1960s era civil rights laws typically passed Congress with overwhelming majorities of both parties support.
In both parties Northern Congressmen voted nearly 100% for the new laws and Southerners nearly 100% opposed.
Since nearly all Southerners then were Democrats, they made Democrat majorities smaller than Republicans'.
Those non-Southern Republicans (such as you mention here) who opposed some of the new laws did so on grounds that businesses should be able to choose their customers.
None in my memory continued opposition once the laws had passed.
Barry Goldwater, iirc, ended his career in a much different key than his song in 1964.
Now there's an understatement!
“Barry Goldwater, iirc, ended his career in a much different key than his song in 1964. “
Elaborate on what you mean.
While I do not want to touch off one of these divisive debates, which divert attention away the more immediate issues in today's politics, there is a palpable, if implied, fallacy in your argument, yesterday, which should at least deserve a more than passing comment.
The propensity of politicians (Left, Right or just eager for attention) to jump on bandwagons, can never justify the notion that basic moral or legal questions should simply be determined by "counting noses." The idea that Government should have the right to forbid citizens, able to afford to hire others with their own funds, from exercising their preferences for their kith & kin, or people who share their theological views or a common history, is not validated in respect to our cultural insights by politicians' climbing on bandwagons.