Posted on 09/13/2016 8:29:36 AM PDT by semperfidevildog
Congress would never pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964 today. There would be no need. And therein lies the root of the deepening crisis facing the republic.
But such a campaign to persuade the American people and earn their support would not—does not—happen today. Today, such important matters are diligently kept from the hands of voters and handed over to judges and powerful commissars in places like the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. No voter persuasion is required.
(Excerpt) Read more at amgreatness.com ...
The 1964 Civil Rights Act is patently unconstitutional and should be repealed. All it is is another unconstitutional federal power grab. The feds have NO constitutional authority over discrimination ( “discrimination” BTW=freedom of choice) except for the prohibition of segregation in state laws prohibited by the 14th Amendment.
“We’d Never Pass the 1964 Civil Rights Act Today”
********************
?????????????????????????????????
Imam Ubama would probably veto it, though.
But if we allow discrimination, then some folks might has a feelz bad.
We never should have passed it in 1964. Barry Goldwater was exactly right in his grounds for opposing it. It has become an abusive instrument to punish people who do not "right think" according to government imposed morality.
It and subsequent acts are what have given us this "gay marriage" and "gay wedding cake" nonsense.
While it's intentions were good, it removes from individual choice what had previously been regarded as the freedom of association.
THE CRA is biased against white people in spite of its “no person” language, and is used as blackmail against employers. It may have been well intentioned at the time, but it’s one piece of legislation we should have never passed.
Yeah...if the DNC controlled Congress. They didn’t vote for it in the 60s. Nothing changes much.
Patriots, the feds have only those powers which the states have delegated to the feds expressly via the Constitution.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
And the only powers that states have constitutionally delegated to the feds to protect citizens on the basis of race and sex are the voting rights amendments evidenced by the 15th and 19th Amendments.
So the corrupt, post-17th Amendment ratification feds actually have no constitutonal authority to address race and sex issues outside the scope of voting rights imo. Lawmakers make unconstitutonal civil rights laws to protect politically correct race and sex rights, presumably to win votes from low-information citizens who do not understand the fed’s constitutionally limited powers.
Remember in November !
Patriots need to support Trump / Pence by also electing a new, state sovereignty-respecting Congress that will not only work within its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers to support Trump’s vision for making America great again for everybody, but will also put a stop to unconstitutonal federal taxes and likewise unconstitutional inteference in state affairs. Interference in state affairs is evidenced by unconstitutional civil rights laws.
Note that such a Congress will also probably be willing to fire state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices.
It is nothing more or less than the loss of the right to free association— of a person or business entity. Free association allows individuals or groups to be discriminated against or rewarded based on their behavior. By eliminating the effective exercise of this right, and broadening the law to ever more deviant “protected classes”, it has become a tool, along with social welfare programs, whose primary purpose is to separate the deviant population from the natural negative consequences of their actions. It effectively mocks God’s intended plan by allowing sinful behavior to be pursued indefinitely without consequence.
IMHO if it had never been passed, segregation would have died anyway as Southern states increasingly came to realize that it was self-defeating and a drag on economic growth.
Of course it might have taken another twenty years. And they would have been rough, ugly years.
Well said. Basically what it does, it ends up destroying the dominant values (culture) as any delusions become accorded the benefits and protection of “civil rights”.
This leads into the splintering of the national culture and the tearing down of the national will through divisions. Eventually it may become a takeover target of a more culturally unified and confident foe.
Freedom, though not perfect is always a better alternative than the tyranny of unconstitutional federal acts. This great, unconstitutional federal power grab has done vastly more harm than good and has extended federal power way beyond what the Constitution contemplates. Everyone is worse off because of this Act and other acts of federal tyranny.
Historically it was the camel’s nose under the tent in the perversion of the Commerce Clause. Hard to argue that.
The commerce clause is one of the main perversions of the Constitution in facilitating the growth of the feds.
What the Leftist “living” Constitution really means is MORE GOVERNMENT, LESS INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM.
As Barry Goldwater told us at the time.
Legally-enforced segregation violates the Fourteenth Amendment, but doesn’t legally-enforced integration also? And for the same reasons.
Actually, in a political sense, that might not be a bad thing.
Hubert Humphrey, in the face of Goldwater’s criticisms, said that if the bill led to racial quotas, he’d eat his hat. Goldwater bought him a hat.
Private, voluntary action can take care of discrimination. Boycotts, word of mouth, negative advertising, and other means can cause people to stop doing business with the discriminatory business, and thus put it out of business.
It’s called the free market. It might be a good idea to try it sometime.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.