Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Racist Remark - How would you respond? [CLOSED for Review]      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 51
view profile
History
Racist Remark - How would you respond?Page 3 of 7    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7)

I know you're not pro-racism, so I think it's odd you'd have this PC argument in a thread concerning racism.


You're right--I do not support racism. But I support the most hateful racist's right to say whatever he pleases, just as I support the right of other people to denounce it. I think you'll find that the ACLU defended the right of American Nazis to protest a black demonstration in Skokie, Illinois years ago. I take that to mean the ACLU believed First Amendment freedom of speech was worth defending--not that it believed the Nazis' ideas were.

Suppressing unfavorable comments about race is one of the goals of political correctness, even though it takes in other sacred cows, too. The OP mentioned "homophobia," for example. Anyone is free to try to promote political correctness by persuasion. And anyone is free to point out that political correctness is anything but the wholesome, noble attempt to encourage niceness that most of the people who promote it have been duped into believing. What they are NOT free to do is to use it to deprive people they disagree with of their civil rights, as has happened on college campuses all over this country.


If being considerate of others and not insulting them is PC


It's not. It's just being considerate.


Speak your mind. If you don't, then you're just a racist coward.


I doubt many people, whatever their race or ethnicity, usually give vent to their negative feelings about other groups in public. Most of us have said insulting things about this group or that, when we were among friends and blowing off steam. That doesn't necessarily mean you wish the group you're insulting any harm at all.


Brown Shirts were Fascist NOT Liberals.


I agree. I never said the people today who share the Brownshirts' intolerance and thuggish tactics were liberals. I said they are just the opposite, whatever they may like to consider themselves. Many of the early followers of what later became the Nazi Party in Germany had been socialists and communists.

So if you'd rather call their modern-day American counterparts "Red Guards" instead of "Brownshirts," fine with me. "Left" and "right" don't mean much as applied to totalitarian statists. The point is that they're hostile to self-rule and individual freedom--and as such are, literally, un-American. Stalin and Mao were just as repulsive on this score as Hitler and Mussolini.

To me, bigoted comments are something to deal with personally, not by trying to shout the bigot down, or pass some speech code to muzzle him. If I think a person's comments show real malice toward some group, so that I don't like to hear them, I usually take issue with that person. If they don't want to be reasonable, I just avoid them--trying to change a bigot's mind is usually a waste of time.
 Coyotefeller
Joined: 8/1/2005
Msg: 52
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/4/2011 3:26:14 PM
Nice to see some gloves have come off finally :)
Trouble is you have very few fighting skills
cause yall been dumbed down for so long!

You still can't pick on pinkoleander though,
cause as she says:

" I grew up in PV so I'm not a hater :)"

(for those of you who don't want to go out of
your way too much that is a posh area of greater
Los Angeles......may even be the home of the
Valley Girls we used to talk about....but I'm just
guessing.... :)
 vlad dracul
Joined: 4/30/2009
Msg: 53
view profile
History
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/4/2011 3:30:42 PM
yep i read the rule.
how has it been steered off topic?
unless something is being lost in translation between
scotland and over the pond?
the op's point was a racist comment was made how
should it be dealt with.
after the first 4 replies or so i think it was answered
and what her response was to the comment was correct.
we are now on page 4

so obviously it has struck a chord.

so what is wrong with asking what someones response
would be to racist or derogatory remarks made against white folk?

funnily enough i typed white trash into the search forums.
not many threads on the subject but one stood out.
3 pages on how to hold a white trash party?
lol
still folks attitudes have changed since that thread was
started way back in the old days.

we are all jock tamsons bairns after all
 swagg42
Joined: 8/12/2011
Msg: 54
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/4/2011 5:27:02 PM
well just ignore it as it make a u turn and bite him in some kind of way.
 vlad dracul
Joined: 4/30/2009
Msg: 55
view profile
History
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/4/2011 5:46:54 PM
well i see what is being said and i agree that straying too far away
from the threads heading can be counter productive.

but no one apart from the op knows what the content of the IM was and in what
context it was written in . yet an outpouring of dislike and in some cases what could be taken for hate has decended on the person who sent the said remark.

i still think its a perfectly valid question to ask the same people if they would express outrage at racist or disparaging comments about poor white folk?

