GOP rep discovers terrifying fact: That non-Christians exist

[Ifreann]

"Hail Satan and pass the ammo!"

Keep that in mind if ever you find yourself in an action movie.

[Big Jim P]

Keep that in mind if ever you find yourself in an action movie.

I'll make sure you get listed on the credits.

[Gauthier]

I am now.

So, whose going to pay for my armed guards? I can only shoot so fast myself.

Call them students and the state will pay for them.

Same principle as football scholarships.

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

And the government supported it by making all public facilities discriminatory anyway.


Anyway, assume, arguendo, you're right. This isn't the 1960s.

No, but the time period during which these cases of segregation occurred is irrelevant to my point. You said that Civil Rights violations count as such ONLY they're done through violent force or are carried out by the state. You made a broad, blanketing generalization, and I called you out on it. By the way, do you want to know what happened in the 1960s which largely put an end to the housing segregation practices I just mentioned? The government intervened (GASP).

By the way, how the fuck is making a public facility discriminatory "supporting" a case of privatized housing segregation? If the government randomly decided to desegregate public schools and water fountains in the 1920s, would it have struck a crippling blow to privatized housing discrimination? Or did the government secretly donate five cents to the Housing and Real Estate Segregation Fund every time a black person took a shit in a blacks-only public restroom?

Like I said, it was mandated that the facilities be segregated in the south. I'd also like to point out those segregated facilities did not perform as well in the North as integrated ones. For a history major, the fact you didn't know that the Jim Crow laws mandated restaurants, restrooms, among other things to be segregated is a little surprising.

[R Ev0lution]

No, but the time period during which these cases of segregation occurred is irrelevant to my point. You said that Civil Rights violations count as such ONLY they're done through violent force or are carried out by the state. You made a broad, blanketing generalization, and I called you out on it. By the way, do you want to know what happened in the 1960s which largely put an end to the housing segregation practices I just mentioned? The government intervened (GASP).

By the way, how the fuck is making a public facility discriminatory "supporting" a case of privatized housing segregation? If the government randomly decided to desegregate public schools and water fountains in the 1920s, would it have struck a crippling blow to privatized housing discrimination? Or did the government secretly donate five cents to the Housing and Real Estate Segregation Fund every time a black person took a shit in a blacks-only public restroom?

Like I said, it was mandated that the facilities be segregated in the south. I'd also like to point out those segregated facilities did not perform as well in the North as integrated ones. For a history major, the fact you didn't know that the Jim Crow laws mandated restaurants, restrooms, among other things to be segregated is a little surprising.

Yeah, okay, now you're just mad that you got outed as a History major in the other thread.

For the record, stop putting words in my mouth. Housing segregation also occurred in the North, where there were no Jim Crow laws. Again, PRIVATE HOUSING DISCRIMINATION and PUBLIC FACILITIES SEGREGATION are COMPLETELY SEPARATE ISSUES. And, by the way, who gives a shit whether or not segregated or integrated facilities were profitable? That's not the issue. The fact is that housing segregation is, indeed, a Civil Rights violation, regardless of what the results are financially!

By the way, I know what Jim Crow laws are and what they did. Stop trying to make it look like I don't.

Here's a rudimentary lesson in logic for you, since you've clearly demonstrated that you need it:
Housing segregation occurred in the entire United States.
Jim Crow laws existed only in the Southern States.
Housing segregation is a Civil Rights violation.
Therefore, housing segregation also existed in the Northern States, where there were no Jim Crow laws, and it was a Civil Rights violation.

[AiliailiA]

I'm sure all the poor white folks only wanted to mingle freely with the negros, and it was the evil, evil government which forced them to separate and took away rights from the negros against everyone's will.

It couldn't possibly be that the government was chiefly motivated by the will of its electorate.

No, but that's why, you make it illegal for the government to support and subsidize discrimination. The government should not be able to discriminate.

