I think that is a point of view that comes from someone who typically has privilege. Have you ever been told you were too dirty, your skin not your state of cleanliness, to handle a product or eat a table?
Yes, really! One of you is saying âWithout civil rights laws, thatâd still be the norm in many places in the south,â whereas another is saying âwhat actually forced them to abandon segregation was ⌠boycottsâ. So there is some pretty stark disagreement about the facts of the matter here.
I can totally get behind the idea that both helped, and maybe itâs impossible to say which one was the definitive factor, and maybe they even fed off each other⌠but thatâs not a position anyone has put forward here.
Yes, it was a âwhy not bothâ situation. Black people and some of their allies had been doing what they could to combat segregation and the denial of the franchise since the end of Reconstruction in one form or another, often at great risk to life and limb, picking up in the 20th Century and especially after WW2.
With the advent of TV news broadcast nationwide by the early 1960âs enough national moral outrage finally forced the federal governmentâs hand to (begin to) finish the job with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of the following year. Truman had technically desegregated the US Military by 1950 IIRC, and there had been the seminal Brown v. Board decision in 1954, but without some federal muscle that was being honored more in the breach than in the observance.
At this point I think people need to be thinking whether fight or flight is the best option. If things donât change I think we see a real breaking point next decade.
It was also civil disobedience. Sitting in the white personâs area on a bus or a lunch counter and refusing to leave. I get annoyed when I see someone say itâs just a cake. It was just buses and lunch counters too!
Yeah, if this baker wins, what stops anyone from saying âItâs against my religion to let Jews or Black people eat at my restaurant.â
I think that the reality is that both are true.
Boycotts clearly had tangible effects. Civil rights laws and court rulings clearly also played a key role in winding the Jim Crow laws which unfairly limited the rights of blacks in the South.
According to Timex, the stink eye will force everyone to just be nice.
The fact that they would then lose all their business?
Unless thereâs really enough hard core racists in that area (and really, you would be eliminating even the mildly passive racists at that point) to sustain the business.
And I donât think there is.
Or how about the fact that most people just donât care about politics like this. How do you think âWhites Onlyâ businesses existed in the 50s?
Either this is about civil rights or itâs not. If gay rights are civil rights, then fuck all this free market shit. People donât get to choose whether they grant each other civil rights in this country. You lost that battle the day the Constitution was signed, Timex, sorry.
I think that the social environment is dramatically different now than it was a half century ago.
If some restaurant said they were not going to serve blacks or Jews, do you really think that the only folks who would care would be super politically active ones?
Sorry, I donât. Iâm pretty sure that virtually everyone is gonna avoid going to âthe racist restaurantâ. Like literally every single person I know would avoid it, because no one would want to be the guy supporting it.
Three certainly could be a few that would, but I donât you could sustain a business on that small chunk of the population who doesnât care about being associated with over racism like that.
Dude, you donât have the right to do business with me. Thatâs not a thing.
I get to choose who I engage in economic transactions.
You arenât arguing in favor of rights, you are arguing to restrict them, because you donât like the choices sometime might make.
I think youâre wrong, and I hope to god that I never live in a country that allows that sort of thing. Imagine having to check the front door sign every time you enter a business to figure out if youâre allowed to go in or not.
But you have to a large extent or you are going to make life for the gay teen, a whole lot worse.
Some people are assholes and no government rules or regulations are ever going to change that. But most people are pretty tolerant sure they may make homophopic jokes, but they arenât going to go out of there way to to make life miserable for gay person (teen or adult).
But they do get resentful when somebody from the federal government tells them they have to act a certain way, which is widely unpopular in their community.
The target for their resentment very often is the same gay teen you are trying to protect.
It absolutely is a thing. In many states and cities, if you do business with anyone, you have to do business with everyone.
You choose to go into business. Nobody is forcing you to do anything. This is literally an actual law that exists.
You think laws are going to change that, dude? Really?
Because being legally required to serve you isnât gonna mean that some racist fuck isnât going to spit in your food.
Uh, no. Itâs totally not.
If you come into my store and you havenât bathed in a month, I can totally throw you out⌠or I should be able to. The local fish monger here is a Quaker, and he doesnât allow swearing in his store. You curse, he refuses to sell you fish.
And thatâs his right, in my opinion.
If you are a really shitty person, like say David Duke, I should totally be able to refuse to do business with you.
If you are known for dishonesty, like Trump, I should be able to refuse to do business with you.
If you walk into a grocery store and you havenât bathed in a month, youâre not going to be thrown out. Why do you think this is a thing? Theyâre not going to even ask you to leave.
Uh, I dunno about where you are, but yeah, the stores around here with likely throw you out if you stink⌠and it makes sense, because it affects other customers.
Same thing for stuff like requiring shoes and proper clothing.
Maybe they donât do that kind of thing where you are, but they do here.
In fine dining restaurants, yes. Grocery stores, gas stations⌠no they donât. Shoes shirt, service basically. You bet there would be people out there today who would not serve a black person food or gas or give them apartment or rent housing⌠which by the way, the last two are illegal to do too, not just because everyone expects everyone else to love thy neighbors.
Most places reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, and sorry, but I think itâs their right.
Trying to force someone to do business with you serve no useful purpose. You donât WANT to give business to that kind of person, do you?