(and i think it strayed off topic a wee while ago on page 2 but sometimes going a wee bit off topic can add something, but thats just my opinion)

but one day i suppose an offended white person shall post a thread and i
think it shall make for interesting reading.

trolling? the liberals under the bed ? lol

someone starts a thread and people take a particular viewpoint. sometime its difficult to not veer away from the original point.

the strange thing is people are up in arms over something that they never
read or heard.

but hey? its good to talk (even if none of us knows what it is we are getting our knickers in a twist over)
 vibrantshe
Joined: 3/21/2011
Msg: 56
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/4/2011 6:30:42 PM
I didn’t bring up the heredity of the group that the bigoted remark was made towards on purpose because it doesn’t matter. For all you know it remark was made towards “whites”. Although “white” is not an ethnic group.

Here is the difference vlad dracul and why we all know you know the difference and that you are just trying to stir things up.

In the history of the U.S., poor European Americans have never been rounded up and forced off their tribal lands, or abducted and forced into slavery, or jailed in internment camps. Poor European Americans have never been fired from a job for the family they were born into or declined entry to a country club or a school or denied housing. I don’t recall any European Americans that live in poverty being beaten or lynched.

You might have the decency consider the history of our nation towards certain ethnic groups before you make such a thoughtless post.
 Coyotefeller
Joined: 8/1/2005
Msg: 57
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/4/2011 11:14:32 PM
Since you people have seen fit to
mix in 'ancient' history which has little
to do with Racism and all the other
stuff you guys blab about, why has nobody
brought up relatively recent discriminatory
laws (laws!) known as quotas in hiring
minorities?
Is it correct to dismiss any challenge to this
quota law simply because it is the law?

Even though the OP is unwilling
to reveal what exactly prompted her
to start this thread, and it is her prerogative
to be vague, I find it harsh and unfair to
dissect everything she says, even going so far
as to mock and ridicule her.....this is no
trial !
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 58
view profile
History
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/6/2011 12:57:13 PM
The "historical" aspect is also very specific, it has to have a societal aspect. It applies to history of systemic targeting of a member of an identifiable group.


You may know something about that I don't. Would you please cite your authority for it? It's true that the historical significance of cross-burning was important in the Supreme Court's 2003 decision in Virginia v. Black. And the history of discrimination against blacks came up incidentally in R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, a 1992 Supreme Court cross-burning decision. But in both cases, the main issue was whether a state law against cross-burning prohibited expressive speech protected by the First Amendment.

The most relevant Supreme Court "hate crime" decision not involving cross-burning is Wisconsin v. Mitchell, from 1993. And in Mitchell, the Court didn't base its decision on historical factors. In fact, two of the grounds for a longer sentence in the challenged state law were disability and sexual orientation. If either of those characteristics inspired any KKK-like organization, dating back to the 1860's and involved in hundreds of lynchings, our historians have ignored it.

If Mitchell, who was black, had any motive for assaulting his victim other than that he was white, the decision doesn't mention it. And in view of that decision, I wonder how the FBI determines which victims were attacked for what motives. It's hard to imagine that in a single year, there were 5,000+ cases in the U.S. where a court decided, finally, that a defendant had violated a hate crime statute that was valid under Mitchell.

