Pass a law please.....

[farmerbyron]

I think you need to go re-read the Bill of Rights. Race is not mentioned in there at all, and religion is only mentioned insofar as it prevents Congress from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." It says nothing about being able to force people to associate with anyone else.

As for your question about WaMart, being able to do something and actually doing it are two entirely different things. They would not post a sign like that not because it is illegal but because it's bad business--ignoring the certain protests, artificially limiting your business is a mistake when you're trying to sell as much as possible.

Ummm. 15th amendment.

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

 

[SMS]

You know that the Bill of Rights is the first ten amendments right?

 

[farmerbyron]

You know that the Bill of Rights is the first ten amendments right?

Yes and every amendment is just as valid as every other part of the constitution. After all, the "bill of rights" is just a list of 10 amendments.

I mean if the first 10 are all that matter, then why are womenfolk and such voting?

 

[SoonerP226]

Here's what was in question:

Religion and race are covered under the Bill of Rights, just as the right to arm ourselves is.

The Bill of Rights is the first ten amendments, so how does the 15th Amendment enter into the discussion? Hint--if you're talking about the Bill of Rights and you have to take off your shoes to continue counting Amendments, you've gone too far.

 

[farmerbyron]

Here's what was in question:

The Bill of Rights is the first ten amendments, so how does the 15th Amendment enter into the discussion? Hint--if you're talking about the Bill of Rights and you have to take off your shoes to continue counting Amendments, you've gone too far.

Some slaves and Indians living from 1791-1865 would probably disagree with race being covered by the BOR.



EDIT: I'm an idiot arguing with someone agreeing with me.

 

[WessonOil]

Oops..I stand corrected. Guess "negroes" aren't citizens in the U.S. any more.

Guess you won't be letting Colion Noir in your place of business.

Now I'd REALLY love to be a fly on the wall when you get to tell him "No Colored People Allowed" in your store. lol

http://www.mrcolionnoir.com/

 

[SMS]

Thanks for continuing to reinforce my point.

 

[SoonerP226]

Oops..I stand corrected. Guess "negroes" aren't citizens in the U.S. any more.

Guess you won't be letting Colion Noir in your place of business.

Is your grasp of logic really that flawed, or are you just trolling?

 

[caojyn]

Thanks for continuing to reinforce my point.

Lol, This seems appropriate

 

[henschman]

lol ^^

Yes, the 15th Amendment prohibits states from denying the right to vote based on race. However, we are 1) talking about private discrimination rather than state-sponsored, and 2) this discussion has nothing to do with voting... so I'm not quite sure where you're going with that.

The 14th Amendment has been interpreted to prohibit certain types of state discrimination based on race -- but there is nothing in the Constitution regarding private discrimination, which is what we are talking about here. The main prohibition on that is the Civil Rights Act of 1964.