So, back on the thread subject: the government should not discriminate between private schools (according to religion) when authorizing a school voucher. It's some $7,000 dollars per year, per student, and the State government chooses which schools are eligible. They should not be able to discriminate.

Rep. Valarie Hodges is absolutely wrong. Her reasons for opposing the school voucher program (if she actually does) are entirely wrong. Yes?

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

Those that discriminated did not fare as well as those that did not. Evidence? How many of those companies are still around, and how many went national?

As far as discrimination in the North being government supported, check it out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norris-LaGuardia_Act

The government stopped employers from banning their employees from joining racist unions, (which also expelled people in Mccarthyist manner for suspected communism). If employers were allowed to, they may have made a smart business decision and said "No, I want to be able to hire black people, so you can't join a union"

But even, arguendo, you're right, so what? This isn't the 1960s, and why shouldn't people be able to do with the money they earn what they want in a fashion that directly harms nobody?

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

Not enough of a demand to survive on more than a supremely local basis. In which case, oh well, just go drive another 2 miles.

You really, really, really never took any classes that covered the history of the African-American Civil Rights Movement in the United States, did you?

This is what I refer to when I refer to your misunderstanding of the Jim Crowe laws.

How many large, national banks discriminated universally across their enterprise?

[R Ev0lution]

Those that discriminated did not fare as well as those that did not. Evidence? How many of those companies are still around, and how many went national?

As far as discrimination in the North being government supported, check it out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norris-LaGuardia_Act

The government stopped employers from banning their employees from joining racist unions, (which also expelled people in Mccarthyist manner for suspected communism). If employers were allowed to, they may have made a smart business decision and said "No, I want to be able to hire black people, so you can't join a union"

But even, arguendo, you're right, so what? This isn't the 1960s, and why shouldn't people be able to do with the money they earn what they want in a fashion that directly harms nobody?

Once again, the fact that committing Civil Rights violation isn't good for business DOESN'T CHANGE THE FACT THAT IT'S A CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATION.

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

Those that discriminated did not fare as well as those that did not. Evidence? How many of those companies are still around, and how many went national?

As far as discrimination in the North being government supported, check it out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norris-LaGuardia_Act

The government stopped employers from banning their employees from joining racist unions, (which also expelled people in Mccarthyist manner for suspected communism). If employers were allowed to, they may have made a smart business decision and said "No, I want to be able to hire black people, so you can't join a union"

But even, arguendo, you're right, so what? This isn't the 1960s, and why shouldn't people be able to do with the money they earn what they want in a fashion that directly harms nobody?

Once again, the fact that committing Civil Rights violation isn't good for business DOESN'T CHANGE THE FACT THAT IT'S A CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATION.

You don't have a Civil Right to anyone else's money. Most people give Christmas gifts to their own family more than they do strangers. Should we ban that? It's discriminatory.

[R Ev0lution]

Once again, the fact that committing Civil Rights violation isn't good for business DOESN'T CHANGE THE FACT THAT IT'S A CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATION.

You don't have a Civil Right to anyone else's money. Most people give Christmas gifts to their own family more than they do strangers. Should we ban that? It's discriminatory.

You have the shittiest analogies ever. No, you don't have a Civil Right to be on Auntie Gina's Christmas List. You do, however, have a Civil Right to live where you want, as long as you pay your rent, keep the noise down, and the only reason your landlord doesn't like you is because you're black.
http://civilrights.findlaw.com/civil-ri ... lated.html

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

You don't have a Civil Right to anyone else's money. Most people give Christmas gifts to their own family more than they do strangers. Should we ban that? It's discriminatory.

You have the shittiest analogies ever. No, you don't have a Civil Right to be on Auntie Gina's Christmas List. You do, however, have a Civil Right to live where you want, as long as you pay your rent, keep the noise down, and the only reason your landlord doesn't like you is because you're black.
http://civilrights.findlaw.com/civil-ri ... lated.html

Do you have a civil right to someone else's money, or don't you?