It's harder yet to imagine--if 2006 was a typical year-- that less than one-third as many whites were victimized because of their race as were blacks, when whites outnumber blacks in the U.S. by six or seven to one. Why would so many more non-black criminals choose their victims just because they're black, than non-white criminals choose their victims just because they're white?
 vlad dracul
Joined: 4/30/2009
Msg: 59
view profile
History
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/6/2011 2:14:57 PM
msg 115
interesting stats there geezer.
until the mid 90's in the uk white folk were
never recognised as victims of racial attacks.

then when they were included the stats changed



Until the mid-nineties, the government's British Crime Survey only asked ethnic minority groups whether they had been the victim of a crime which was racially motivated. Since then, all victims are asked and the picture has changed dramatically.
The most recent analysis shows that in 2004, 87,000 people from black or minority ethnic communities (BME) said they had been a victim of a racially motivated crime. In the same period, 92,000 white people said they had also fallen victim.
Focusing on violent racial attacks, 49,000 BME were victims. Among whites, the number was 77,000.
Of those that involved wounding 4,000 were BME. Among the white population it was 20,000.

over here if you say the attack was racial then it must
be treated as such.

in scotland school children are now monitored for 'hate' crimes
Almost 2,000 children are reported for 'hate crimes
Published Date: 04 July 2011
By Tim Bugler
NEARLY 2,000 children in Scottish schools and nurseries were reported to their local education authority for "hate crimes" in the last three years, according to official statistics.
Many of those accused of homophobia, racism and sectarian bigotry were merely toddlers.

http://news.scotsman.com/religiousissuesinscotland/Almost-2000-children-are-reported.6795347.jp

so stats can be made to support any view

looks like we shall have to agree to disagree
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 60
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/6/2011 2:26:24 PM

Many of those accused of homophobia, racism and sectarian bigotry were merely toddlers.


Hmmmm....I wonder where these toddler's got such notions????
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 61
view profile
History
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/6/2011 3:30:19 PM

Many of those accused of homophobia, racism and sectarian bigotry were merely toddlers.


An accusation's proof enough for me. No sense wasting time on trials--and half the time, some judge who's soft on child hate crimes would let the kid off on some technicality. These crimes include racial victimization like making faces at children of color, gender victimization like pulling girls' pigtails, and even worse. The statistics don't lie--this has become a very serious problem.
 vlad dracul
Joined: 4/30/2009
Msg: 62
view profile
History
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/6/2011 3:45:09 PM
what worrys me more about the story from scotland
is exactly WHAT type of adult goes sneaking around
childrens playgrounds listening to what they are saying?

then not only do these weirdos creep around they then
go and report children to the state.

what possible agenda would those state employees have?

and what kind of state spys on children in nursery schools?

if you do not think that what is happening to these bairns in
scotland is nothing short of a disgrace then i despair for you.

and as for the child creepers if they are reporting bairns to
the state then who or what else are they reporting?
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 63
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/6/2011 3:51:36 PM
As reported today:

The family of James Craig Anderson, who was killed in June in what authorities have called a hate crime, has filed a wrongful death lawsuit against a group of seven white teenagers.

According to the Associated Press, the new lawsuit "tracks with police allegations that a group of teens were out looking for a black man to 'mess with' when they found 49-year-old James Craig Anderson before dawn in the parking lot of a Jackson [Mississippi] hotel."

The suit, filed Tuesday in Hinds County Circuit Court in Jackson, seeks monetary damages, but Winston Thompson, an attorney for Anderson's family, said it also aims to make sure all the facts come out.

Two of the seven teenagers named in the lawsuit have been charged in the attack on Anderson. Deryl Dedmon, 19, is charged with capital murder and robbery for allegedly running Anderson over with a Ford F-250 truck. Police say Dedmon later bragged about the act. And John Aaron Rice is charged with assault for allegedly attacking Anderson before he was run over.

The New York Times reports that the Anderson family's lawsuit makes public for the first time the names of all seven young people said to be involved in the incident. The suit claims that while not all are directly responsible for attacking and killing Anderson, the others were negligent because they acted as "look-outs" and did not help him.

"We allege that they acted as a group, as one," Thompson told the AP.

The lawsuit said Rice, Dedmon and two others approached Anderson in the parking lot and surrounded him. It says Rice and Dedmon then attacked him "with the cooperation and encouragement" of the others. The three people who stayed in the vehicles during the attack acted as lookouts, the lawsuit said.

Dedmon is scheduled to be in court on Tuesday for a preliminary hearing.

