I don't. Private property is private property. If I own it, then I own it, no matter what it is used for.
One has the right to not invite (fill in the race, religion, sexual orientation here) people to their homes. However I believe that business should not be able to discriminate against these people at the workplace.
Sorry, the basis of a free society is freedom of association. IF someone other than me can force me to associate with someone, then I am essentially a slave.
Granted I do NOT have to accept an invite to someones home if that invitation is dependant on the host rifling thru my ladies purse and my pants pockets. BUT there generally is no financial harm in refusing an invitation to visit someone's home. However, in order to work one MUST (except those who are self employed) go to the work site. The fact that one must enter the property on threat of unemployment/poverty/hunger, IMHO puts that property under public domain as far as the BoR goes.
Oh, good Lord! How is this different than Marxism? You are claiming someone has a right to my money, my property and any job I offer, based upon some supposed right not to be unemployed, impoverished or hungry. Jeez!
Let me make an example ... lets say that the police have been privatized, since they are now under the auspicies of a private company are they now exempt from the BoR ? I certainly hope not.
The Constitution, and Natural Law, allows for "the State" to punish crimes - thus have a police force. The "police" can not be privatized. Faulty analogy.
If businesses were left without ANY control it is also my opinion we would quickly return to the days of sweatshops and child labor.
Nope. You are buying into the "without the government, evil capitalists would oppress everyone" argument. This is the basis of Marxism/socialism.
Though I am a little "l" libertarian edging on RLC I believe this is one area that needs to be controlled.
Please, stop refering to yourself as a libertarian. This position you have taken is the anti-thesis of our beliefs.
In my definition of police, prison guards are also "police". They HAVE been privatized so based on that definition, your statement about police not being able to be privatized is untrue.
As far as my not being a libertarian under your definition ...
Well ... I took that lib test and even with the views I previously stated, it said I was a personal freedom libertarian. If that test is incorrect perhaps they should change it.
You know Free Tally ,,, we have so far seen eye to eye on the issues. I'm somewhat surprised that you would react the way you did when I stepped a little out of the "party" line. This is what a lot of Libertarians accuse GOP's of doing.
BUT alright a better analogy ... the street in front of my house has been bought from the county by a private company. The company will not let ne use the sidewalk nor the street unless I submit to a strip search by their PRIVATE officers. Is THIS a violation of my rights. after all I don't have to use their street or sidewalk ... of course I can't leave my property with using them ... so I starve to death unless I comply.
An other analogy ...
ALL retail stores have formed a coalition in that they will not let anyone on their property who does NOT have the ID chip embedded and 666 tatooed to their head. Granted I could grow my own food BUT the real estate company / title companies are also part of this coalition so I can't buy property and the seed store won't let me buy seed for the same reason ... oh and that private water company .. they won't let me have water without that chip either ... NOW WHAT!!!!
Well ... we will have to agree to disagree on that one. I myself will fight for those right no matter who is trying to usurp them. If that means that I am NOT a libertarian ... so be it.