"It wasn't intended to be a defense of the entire position, rather it was a response to your calling such discrimination abuse and mistreatment that we have laws to protect against"
I guess it is a "response"; but as I said...it is not a defense.
"Other differences include the fact that anti-descrimination don't forbid an abusive action, they compel action, and the fact that there is no natural right to rape or poison, but there is a natural right to choose who you want to associate with or not associate with"
All rights are conditional. We make them up, you see. if you are in prison you may only associate with prisoners, guards, and the whores you can finagle in. Oh...I was just having some fun here...forgive me!
"Unfortunatly the high court's rulings do not always follow the constitution."
Unconstitutional rulings can obviously be challenged. I think you are flying a kite with a broken wing...but go for it. That is how law keeps pace with intellect and social values. GO FOR IT, Tim. Maybe they are wrong and you are right? I don't think it is right that ANY court (high or low) should make unconstitutional laws and rulings. What value is the Constitution, then? Rights become arbitrary and capricious.
I don't see that as happening,, but if YOU do, then YOU ought to do something about it. |