Anderson's family has created the James Craig Anderson Foundation for Racial Tolerance, and has yet to say much publicly about his death. The Southern Poverty Law Center is assisting Thompson with the lawsuit.
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/americas/united-states/110906/james-craig-anderson-lawsuit-hate-crime
 vlad dracul
Joined: 4/30/2009
Msg: 64
view profile
History
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/6/2011 4:09:05 PM
And if they are found guilty then make the punishment suit the crime.
The first racial murder in scotland was 15 year old kriss donald. Hauled of the street by asians who were going to kill a white boy. After being driven around in a car and beaten and stabbed he was then set on fire whilst still alive.
Is my example worse than yours?
Both are horrific. Its just that to some folk one is seen worse than the other.
I don't pretend that one is somehow worse than the other. I at least acknowledge both crimes as heinous. The death of a black boy at the hands of racists is the same as the death of a white boy at the hands of racistsg

Msg 122
Yep I'm sure stats are done to suit the agenda.
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 65
view profile
History
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/6/2011 5:06:45 PM
And if they are found guilty then make the punishment suit the crime.


I think for murders that heinous, the only just punishment is death. The law in a lot of states recognizes aggravating factors. In California, murder committed under any of a dozen or so special circumstances (by poisoning, torture, ambush, etc.) is punishable only by life without parole, or death. That's as far as state law can go, because the Supreme Court has said a mandatory death penalty is unconstitutional.

When the facts are that extreme, I don't see why the victim's race makes any difference. The murderer should be executed whether he was motivated by racial hatred or not. And the same for heinous murders that are motivated by the victim's ancestry, sexual orientation, religion, etc.


has filed a wrongful death lawsuit against a group of seven white teenagers.


The fact this just happened in June makes me wonder about the criminal case against them, which you'd think would go first. I see the lookouts are only accused of being negligent, and not of being accomplices or conspirators, as they might be in a criminal case. I don't know the facts in detail, but it sounds like the evidence may not have been good enough to try any of them for murder. For wrongful death, you just that it's more likely than not the person did it. That's much easier than to prove they're guilty of murder beyond a reasonable doubt, let alone proving the victim's race motivated the murder.


You're barking up the wrong tree.


Yes, I think that's clear. You can't cite any legal authority for what you're asserting, because there is none. But I thank you for showing us so nicely what equivocation means.


 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 66
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/6/2011 5:16:36 PM
The thing is...there's statements, confessions, and video of the incident (on CBS tonight)...the guys driving backed up and then raced forward to jump the curb to hit the black man...they boasted of killing the guy...there were witness's...

The posting of this incident wasn't to one-up whats worse...it was to point out that here in America...such incidents happen more often then hate crimes against whites.

Of course...just like the New Black Panter's...no one's been prosecuted...so, jumping to conclusions shows a degree of ignorance.
 vlad dracul
Joined: 4/30/2009
Msg: 67
view profile
History
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/7/2011 2:18:26 AM
IMHO i think a balkans like scenario will emerge.

ancient hatreds left festering away. yes the slave trade happened
but it did not start and finish with blacks being transported to america.

how far back do we really want to go? what about the countless thousands
of slavs/slaves taken by north african mohamedins?

does anyone honestly believe bigbadius nirishii said to the missus
'pack another few stuffed quaills and a flagon of wine darlin im doing a bit overtime
on the colliseum its a rush job'

no, the romans took slaves to do the work. most of europe should be
after reparations from italy then if we go to its logical conclusion.

if you tell people long enough that nothing is their fault and give them someone
to blame then how the hell will that person ever move forward?

the arsehole tony blair apologising for the potato famine in ireland!!!!!!!!

yes hatred because of skin colour is wrong, and yes take offence, and yes
pull the perpetrator up but you cannot then sit and justify the murder of one
race and say you feel the murderers pain and then trot out something that occured centuries ago.

how the **** is ANYONE ever going to move on? throwing blame at one group
while admonishing another. all that happens is folk like me start getting entrenched
as well.

