[Dolphan]

I'm gonna get nailed for this but...private property owners should be allowed to restrict/admit whoever they please onto all or any of their property.

[steve86]

Go away, newbie.

[NASBWI]

"I'm gonna get nailed for this but...private property owners should be allowed to restrict/admit whoever they please onto all or any of their property."

That's all well and good when that property is yours alone and not to share with anyone else (if everyone entering your space is a guest). However, what do you say when there's a Homeowners Association that rents out their property to others? It may be private, but if they're going to rent their property to others, you have to take into account the freedoms of others who may want to rent.

This is why the anti-discrimination act came along - to provide reason to the selection process. In other words, if you want to keep riffraff out, then fine; run a background check on everyone (regardless of their race) applying to rent your space. However, to say that you just don't want someone in your space because he/she is a certain colour is a baseless argument, and it hurts the freedom of the people wishing to rent.

[SlowBoat407]

I'm gonna get nailed for this but...private property owners should be allowed to restrict/admit whoever they please onto all or any of their property.

Private property owners, yes, but this was a business, a resort doing business with the public. In case you hadn't heard, the public now includes black people. Private property rights are a poor refuge for public racism.

[rebelyeller]

Exactly Right. I don't consider myself a racist and this is clearly a tasteless act; however private property is private property and the owner of said private property should have the right to include or exclude any one for any reason. We all complain about loosing personal property rights this is just another example.

[AppyPappy]

private property owners should be allowed to restrict/admit whoever they please onto all or any of their property.

Thank you Mr Crow.

[BootsOnTheGround]

"I'm gonna get nailed for this but...private property owners should be allowed to restrict/admit whoever they please onto all or any of their property."

I'd like to keep clueless idiots off my property but they blend in with all the others.

Could you help me out with that:

*Hands Dolphan a t-shirt printed with "Clueless Idiot" *

Now put that on and stay off my property.

[mhking]

I'm gonna get nailed for this but...private property owners should be allowed to restrict/admit whoever they please onto all or any of their property.

So they should be permitted to keep us "filthy dark people" out, right?

Feh.

[Skooz]

I agree 100%.

[Mulch]

Agreed.

What about the rights of the business owner? He has the right to determine for himself who he wants to to do business with. If a black businessman wanted to exclude whites he should have that right as well. The consumer's rights have also been violated since they do not have a choice to go to an all whites/blacks business or an integrated business. The government does not have(or at least shouldn't have) the constitutional authority to interfere.

Blacks organizations and institutions exclude whites all the time and no one seems to make a fuss over that. Lets name a few: black businessman's associations, college fraternities, political organizations, black MBA Association, black pages (like the yellow pages but only black owned business are included),

[wtc911]

I'm gonna get nailed for this but...private property owners should be allowed to restrict/admit whoever they please onto all or any of their property........

--------------------------------------------------

Not if they use the property in any publicly commercial way, such as renting.

[rdb3]

I'm gonna get nailed for this but...private property owners should be allowed to restrict/admit whoever they please onto all or any of their property.

You're not gonna be nailed by me. Par for the course for you. But I do have a question.

Why did this resort take these family members' money, then turned around and denied them access to all amenities at that resort?

[Stone Mountain]

I'm gonna get nailed for this but...private property owners should be allowed to restrict/admit whoever they please onto all or any of their property.

What about a family who had already paid for the use of the facilities?

[hispanarepublicana]

I'm gonna get nailed for this but...private property owners should be allowed to restrict/admit whoever they please onto all or any of their property.

Well, then, they shouldn't expect fire and police protection, since some of them might be "undesirables", IMHO.

[HereInTheHeartland]

So you think a world where a sign that says "No Coloreds" is ok on a restaurant door?
Wow I don't. That kind of behavior is Neanderthal and stupid.
The closest thing to it today is how liberals want to seperate us into groups.
If you are black and were there, would you think it was ok that your children were told that they wern't worthy to swim because of the pigment in their skin?
There are to many false situations where Jesse Jackson and his gang of thugs get their racist machine all cranked up to extort money.
This is a real situation where someone has been wronged. It was probably just one stupid person managing the place, it will cost someone $$.

[lepton]

I'm gonna get nailed for this but...private property owners should be allowed to restrict/admit whoever they please onto all or any of their property.

Even if you assume that, there is the matter of changing the qualitiy of amenities after they have been paid for based upon race. At the least that is fraud, based upon race.

[joeystoy]

Bay Tree isn't simply an association of private homeowners. They have a management company that rents condo units to families and groups and are therefore a public accomodation. It's the same as Hilton renting your family a room and then barring you from the pool.

It's wrong on every possible level.