No Negroes Allowed

[Jogeephus]

Horrible sign isn't it? A black eye in our country's history and I think most would agree this is a clear sign of government condoned discrimination. Don't mean to stir the pot only make a point and pose the question as to what discrimination is. I'm sure your adrenalin is up so don't blow a fuse just yet.

Is this sign any different than this sign on Toby Keith's new restaurant? Is this not discrimination? Aren't you are depriving a law abiding citizen the right of service when they are doing nothing more than exercising their constitutional right? What good will this sign do?

I guess my question is, is how is one form of discrimination different than another? How can we accept one form of discrimination and not another? Our country has changed a lot or have we?

 

[slick4591]

My first reaction would be that a person has no control over their skin color and they have to make a conscious decision whether to arm themselves or not.

 

[Jogeephus]

Good point. But on the other hand, my family and I are supposed to ignore gay people smooching in a restaurant and we find this extremely offensive but this is their right and I accept their right to do this. I don't like it but I accept it. Why is this any different? Is this not discrimination?

 

[highgrit]

I see where he has a right to put that sign up. And I should have the right to put the other sign up if I feel like it. I don't like the no hunting and no alcohol sales on Sunday rules either. I don't want the Liberals or the Holly Rollers pushing their agenda down my throat either. Discrimination is not right, but neither is gay marriage or interracial marriages. IMO

 

[Jogeephus]

I very well may in the minority on this but I think discrimination is discrimination. If you are doing business with the public then your doors should be open to the public as long as they are not breaking any laws, infringing on other people's rights or imposing a threat to their safety. If you want to be selective in who you serve you can always form a private club with selective membership.

 

[highgrit]

What like the Masters tried to do?? I agree with you, just another looking at another angle.

 

[I luv herfrds]

Jo I am not allowed to have any form of weapon at my job even though I have a permit. Rather funny since I can carry a box cutter. Just figure they do not want my money. Know what you are saying about two guys or two girls kissing in public. Should hear my kids reaction.

 

[inyati13]

Jo, a thoughtful question. I think anytime there is an insinuation that another human being is inherently inferior because of his race or ethnic origins raises the bar of disgust to a much higher level than denying someone the right to exercise a constitutional right. Both are abhorrent. I am not a Christian but I adhere to many Christian doctrines. One of those is that men are created equal. The sign denying a man access because he is a negro is disgusting. The amount of melanin in the skin that covers your heart and mind should not have anything to do with it.

A story about ethnic origins. When I was in Denver, I was a member of a sextet of guys who went out drinking one night a week to Dixon’s Bar and Grill on 16th Street. There were two Hispanics in the sextet. I will use the name Garcia for one and Hernandez for the other. Garcia was from a Ranch in northern New Mexico and the other was from Albuquerque. We got on the subject of the ethnic origins of Mexicans. Garcia was doing a tap dance distancing himself from having a Mexican label placed on himself. He was saying his family had aristocratic Spanish blood and they avoided mixing with the native Americans and Mexicans. When he got through, one of us ask Hernandez about his background. He says, “I am just a f**kin Mexican. But that is better than being a f**king inbred Spanish-American like Garcia.” The subject never went any further. Garcia never said much the rest of the night.

 

[Jogeephus]

:lol2: Sounds like Garcia took just enough rope to hang himself with. :lol2:

I'd like to pose another question in this. Ok, so Toby Keith bans people with guns. Does this apply to law enforcement officers as well? I mean, no guns is NO GUNS right? Or are they exempted from the rule? If so, Why? All men are equal, right?

I just think it silly to put up a sign like that when its only going to infringe on the right of the honest man since a robber isn't going to abide by the rule.

 

[inyati13]

:lol2: Sounds like Garcia took just enough rope to hang himself with. :lol2:

I'd like to pose another question in this. Ok, so Toby Keith bans people with guns. Does this apply to law enforcement officers as well? I mean, no guns is NO GUNS right? Or are they exempted from the rule? If so, Why? All men are equal, right?

I just think it silly to put up a sign like that when its only going to infringe on the right of the honest man since a robber isn't going to abide by the rule.

