Ron Paul "1964 Civil Rights act" is a non-issue, page 1

Can we please put this aside. This is clearly a political talking point aimed at hurting Ron Paul.

dont get me wrong, there are plenty of things i can disagree with Ron Paul on, this is not one of them.
The law was passed because of segregation issue's. It was important at the time but in todays society it has no purpose and getting rid of it would do no harm.
Here are just some reasons why the law is outdated and basically meaningless today:

1) Racism is publically unacceptable. Therefore, its against business interet to discriminate in the first place.

2) Any business can discriminate if they really want to. No amount of laws will ever change that.
Have you ever walked into a business and seen a "We Have the Right to Refuse Service to Anyone" sign?
LEgally, that allows the business to refuse service to ANYONE, for ANY reason, for ANY amount of time.
Whether it be a drunk homeless man or that ethnic culture you dont want in your store, at the end of the day that sign gives you the right to be a racist. And even though racism is outdated and wrong, people are still racist. I have seen stores treat customers of certain ethnicity very poorly. Those customers never come back and it is bad for business.

3) No amount of government laws will ever eliminate racism. And any laws attempting to do so will result in big problems for businesses, regardless of whether they are being racially critical or not.

Here's an exampe: Lets say you pass a law banning the sign that reads "We have the Right to refuse service to anyone.'

Now what?
Now homeless men can walk into your store and sleep there, and there's nothing you can do.
People causing trouble and scaring customers away will not be allowed to be removed from the store. Even worse, attempting to remove a hoodlum from a store may result in the "racism card" being played, even though the store owner had perfect reason to remove the person from the store.

This is just the tip of the ice berg too. There is no end in sight when you really think about.

So really, i am just pointing out some obvious reasons why this debate is pointless. It is just an attack on Ron Paul's reputation and has nothing to do with racism.

You can call him a liberatarian, cuz he is definately a conservative liberatarian.
You can calll him anti-war, anti-abortion all that good stuff.

But Racist? cmon... did we run out of bad things to say about Mr Paul?