Back in 2010 Rand Paul was asked a hypothetical question by the Louisville Courier-Journal about voting for the civil rights act of 1964. He basically said he liked the civil rights act in the sense that it ended discrimination in the public domain, but he didn't like the part of the law which which took away an owners right on who or who not to serve. Rachel (The liberal puke) Maddow found out about the interview with the local paper in Louisville, and grilled Rand about his answer. It was very painful to watch.... I knew Rand was correct, but his words were being twisted and misunderstood by those on the left (and some on the right) who were guided by their emotions and not by logic or reasoning. Rand would have voted no not because he approves of discrimination, but because of his libertarian ideology. He simply believed businesses shouldn't be forced to serve others by law and should be allowed freedom of association.
The controversy of Rand's comments eventfully died down after months of hysteria by most of the liberal media but ever since Donald Trump's misunderstood "Mexican Rapist" comments, some controversial police shootings, and the sudden outrage of confederate statues, the issue of race has been once again thrust into the national spotlight.
Many on the left are beginning to demand more action be taken by Government to combat hate speech and racism. When I hear this it worries me. Giving Government the power to enforce morality and speech will eventually lead to less freedom for everyone. Being an ignorant racist is morally wrong but it's not a crime...yet. Who gets to decide what's hate speech? what if some radical, hardcore atheist come into power and considered preaching the gospel to be offensive and hateful? What if the opposite happened and some radical Christians came into power, and considered any criticism of Christianity to be hateful? See how that can become a very slippery slope?
If the left really wants to punish racists and those who discriminate, the best way to do that is by allowing the free market to work. The free market (without infringing on anyone's freedom) can punish and end racism more harshly and effectively than the government can. A perfect example of this was the Montgomery Bus boycott in Alabama. Blacks in Montgomery were forced to sit in the back of the bus and were treated like crap. So they decided to boycott, and caused the bus company to lose a tremendous amount of their profits.The Bus company reluctantly changed their polices toward black passengers and welcomed them back with a new appreciation for their business.This happened with NO Govt intervention, this was the free market being allowed to work and kicking ass. Racist business owners will not have an appreciation for non white customers or see the error of their ways if they are being forced to serve those customers by a government mandate.
As a person of color I want business owners to be able to openly discriminate. Why? So I can make dam sure I won't spend a dime of my money on their business. Why should I give them any of my hard earned money? I really don't like the idea of someone secretly hating me and potentially spitting in my food (or doing some other type of craziness) because they resent the fact that Govt is forcing them to serve me. If I knew a white person was in the KKK I would want the right to not serve them, or what if I thought all white people were devils for no logical reason? Would you want me serving you?
A personal business that a person owns and is THEIRS should be an extension of the rights someone has with their home. (Public property is a different story) If I don't want white people coming into my home like it or not, no matter how ignorant I am, I have the right and the freedom to be ignorant and not allow any white person or whoever into my place of residence. The same rights should apply to one's business.
Most of the problems caused by discrimination could have been fixed by simply forcing a repeal of the grossly unconstitutional Jim Crow laws. It was not necessary to violate the property rights of business owners through the civil rights act. Even if a white business owner wanted to serve a black person, the Jim Crow laws made it illegal. I'm sure there were business owners who cared more about profit than bigotry. The most well know example of this was when the Brooklyn Dodgers signed Jackie Robinson on October 23, 1945. The Brooklyn Dodgers knew Robinson would help the team win games and thus make the team more money. It did not take an act of Govt to break the color barrier in baseball. It was the free market through the profit motive which ended the color barrier.
A truly free market is the solution to many of our problems. If only we weren't so afraid to let freedom work.