Forums

Right on Alex

• mkg335 5,491 Posts

  Sat, Jun 29 2013 8:51 AM

  Well thanks, Andy...but I'm sure I've managed to piss off a few fine folks here.

  Anyway, let's try one more time and try to use  a realistic example:

  Is it legal to establish a private country club and stipulate that it's for whites only?  Why or why not?

  Once you can answer that question correctly you'll have understood my position in this argument.

• Lobsterboy 4,729 Posts

  Sat, Jun 29 2013 9:09 AM

  Wheels65:

  As if he doesn't belong to several EXCLUSIVE (not open to all) men's clubs in London!

  Care to enlighten us as to what clubs you're talking about?

• MBaggese 15,378 Posts

  Sat, Jun 29 2013 9:27 AM

  mkg335:

  Is it legal to establish a private country club and stipulate that it's for whites only?  Why or why not?

   

  I don't think there are any laws here in the US that can govern private clubs of whom they wish to have membership or deny membership to, as long as they are privately funded.

• MBaggese 15,378 Posts

  Sat, Jun 29 2013 9:30 AM

  FBudd:

  Comparing equality between males and females to different makes of cars.. possibly the worst analogy i have ever heard.

   

  It has nothing to do with equality, discussion revolves around discrimination....or did you miss that point?

   

  Maybe you were vem'ed again...

• Doublemochaman 2,009 Posts

  Sat, Jun 29 2013 9:36 AM

  I had a treehouse club as a kid and no icky girls were allowed.  Later I had a treehouse club and only girls were allowed.   Somewhere between the two I learned alot more about girls and how interesting they could be.  Good thing I changed the bylaws.

• YankeeJim 25,827 Posts

  Sat, Jun 29 2013 9:42 AM

  LOL. Came to see if Alex was challenging TLs again and find FBudd nit-picking Baggs' relevant analogy. Moving on...........

   

  This thread brought back memories of Martha Burk and her war against Augusta's men only policy. Poor Hootie Johnson, 2012 good ol Southern boy president of the club. Had to deal with the first black player allowed in, the change from black-only caddies and now the wimmens were on his case. Condeleezza Rice, a black woman, is now a member of that prestigious CC.  :-)

• 9,041 Posts

  Sat, Jun 29 2013 9:43 AM

  Doublemochaman:

  I had a treehouse club as a kid and no icky girls were allowed.  Later I had a treehouse club and only girls were allowed.   Somewhere between the two I learned alot more about girls and how interesting they could be.  Good thing I changed the bylaws.

  Or to paraphrase.....With a few more years wisdom, ALL should have been eligible to 'climb that ladder' in the 1st place. :))

  Andy

• Wheels65 744 Posts

  Sat, Jun 29 2013 10:46 AM

  Lobsterboy, my apology, I didn't know that the "private" dining clubs in London had been closed.

  mkg, you keep trying to throw the discrimination thing at me and I keep telling you "horse feathers"!  You discriminate every time you chose one person as a friend and reject another and that, certainly, is not against any law in this country.

  As to your question about the "correct answer" concerning the legality of a private club to stipulate qualifications for its membership - whether you like it or not, the answer is "Yes" it is legal. 

  If you are asking is this right - I've already said that I do not think so but it is "None of my beeswax". 

  In this country, we are free to choose with whom we associate - how can I possibly be any clearer?

• 9,041 Posts

  Sat, Jun 29 2013 11:39 AM

  MBaggese:

  mkg335:

  Is it legal to establish a private country club and stipulate that it's for whites only?  Why or why not?

   

  I don't think there are any laws here in the US that can govern private clubs of whom they wish to have membership or deny membership to, as long as they are privately funded.

  Well that's wrong then no ? 

  You can be a racist / homophobic / sexist but..As long as you have enough money then....

  I hope that is NOT the case in Britain but off to find out......

  The shame for us all if that is the case in the wombs of Democracy ?

  Andy 

  Edit:- You can ! Anywhere in the World it seems.....Once again "shame on us all"

  Still in the Dark Ages it looks like.....definitely no pun intended !!

• mkg335 5,491 Posts

  Sat, Jun 29 2013 12:21 PM

  Wheels65:

  Lobsterboy, my apology, I didn't know that the "private" dining clubs in London had been closed.

  mkg, you keep trying to throw the discrimination thing at me and I keep telling you "horse feathers"!  You discriminate every time you chose one person as a friend and reject another and that, certainly, is not against any law in this country.

  As to your question about the "correct answer" concerning the legality of a private club to stipulate qualifications for its membership - whether you like it or not, the answer is "Yes" it is legal. 

  If you are asking is this right - I've already said that I do not think so but it is "None of my beeswax". 

  In this country, we are free to choose with whom we associate - how can I possibly be any clearer?

  The Supreme Court under Justice Roberts seems pretty clear on the matter of applying state public accommodations laws to private clubs.  Here's a brief excerpt from a study of a case in Minnesota:

  "When applied to private clubs, however, the argument in favor of equal access must be modified because such clubs, by their very nature, do not offer services to the general public. In the Roberts trilogy, the Supreme Court recognized that such private organizations, while not offering "public opportunities," do, however, offer special business skills and advantages that would be otherwise unavailable to the excluded group. The Roberts Court affirmed the lower court ruling that the "various commercial programs and benefits offered to [Jaycees] members" placed the group within the jurisdiction of Minnesota's public accommodations law because "'leadership skills are "goods," [and] business contacts and employment promotions are "privileges" and "advantages" ...."' In accordance with this expansion of the equal access rationale, the Court went on to hold that "[a] ssuring women equal access to such goods, privileges, and advantages clearly furthers compelling state interests." The application of a governmental interest in favor of equal access to business contacts (or "goods") provided by private organizations has become entrenched in the jurisprudence of associational freedoms."