Ron Paul on Employee Rights (Part 3): Darn Those Pesky Civil Rights Laws
Published by James Peters January 17th, 2008 in Discrimination, Policy : OpinionIn this third and final installment in our series on Ron Paul’s comments about employee rights in his book Freedom Under Siege, we examine his views on civil rights legislation in general, which can be found in several sections of his book, but is best summed up with the following quote found on page 39:
[P]eople have the right to discriminate…in choosing…an employee…. Civil rights legislation of the past thirty years has totally ignored this principle. Many ‘do-gooders,’ of course, argue from the ‘moral high ground’ for their version of equal rights, knowing that they can play the sympathies and the guilt of many Americans.
It appears Mr. Paul is not only against protection of women in the face of discrimination, but virtually all protected minorities and classifications, including race, religion, and age.
What else is there for me to say about Mr. Paul’s views other than I disagree completely and as someone who thinks of himself as a “do-gooder,” they offend me. I would think the majority of independent voters tend to agree with me, but recent polls showing independent support for him seem to tell a different story.
This will likely be my last foray into political commentary for this election cycle. It has been an eye-opening experience and at least solidified who I will not be supporting in the upcoming elections.
Table of Contents for This Series
- Ron Paul on Employee Rights (Part 1): Sexual Harassment-What’s the Big Deal?
- Ron Paul on Employee Rights (Part 2): Unattractive Women Need Not Apply
- Ron Paul on Employee Rights (Part 3): Darn Those Pesky Civil Rights Laws
Tags
California Employment Law | Disability Discrimination | Discrimination | Gender Discrimination | National Origin Discrimination | News | Policy : Opinion | Race Discrimination
DISCLAIMER
What Ron Paul has also said about civil rights and what you ignored to paint it all black:
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 not only violated the Constitution and reduced individual liberty; it also failed to achieve its stated goals of promoting racial harmony and a color-blind society. Federal bureaucrats and judges cannot read minds to see if actions are motivated by racism. Therefore, the only way the federal government could ensure an employer was not violating the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was to ensure that the racial composition of a business’s workforce matched the racial composition of a bureaucrat or judge’s defined body of potential employees. Thus, bureaucrats began forcing employers to hire by racial quota. Racial quotas have not contributed to racial harmony or advanced the goal of a color-blind society. Instead, these quotas encouraged racial balkanization, and fostered racial strife.
@Jonas: Mind reading” is not necessary and is not valid evidence to rule against an employer. Unless there is actual proof of racial discrimination, it is highly unlikely that a court would rule against an employer.
Additionally, “racial quotas” are illegal and a form of reverse racial discrimination that is just as illegal as discrimination against minorities by the private sector.
Thank you for the comment, though. Until I found these and other comments that I found offensive, I was actually a tentative fan of Ron Paul.