“SACRAMENTO (CBS13/AP) — Black lawmakers at the California state Capitol are calling on fans to boycott Los Angeles Clippers games after alleged recordings emerged of owner Donald Sterling making racist remarks. Sterling is purported to have told a woman not to bring black people to his games or associate with them.”
I have to observation to make on this:
The first is the ridicules use of “alleged” and “is purported”. The tape of his remarks are being played over every MSM outlet available, there is no allegations or purporting about it, they are facts.
The second is twofold, first is the PC use of shunning those who offend their sensibilities, e.g., boycott. Then there is the God given right of a person to like or dislike any person may may wish for any reason they may wish. Sterling broke no laws, he expressed an opinion and a rather. It was that that he would rather not have that is causing all the uproar. It was his right of association that he was exercising, as having the right to associate imply the right to disassociate.
They just don’t like who he does not wish to hang out with or be associated with, for if that happens to be black people it is taboo. I believe that people have the right to like or dislike for any reason they may wish, and we do not have to like that reason for it to be a valid reason for them.
Yes, people have the God given right to be racist, both white and black people have that right, and many exercises it. People also have the right to use shunning and shaming to attempt to change other’s behavior, and to punish the wrong doers (in their eyes), it is when the government with all of its coercive powers get involved in the punishment of the offender for “though crime” that we should stand up for the offender’s right to offend, especially when the offense broke no law nor did any harm other than to some’s sensibilities.