that's the thing, you still have a list of questions from me that you haven't answered.
you did answer one, though. you told me that your idea of peacefully denying service to someone based on their skin color was by use of a sign stating that you would not serve them because of their skin color.
two left to go:
1) who has ever been forced to open a dstore that is open to the public?
2) did denial of service to blacks cause harm, and can you show me one historian who agrees with you?
thanks, dickless shitbag.
You asked the most peaceful way for a person to notify somebody of their racist policy. I suggested notification of that be made clear. You then erroneously extrapolated that into my endorsing the ACTIONS of the property owner, their racism, which I don't.
I do endorse property owners determining the use of their own property, you don't.
1) The answer to this question is, the force is not in what or how you asked, it is already placed there by government by virtue of how they say property that is ALREADY private needs to be further defined. Which then makes the property less than private property and wrests control of it from the ostensible owner, by using threats for failure to comply.
2) The answer to the second question is laws which disallowed people to integrate certainly were wrong. Nobody should be forcibly threatened for associating with a person of a different race. Nobody should be forcibly made to associate with a person of a different race. Human interactions should be decided by the people involved on a mutual basis. not by third parties. Especially not by a third party (the federal thugs) that at one time SANCTIFIED slavery and segregation.
Okay Poopy Pants....now it's your turn.
Can a person delegate a right they do not possess?