The More We Evolve, the Less We Need God

[carpedm9587]

The Civil Rights Act is grounded in the Fourteenth Amendment and it ended discrimination in public places on the basis of race, colour, religion, sex or national origin.

I'm not sure we can say it "ended discrimination"...

[carpedm9587]

There is no Constitutional right to not be discriminated against.

And yet the Constitution, in its preamble, identifies three inalienable rights: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. There are few things as destructive to happiness as experiencing discrimination - especially when it is systemic or systemically endorsed. While I recognize it is not the role of government to ensure we are all happy, it is the role of government to foster a country and culture where each of us can successfully "pursue happiness." Indeed, many countries now use a "happiness quotient" to guide public policy, and have consistently come up as the countries where the greatest number of their populace have the greatest levels of overall life satisfaction and joy. The U.S. is very low on that list.

Makes one wonder how, perhaps, we could shift our priorities to perhaps helping all people find greater levels of happiness and satisfaction in life.

[seer]

And yet the Constitution, in its preamble, identifies three inalienable rights: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. There are few things as destructive to happiness as experiencing discrimination - especially when it is systemic or systemically endorsed. While I recognize it is not the role of government to ensure we are all happy, it is the role of government to foster a country and culture where each of us can successfully "pursue happiness." Indeed, many countries now use a "happiness quotient" to guide public policy, and have consistently come up as the countries where the greatest number of their populace have the greatest levels of overall life satisfaction and joy. The U.S. is very low on that list.

Makes one wonder how, perhaps, we could shift our priorities to perhaps helping all people find greater levels of happiness and satisfaction in life.

Carp, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are not found in the Constitution. And I have no problem with you pursing happiness, the only question is, how much do we want or need government involved. And my point with Tass is that there is no Constitutional right to not be discriminated against. Also, where does the atheist get inalienable rights from?

[Sparko]

And yet the Constitution, in its preamble, identifies three inalienable rights: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. There are few things as destructive to happiness as experiencing discrimination - especially when it is systemic or systemically endorsed. While I recognize it is not the role of government to ensure we are all happy, it is the role of government to foster a country and culture where each of us can successfully "pursue happiness." Indeed, many countries now use a "happiness quotient" to guide public policy, and have consistently come up as the countries where the greatest number of their populace have the greatest levels of overall life satisfaction and joy. The U.S. is very low on that list.

Makes one wonder how, perhaps, we could shift our priorities to perhaps helping all people find greater levels of happiness and satisfaction in life.

well to nitpick, it says "the pursuit of happiness" not that you are guaranteed happiness or that they would or should supply it.

[carpedm9587]

well to nitpick, it says "the pursuit of happiness" not that you are guaranteed happiness or that they would or should supply it.

If you read my post again, you will note I was careful with my language. To whit: "While I recognize it is not the role of government to ensure we are all happy, it is the role of government to foster a country and culture where each of us can successfully 'pursue happiness.' "

So we appear to be agreeing.

[Sparko]

If you read my post again, you will note I was careful with my language. To whit: "While I recognize it is not the role of government to ensure we are all happy, it is the role of government to foster a country and culture where each of us can successfully 'pursue happiness.' "

So we appear to be agreeing.

We can't agree. It's illegal.

[carpedm9587]

We can't agree. It's illegal.

If I may be so bold, the emoji list on this page is less useful when you have to guess the code that creates the emoji.

[Sparko]

If I may be so bold, the emoji list on this page is less useful when you have to guess the code that creates the emoji.

you dont need that page any more. you can just click on the smiley face in the top of the text editor, then "more" and pick the smiley you want to use and it will insert it into your post for you.

[lilpixieofterror]

If I may be so bold, the emoji list on this page is less useful when you have to guess the code that creates the emoji.

Or you could memorize them.

[Tassman]

I'm not sure we can say it "ended discrimination"...

True!

It ended officially sanctioned discrimination.

[Tassman]

No Tass, no it is not. The Civil Rights Act is not grounded in the Fourteenth Amendment:

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 enacted July 2, 1964, is a landmark civil rights and US labor law in the United States that outlaws discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. It prohibits unequal application of voter registration requirements, racial segregation in schools, employment, and public accommodations.

Congress asserted its authority to legislate under several different parts of the United States Constitution, principally its power to regulate interstate commerce under Article One (section 8), its duty to guarantee all citizens equal protection of the laws under the Fourteenth Amendment and its duty to protect voting rights under the Fifteenth Amendment.

https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=false&doc=97

There is no Constitutional right to not be discriminated against.

See above.

[seer]

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 enacted July 2, 1964, is a landmark civil rights and US labor law in the United States that outlaws discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. It prohibits unequal application of voter registration requirements, racial segregation in schools, employment, and public accommodations.

Congress asserted its authority to legislate under several different parts of the United States Constitution, principally its power to regulate interstate commerce under Article One (section 8), its duty to guarantee all citizens equal protection of the laws under the Fourteenth Amendment and its duty to protect voting rights under the Fifteenth Amendment.

https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=false&doc=97



See above.

Tass I already proved that the Fourteenth Amendment does not apply to private business, the Supreme Court long ago shot that idea down. Again:

The Court held that Congress exceeded its enforcement authority under the Fourteenth Amendment because racial discrimination in places of public accommodation amounted to private discrimination, No State shallhttps://www.americanbar.org/publicat...lutionary.html

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The Fourteenth Amendment only deals with what the state or government can do, not what private business can or can not do. So the Fourteenth Amendment can apply to the CRA where it is speaking to the laws of a state, but not to private business.

[carpedm9587]

you dont need that page any more. you can just click on the smiley face in the top of the text editor, then "more" and pick the smiley you want to use and it will insert it into your post for you.

Cool - didn't know they had fixed it...

[carpedm9587]

Or you could memorize them.

Hard to memorize something you've never used before. Once I use them, I know them.

Would also be helpful if, when you moused over, it displayed the code instead of a description. Like this one: and this one:

[carpedm9587]

Carp, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are not found in the Constitution. And I have no problem with you pursing happiness, the only question is, how much do we want or need government involved. And my point with Tass is that there is no Constitutional right to not be discriminated against. Also, where does the atheist get inalienable rights from?

You're partly right. The preamble to the constitution states: "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

"Pursuit of happiness" is in the DoI, so I short-circuited on that one. I thought I remembered it being the Constitution as well and I was wrong. However, the constitution does state that it's purpose is to establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, and promote general welfare - and discrimination is counter to all of those things. The constitution does not give the government the right to tell someone what to think, but it does give the government the right to limit expression of those thoughts in action under certain circumstances.

By the way, congrats on the sig. It's so joyful and uplifting...