give them their money, or whether or not to make a fuss about their policies.
That, Rand Paul maintains — not government regulation and intervention — is how bias should be eliminated in the private sector. In this belief Paul is joined by many conservatives and most Libertarians who resent that liberals seek government intervention for every inequitable outcome. And, that President Obama fulfills yet another hope of Martin Luther King, Jr really chaps their asses.
The problem remains: his argument makes no sense. There is no such thing as “private” discrimination with respect to a “public accommodation.” Like any other claimed property right, it could not exist without government support. Americans tend not to see that relationship.
Property — demarcated bounds marking turf/air/water belonging to a specific owner — never existed from Nature itself and is solely a man-made, man-sanctioned and enforced artificial concept. I’m making no statement of judgement here, just presenting a simple fact.
Government of mankind legally allows and validates property demarcation and ownership, and the man-seated Courts enforce laws, rights, and contracts pertaining to that property.
- Whose government is it that validates and assigns property rights? The Government “of, by, and for the People” of these United States.
- Whose Courts enforce the Government’s validation and the exercise of assigned property rights? The Courts established by “Our” Governments.
- Ergo… allowing segregation and discrimination on private property open for use to the community is government and societal discrimination…
- … and is, hence, justifiably illegal.
Yet as compromise, enforcement of nondiscrimination and civil rights laws applies only to those property owners who choose to make their property a “public accommodation,” meaning you open your doors and property to the public for service, sales, or whatever… and have not restricted the property only to a limited and private membership purchased for such exclusive use. It’s really that simple.
Human/Citizen Rights Discrimination In The Age of The Defense of Marriage Act (DoMA)
Tea Baggers should not fret, though. Through their fears — as well as the fears of too many republicans and even a few Democrats — you’ve managed to remove Civil and Human Rights from a huge swath of the Citizenry.
DoMA and most State’s Constitutions forbid recognitions of gay persons rights to marriage and its benefits. Each day, many of us U.S. citizens are reminded in cruel fashion that we are sub-human, sub-citizen. Each day my “Life-Partner” of twenty years and I know that we are no different than the “Niggers” of the old and current South.
Obviously if Libertarians, Tea Baggers, and republicans find an environment safe enough to shout down the “Black” U.S. President with “You Lie!” and to corner and scream “Nigger!” at a heroic civil rights era leader and respected Congressman, and to carry racist signs at tea bagging rallies, and where a succeeding political candidate is not tossed aside for stating that racial discrimination at private businesses should be permitted,… then I know we gays are next!
And here’s what I’m certain we can look forward to under a Libertarian, Tea Bagger, or republican Government in spirit if not actual in practice:
And, folks couldn’t understand why I refused (and still refuse) to pledge allegiance with hand over heart at the start of Annual Meetings for Boards on which I have served. I’m NOT a U.S. Citizen with Rights… hence, no allegiance.
So, for those who think me wrong, I ask one question: