Posted on 05/08/2007 8:27:49 PM PDT by doesnt suffer fools gladly
um, he wasn’t found “innocent” of the killings. he was found not guilty. very important difference.
“Dude slit his wife’s neck from ear to ear.”
Wasn’t proven.
“If I owned a restaurant,I’d deny service to (among others) either of the Clintons,either of the Kerrys,the entire Kennedy family,OJ,Michael Jackson and Peyton Manning.”
I sympathize with your emotions and basically agree. BUT, to deny service to any of them would be discrimination, would it not?
Eventually, the American people need to begin calling a spade a spade, not changing the rules to apply differently to different genders or different races for different reasons. If we fail to do this, we may lose our nation.
Of course it was. No one could have convinced that jury of anything.
“As is, or should be, his right. If a smelly, poorly dressed man came in he could/would refuse him service. Well, metaphorically, OJ smelled pretty bad to him. And, based on the customer’s responses, he was doing for their benefit also.”
And if you had your home up for sale and a smelly, poorly dressed man came in and offered you your asking price, would you sell your house to him? If you didn’t you’d be convicted of discrimination.
You do not have a “right” to discriminate on the basis of your emotions. Check the law.
So? Not all 'discrimination' is bad. I'll tell you this, if I am in that restaurant and they were to serve that murderer, I would leave and tell them why I was leaving. Their choice, the murderer or me, one of is going. I bet I would not be alone as I left.
Wasn’t proven
Yes it was. He was found 'not guilty', he was not found 'innocent'. The man killed her, you cannot seriously believe otherwise. This was a 'jury nullification case by a racist jury, pure and simple.
‘And why can’t a person “discriminate”?’
Answered by Rosa Parks 50 or so years ago.
“He should’ve given him a special menu where everything cost $33.5 million dollars”
R O T F L M A O
“i don’t see this as anything “evil”
private establishment”
What Ruby runs is a public house. He is not serving guests of his family at no charge to them, he is operating a business and charging money for food and drink.
He is not permitted to choose who he will and will not serve although some dress codes can be enforced.
“Of course it was. No one could have convinced that jury of anything.”
OK, they convinced you. Were you the Foreman of the jury?
“So? Not all ‘discrimination’ is bad. I’ll tell you this, if I am in that restaurant and they were to serve that murderer, I would leave and tell them why I was leaving. Their choice, the murderer or me, one of is going. I bet I would not be alone as I left.”
We would both make that choice, but note that you and I are both using the word choose. Ruby used the words “won’t serve you.” That’s different. That’s illegal in a business establishment.
Do you even remember the reason given by the black jurors as to why they didn’t convict?
Wasn’t proven.So? Not based on the rules at that particular trial. At the subsequent civil trial it was. Goldman won.
Nor is discriminating against a killer against the law. Get over it.+
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic Ping List:
Please ping me to all note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
Yep, discrimination, pure and simple.
AND PERFECTLY LEGAL!
“Do you even remember the reason given by the black jurors as to why they didn’t convict?”
All of that is in the “ago.” Not relevant. I think I know why they didn’t convict, but that is also not relevant. What you think is also not relevant, is it?
More moronic MSNBC public school educated reporter BS. OJ was not found innocent. He was not proven guilty.
“Nor is discriminating against a killer against the law.”
Know any lawyers or judges? Pose that issue to them; you’ll get a bit of an education.
What the owner cannot do is throw OJ out BECAUSE he is black (sort of). What the owner can do is refuse to serve a man whom he believes would cause a disruption or discomfort to his clientele.
Let OJ bring charges and no jury in the US would convict him, unless they assembled the same 12 numb nuts that voted against all available evidence.
What was the answer?
Is it unconstitutional for a restaurant owner to throw out a bum?
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.