this t'interweb thingy is great, the things i find out. the black units who fought for
the confederates during your civil war, the black slave owners who sent their slaves to fight because their nation was being invaded, the character from amistad who ended up a slave owner himself, alex hayleys book roots with kunte kinte and the fact he had to pay half a million dollars to a white author for plaigerising his book, the bbc making a documentery about the fraudulent book and american tv stations putting a blanket ban on the documentery in case it damaged race relations.

see whats happening? someone like me who just wants to get on with things and survive and see my lassies and grandbairns get on in life, because im constantly bombarded by how, as a white man, every ****in thing in the world is my fault. i start having a wee nose around online and find some inconvenient history.

the slave trade happened, and a long time before africans ended up in america. and every race was involved in it not just whites. get over it and move on or we are going to end up with balkans like hatreds in the near future.

vlad dracul
(unemployed just now and wondering who to blame and who will feel my pain)
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 68
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/7/2011 5:42:33 AM
In a New York Times article about the controversial TSA searches, professor Orin Kerr commented about the weak oversight by the courts of searches at airports. In a massive understatement Kerr said, “The tenor of earlier cases is pretty deferential to the government.” Translated from nuanced, politic legalese, Kerr might have explained “deferential” more colorfully—as akin to the attitude Rochester, the Beverly Hills butler, showed toward Jack Benny: “I’ll take your word for it, Boss.”

What has emerged from the TSA pat-down kerfuffle is recognition that it is psychologically demeaning to be subjected to physical touching of private areas of the body by someone not invited to do so. Now, the psychological treatment of men of color is being brought home to middle American men as shown by, the Times reports, their complaints “about airport security measures, offering graphic accounts of genital contact and expressing a general sense of powerlessness and humiliation.” Men of color might respond: “Welcome to our world. We have had that experience in our own neighborhood without driving out to the airport.”

Will the perception that there is a harm—a substantial psychological humiliation—needlessly imposed on millions of innocent citizens by intrusive pat-downs change opinions of the general public about the use of such tactics by police officers against males of color who are not boarding airplanes? Probably not.

Intrusive “junk touching” will continue to be a threat in the lives of men of color walking or driving on the streets of America. The courts will continue to give the police carte blanche with regard to the necessity for, and scope of, police pat-downs. For four decades since the approval of the frisk tactic in Terry v. Ohio, the courts have looked the other way while the frisks disproportionately targeted men of color.

It should come as no surprise that police and agents of federal security agencies such as the TSA may be more responsive to the air traveling business public than to pedestrians and motorists in low income communities of color. Now that white, male, middle Americans are feeling the long arm of the law near the family jewels, the impact of a humiliating governmental indignity is no longer confined to a powerless and silent minority. For men of color, who have traditionally been on the groping end of the long arm of the law, the response may be “So what’s new?”

http://www.truthdig.com/report/page2/pat-downs_hit_middle_america_where_it_counts_20101124/
 unYOUsual
Joined: 8/11/2011
Msg: 69
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/7/2011 6:43:32 AM

The posting of this incident wasn't to one-up whats worse...it was to point out that here in America...such incidents happen more often then hate crimes against whites.
BS......when Blacks attack whites, rob, rape or whatever the crimes are considered crimes of opportunity...when whites victimize blacks it is almost always considered racially motivated...

Therefore, most hate crimes are committed by white offenders....by more than 3 times as many as any other group
"It’s up to the investigating police officer to determine whether a crime involves bias motivation, a requirement for it to be considered a hate crime. If the police report doesn’t include that, the incident does not show up in the Uniform Crime Report as a hate crime"

The recent Black teen mob attacks around the U.S. are good examples of law enforcement being reluctant to include whites as being protected by Hate Crime Laws...some of the arrested offenders admitted they were specifically targeting people because they were white, the assaults and robberies were not classified as Hate crimes even though there was racial bias...