[Mavorpen]

You don't have a Civil Right to anyone else's money. Most people give Christmas gifts to their own family more than they do strangers. Should we ban that? It's discriminatory.

If I ever get an assignment that tells me to come up with the most asinine and pointless analogies ever, I need only to look at your post history.

[Gauthier]

You have the shittiest analogies ever. No, you don't have a Civil Right to be on Auntie Gina's Christmas List. You do, however, have a Civil Right to live where you want, as long as you pay your rent, keep the noise down, and the only reason your landlord doesn't like you is because you're black.
http://civilrights.findlaw.com/civil-ri ... lated.html

Do you have a civil right to someone else's money, or don't you?

Keep burning that straw man. Or is this another cute attempt at trolling after your Scientific Method was thread cruelly aborted like an unwanted child?

[R Ev0lution]

You have the shittiest analogies ever. No, you don't have a Civil Right to be on Auntie Gina's Christmas List. You do, however, have a Civil Right to live where you want, as long as you pay your rent, keep the noise down, and the only reason your landlord doesn't like you is because you're black.
http://civilrights.findlaw.com/civil-ri ... lated.html

Do you have a civil right to someone else's money, or don't you?

That's such a dramatic oversimplification that it's ridiculous.

Do you have a right to walk up to somebody, point a gun at them, and steal their money? No.
Do you have a right to go into a bank, request a loan, and, when they reject you, get a reason that doesn't boil down to "You're black"? Yes, that is a Civil Right.

Again, look at the website that's run by a bunch of lawyers: http://civilrights.findlaw.com/civil-ri ... lated.html

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

You have the shittiest analogies ever. No, you don't have a Civil Right to be on Auntie Gina's Christmas List. You do, however, have a Civil Right to live where you want, as long as you pay your rent, keep the noise down, and the only reason your landlord doesn't like you is because you're black.
http://civilrights.findlaw.com/civil-ri ... lated.html

Do you have a civil right to someone else's money, or don't you?

No, unless you mean the money of a bank, available in loan form on request, but it's a nonsense analogy so it's hardly relevant. You do have a civil right to live where you want, free from racial discrimination, and so, as has already been pointed out, there were civil rights violations present throughout America, not just in the South under the Jim Crow Laws.

BTW, do you actually have a degree in anything, history or otherwise?

[Mavorpen]

Keep burning that straw man. Or is this another cute attempt at trolling after your Scientific Method was thread cruelly aborted like an unwanted child?

The sad part is that I don't think he is trolling. His method of debating follows like this:

1. Argues a point.
2. His point gets taken down.
3. Mongol asks for completely unrelated or impossible to obtain evidence.
4. Person points out Mongol's request is asinine, but still provides evidence proving him wrong.
5. Mongol then says the other person is wrong, and tries to back it up using an analogy that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Rinse and repeat.

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

Do you have a civil right to someone else's money, or don't you?

That's such a dramatic oversimplification that it's ridiculous.

Do you have a right to walk up to somebody, point a gun at them, and steal their money? No.
Do you have a right to go into a bank, request a loan, and, when they reject you, get a reason that doesn't boil down to "You're black"? Yes, that is a Civil Right.

Again, look at the website that's run by a bunch of lawyers.

I deal in absolutes. I discriminated against you by not sending you a gift, though you may have asked for one, when I sent it to my Mongolian (family, so Mongolian), cousin. I discriminated against you.

[Cannot think of a name]

Do you have a civil right to someone else's money, or don't you?

No, unless you mean the money of a bank, available in loan form on request, but it's a nonsense analogy so it's hardly relevant. You do have a civil right to live where you want, free from racial discrimination, and so, as has already been pointed out, there were civil rights violations present throughout America, not just in the South under the Jim Crow Laws.

BTW, do you actually have a degree in anything, history or otherwise?

