1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Judicial review? Brown v. Board of Education

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by fromtheright, Nov 16, 2003.

  1. KenH

    KenH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    41,978
    Likes Received:
    1,483
    Faith:
    Baptist
    As long as it took while respecting the U.S. Constitution.

    But like I said, the government has no right to ever discriminate. Private discrimination is quite constitutionally acceptable according to freedom of association.
     
  2. Major B

    Major B <img src=/6069.jpg>

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    Messages:
    2,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    If the restaurant is privately owned, then they certainly have that right. And I have the right not to frequent such an establishment. </font>[/QUOTE]Privately owned establishments that serve the public are not private. By the "commerce clause" in the constitution, Congress has the right to regulate public commerce, and that, along with the "necessary and proper" clause was the basis of the civil rights legistlation of the '60s that outlawed segregated restaurants, hotels, etc. True private clubs (like country clubs) may discrimminate because they are not open to the public.
     
  3. KenH

    KenH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    41,978
    Likes Received:
    1,483
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Obviously, I disagree with that interpretation. If I own a piece of property, I have the right to do what I want with it, as long as I do not interfere with another person's right to use their property as they want.

    Therefore, I have the right to determine who can or cannot set foot on my property and where they can or cannot sit on my property.
     
  4. Major B

    Major B <img src=/6069.jpg>

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    Messages:
    2,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    Of course that is true if your property is not used for a public commerce purpose. However, the constitution specifically gives Congress the right to regulate commerce. Since Justice Marshall's decision in Gibbons V. Ogden, about 180 years ago, that is the way it is interpreted.
     
  5. Major B

    Major B <img src=/6069.jpg>

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    Messages:
    2,294
    Likes Received:
    0
  6. KenH

    KenH Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    41,978
    Likes Received:
    1,483
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I consider such property is being used for private commerce. Public commerce would take place on government property.

    But, then again, I am a strict believer in private property rights. And I think the Founding Fathers were, too.
     
  7. Major B

    Major B <img src=/6069.jpg>

    Joined:
    May 6, 2003
    Messages:
    2,294
    Likes Received:
    0
    Private commerce is not open to the public--that is why a country club can legally discriminate. If you are open to the public, you must abide by the discrimination laws.

    You can invite who you want to your house.

    But if you decide to rent or sell it, you cannot refuse someone on the basis of race, religion, or national origin.

    You can start a private club and exclude who you want. If you serve the public, you can't exclude people on the basis of who they are (you can dictate dress code, however).

    A lot of the founders thought people could be property!
     
Loading...