Since Whites are not considered one of the target groups listed in applicable Laws the presumption is that a crime committed against them is not motivated by bias
 unYOUsual
Joined: 8/11/2011
Msg: 70
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/7/2011 8:14:01 AM
Really? Racist remarks lead to a discussion about racism..Who'd a thunk?....as usual those who have different views than the established PC views are labeled as Racists..the inability for Liberals to accept the fact that Minorities are protected from institutional racism and discrimination " Speaks Volumes"...You all need to get past the 60's for Real...
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 71
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/7/2011 8:27:15 AM

when Blacks attack whites, rob, rape or whatever the crimes are considered crimes of opportunity


Surely this poster meant to say that all black crimes against whites are considered crimes of opportunity....Please cite your source.


when whites victimize blacks it is almost always considered racially motivated...


Please cite your source...


the inability for Liberals to accept the fact that Minorities are protected from institutional racism and discrimination


So, it is this posters opinion that people in power should be allowed to discriminate based upon race. I need no history lesson, just as I'm sure that many here haven't forgotten the reasons why minoities rights are protected.


PC views


If your speaking about abhorring rasicm and bigotry...please call me PC all you'd like.
 vlad dracul
Joined: 4/30/2009
Msg: 72
view profile
History
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/7/2011 8:49:23 AM
msg 134

so you abhorr racism and bigotry against whites as well?
its just that you have never said from what i can see.

racism apologists? lol and where has anyone said racism
by white folk is acceptable?

seems to me that the 'deniers' that white folk can be victims
of racism and there are a few, not all but a few are living in
denial and somehow trying to justify the actions of non white
racists by trotting out excuse after excuse.

they just dont like their view being questioned

the op's question about a racist remark and what she done
about it was fair enough. well done hen.

but a simple point about racism against white folk gets the
full 'ah but what about? ' treatment.

if none of them want to admit that there are racists who are
not white then carry on.

and even better why not do what they do in scotland and get
some kind of creepy 'denier' to slither about nurserys and
primary and secondary schools listening in too bairns talking
then report them to the state?

that way you can teach them about their guilt early and they
can become double plus good drones of the state
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 73
view profile
History
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/7/2011 9:49:16 AM
people in power should be allowed to discriminate based upon race


That depends on what you mean by "people in power." Race discrimination by both federal and state governments is almost always unconstitutional. I say "almost" because a government can discriminate by race IF it can prove that what it's doing, to use the Supreme Court's magic words, is "necessary" to achieve a "compelling" government interest.

In practice, that standard's extremely hard to meet. And yet a local police department could legally favor a white undercover detective over a black one, just because of race, if the assignment were to infiltrate a white supremacist group known to be involved in a lot of serious crimes.

But if the "people in power" are landlords, owners of private clubs or other businesses, or just private citizens, I don't believe the federal government has the authority to prohibit them from engaging in whatever race discrimination they please.

I think a state should be able to make some private race discrimination illegal, but not to the point of violating a person's right to associate with the people he chooses. There shouldn't be a state law against discriminating by race in the people you invite to your parties, allow to join your book discussion club, or go on dates with.

And people should be free to make the most offensive racist remarks they please--just as the people who are offended by those remarks should be free to avoid the person making them, to tell them off, or just to shake their heads and smile.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 74
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/7/2011 9:53:42 AM

There shouldn't be a state law against discriminating by race in the people you invite to your parties, allow to join your book discussion club, or go on dates with.


What state does this???
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 75
view profile
History
Racist Remark - How would you respond?
Posted: 9/7/2011 10:16:02 AM

What state does this???


Only one with very sorry legislators--although I'm sure many totalitarian types would love to be able to make everyone else do whatever they think is fair and noble. There is some point past which a state law couldn't prevent people from discriminating because of race. The First Amendment applies to states, too, and it protects freedom of association. But where should that line be drawn?

If a state can make it illegal for the owner of an eight-unit apartment building to refuse tenants because of their race, can it do the same if the building has only six units? What if the Exalted Cyclops of the local KKK chapter owns a quadriplex and lives in one of the units--does he have to rent any of the other three to a black person? How about a duplex where he lives in one of the units? Or a room in his house? Wouldn't it be outrageous for the rest of us to tolerate his intolerance?
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Racist Remark - How would you respond? [CLOSED for Review]