Here’s the thing, if a black or gay person was asked to leave the premises would that be constitutional? Think about this man like Rosa Parks. Since then, we have changed the laws of discrimination but it wouldn’t have been done without people defying unconstitutional situations. The mandate by the mayor is over reach and the actions of the restaurant are discrimination. Both are unconstitutional. Period. This isn’t a grey area. Refusing to be served was the jumping off point that led to arrest. He won’t be held accountable if he has a good attorney. People have to defy in order to bring it to attention to the courts.
If you have discrimination on one side, and slavery and destruction of property rights on the other side of the equation, I'm all down with discrimination. Its simply the lesser of two evils. Both groups you mention in your example assert 'rights' to commit crime now, based on the 'civil rights' rubric that was actually used to attack the civil rights of all others. I'd put it to you that the massive crime and indoctrination against children in schools and elsewhere came about because of these 'rights'. Objectively and in hindsight, I dont think any of these things thought of as victories actually were.
The example I gave earlier still holds - if criminals assert a right to enter your home and attack you, and you cant discriminate as the owner of that property to contest this.. do you really have civilization? Or just a fading vestige of what once was.
Here’s the thing, if a black or gay person was asked to leave the premises would that be constitutional? Think about this man like Rosa Parks. Since then, we have changed the laws of discrimination but it wouldn’t have been done without people defying unconstitutional situations. The mandate by the mayor is over reach and the actions of the restaurant are discrimination. Both are unconstitutional. Period. This isn’t a grey area. Refusing to be served was the jumping off point that led to arrest. He won’t be held accountable if he has a good attorney. People have to defy in order to bring it to attention to the courts.
If you have discrimination on one side, and slavery and destruction of property rights on the other side of the equation, I'm all down with discrimination. Its simply the lesser of two evils. Both groups you mention in your example assert 'rights' to commit crime now, based on the 'civil rights' rubric that was actually used to attack the civil rights of all others. I'd put it to you that the massive crime and indoctrination against children in schools and elsewhere came about because of these 'rights'. Objectively and in hindsight, I dont think any of these things thought of as victories actually were.
The example I gave earlier still holds - if criminals assert a right to enter your home and attack you, and you cant discriminate as the owner of that property to contest this.. do you really have civilization? Or just a fading vestige of what once was.