Not to go all 'hall monitor' or anything, but I don't think dragging the bit that got that thread locked in here is the best of ideas.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

That's such a dramatic oversimplification that it's ridiculous.

Do you have a right to walk up to somebody, point a gun at them, and steal their money? No.
Do you have a right to go into a bank, request a loan, and, when they reject you, get a reason that doesn't boil down to "You're black"? Yes, that is a Civil Right.

Again, look at the website that's run by a bunch of lawyers.

I deal in absolutes. I discriminated against you by not sending you a gift, though you may have asked for one, when I sent it to my Mongolian (family, so Mongolian), cousin. I discriminated against you.

Don't deal in absolutes, it's a ridiculous thing to do, because the inference of that statement is that you continually deal in reductio ad absurdum, a hypothesis borne out by evidence.

Not to go all 'hall monitor' or anything, but I don't think dragging the bit that got that thread locked in here is the best of ideas.

I know, I know. I was wondering what he actually studies, but for now I'll work on the assumption that it's history.

[Veladio]

That's such a dramatic oversimplification that it's ridiculous.

Do you have a right to walk up to somebody, point a gun at them, and steal their money? No.
Do you have a right to go into a bank, request a loan, and, when they reject you, get a reason that doesn't boil down to "You're black"? Yes, that is a Civil Right.

Again, look at the website that's run by a bunch of lawyers.

I deal in absolutes. I discriminated against you by not sending you a gift, though you may have asked for one, when I sent it to my Mongolian (family, so Mongolian), cousin. I discriminated against you.

No...just...wtf? Sometimes issues aren't completely black and white.

[Cannot think of a name]

That's such a dramatic oversimplification that it's ridiculous.

Do you have a right to walk up to somebody, point a gun at them, and steal their money? No.
Do you have a right to go into a bank, request a loan, and, when they reject you, get a reason that doesn't boil down to "You're black"? Yes, that is a Civil Right.

Again, look at the website that's run by a bunch of lawyers.

I deal in absolutes. I discriminated against you by not sending you a gift, though you may have asked for one, when I sent it to my Mongolian (family, so Mongolian), cousin. I discriminated against you.

Did you, in the process of giving gifts to your Mongolian Family, ever indicate that your gift giving was open to the public or that it was in anyway a public service and therefore subject to the regulations and laws regarding public service?

[The Mongol Ilkhanate]

No, unless you mean the money of a bank, available in loan form on request, but it's a nonsense analogy so it's hardly relevant. You do have a civil right to live where you want, free from racial discrimination, and so, as has already been pointed out, there were civil rights violations present throughout America, not just in the South under the Jim Crow Laws.

BTW, do you actually have a degree in anything, history or otherwise?

Not to go all 'hall monitor' or anything, but I don't think dragging the bit that got that thread locked in here is the best of ideas.

I'm interested in what he shows as evidence of our puppetry. If he'd talked to me or G before this, he'd know the circumstances. We're roomies.

[Cannot think of a name]

Not to go all 'hall monitor' or anything, but I don't think dragging the bit that got that thread locked in here is the best of ideas.

I'm interested in what he shows as evidence of our puppetry. If he'd talked to me or G before this, he'd know the circumstances. We're roomies.

Seriously, I don't give a shit.

[R Ev0lution]

That's such a dramatic oversimplification that it's ridiculous.

Do you have a right to walk up to somebody, point a gun at them, and steal their money? No.
Do you have a right to go into a bank, request a loan, and, when they reject you, get a reason that doesn't boil down to "You're black"? Yes, that is a Civil Right.

Again, look at the website that's run by a bunch of lawyers.

I deal in absolutes. I discriminated against you by not sending you a gift, though you may have asked for one, when I sent it to my Mongolian (family, so Mongolian), cousin. I discriminated against you.

You call it "absolutes", I call it "dreadful and illogical analogies which have absolutely zero relevance to the case at hand."