Jo, law enforcement authority emanates from the police powers act and other authority to protect the public. They are not restrained by any ban placed under individual rights of this nature. People put up all manner of signs alleging law enforcement cannot enter or enter at their own peril, etc. They mean nothing.

 

[inyati13]

This is where police power comes from:

"In United States constitutional law, police power is the capacity of the states to regulate behavior and enforce order within their territory for the betterment of the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of their inhabitants."

 

[Jogeephus]

This is where police power comes from:

"In United States constitutional law, police power is the capacity of the states to regulate behavior and enforce order within their territory for the betterment of the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of their inhabitants."

After reading this I would assume Homeland Security, FBI and ATF would have to leave their guns in their car. :mrgreen:

 

[inyati13]

Jo, I remember that some states do not allow public establishments to restrict the right to carry. However, if it is a federal building, or federal property, the state may not have jurisdiction. For example, federal buildings where Federal Judges or Adminstrative law judges hold court have no carry requirements and you are checked by armed guards on entry and usually have to pass through a security check before being allowed to proceed beyond security.

 

[presmudjo]

Judges ruled the baker had to provide for a gay couple, so maybe someone will bring a suit against the no guns allowed. It is discrimination because i choose to bring my gun where I go, as I have a right to.

 

[Jogeephus]

Federal property is federal property and private is private. Its the exceptions on private property I have a problem with because I don't think discrimination should be allowed in any form. We are all equal right? If I am willing to tolerate two homosexuals groping each other then the least the others can do is tolerate my having a firearm especially when its concealed. Why make me a criminal when all I'm doing is exercising my right that is protected in the constitution? If we are going to have equality lets not pick and choose who is more equal than another.

 

[greybeard]

Many states have laws that forbid firearms where alcohol is served. Is T Keith's place food only or food and booze?

 

[sim.-ang.king]

The first two Amendments of the Constitution can be discriminated if someone feels so needed, but don't you dare discriminate on the other 25!

 

[Jogeephus]

Many states have laws that forbid firearms where alcohol is served. Is T Keith's place food only or food and booze?

From what I read he has the choice to allow them or not. Here, if the establishment is geared more toward drink than food you can't carry inside the establishment. I have no problem with that because guns, knives, ninja stars, spears, Ronco Throwing knives, souped up lawnmowers, and crotch rockets just don't mix well with alcohol. Any law abiding citizen with a CC permit knows these laws so a sign on the door is would be unnecessary unless you were just wanting to make an issue out of nothing. In fairness to Mr. Keith, he probably delegated this to some minion and didn't have any input in the sign in the first place. Hope he didn't.

 

[artesianspringsfarm]

Jo, I think just from my casual following of this site that I get your personality and sensibilities, and can tell I would get along just fine with you. I do have to say I definitely disagree with your logic here though. You have have said discrminating on race(A)= Discriminating against armed people(B). Then you also said discriminating against armed people(B)=discriminating against homosexuals(C). Therefore, if A=B and B=C, then A=C. I'm sorry, but I do not believe discriminating based on race, which is how our Good Lord made someone to inherently and genetically be is equal to someone who actively practices a sin. Yes, I am fully aware that my view is biased and based off of a worldview that is based on the Bible, but I also believe it to be truth. I don't expect all others to agree and am ok with that, but I do believe racism is always wrong, and the two other forms of discrimination have their place and are not based off something that is a part of the essence of a person.

 

[Jogeephus]

I follow what you are saying and I would be more than happy to see signs on the door restricting access to sinful people but this is not the way of things today and I do think there should be a large divide between church and state. They say this is what they want till it comes to something like this. Its the discrimination against the law abiding people I have an issue with. Offending other's sensitivities so to speak. I don't want my children to be desensitized to sin nor do I want them to get the false impression that someone is wrong or a criminal for exercising their constitutional rights and I don't confine this to just guns. Its everything. If I am to ignore and tolerate others then should they not extend me the same level of tolerance. There seems to be a double standard and I don't think this is right.