10 December 2013

Housing Discrimination and Private Property Rights

HUD has a radio ad about "property discrimination." Surprisingly, it is a crime to be discriminating when deciding whom may rent your private property. Maybe I don't want to retrofit my 150 year old building to accommodate people with wheelchairs or who are morbidly obese. Maybe I don't want a crack dealer or gang member or convicted felon renting my property. Maybe I don't want people who can't speak English or who play loud music or have huge parties with their entire tribe at my private property. There should be absolutely nothing controversial about this!

If I can't be discriminating with regard to who rents my private property – people who are my responsibility – then in what sense can we say we have private property rights? In what sense can we call this a free country?

This is a separate issue from the ideal world. Divorced from issues of love thy brother as thyself and judging people by the content of their character rather than the colour of their marble (the Dr. King statue controversy). Al that is still true, and that is the ideal, but this is an issue of freedom. Let's face it, if someone tried to have a "coloured only" fast food shop today the free market wold see the place lose business and close down rather quickly. If we treat people like adults and let them have the free choice the Lord has endowed us all with, many people will choose to do the right thing and the free market will close down many of the other establishments. What this really is about is the issue of a grotesquely bloated predatory government trying to legislate morality. We see how well the government runs the post office and the IRS and public education (fewer than 40% of HS graduates actually have a twelfth grade level of education – "no child left behind" was instituted by Bush because he didn't want to be left behind as a child. It may or may not be true, but it still is funny.). So, with the stellar failure of everything the government does, why do we think the government should try to regulate morality?

And this is all skirting the issue that it is my property! My private property should be something I have more control over. If I want whites only living in my house I should have that right. Other like-minded people will congregate around me and different-minded people will go somewhere else, like adults. People who like to smoke should have freedom of smoking and be allowed to work at pro-smoking establishments and non-smokers would do the same at smoke-free places, just like I should have the right to rent my private property to whomever I want.

I know I'm repeating myself here, but freedom is something I am really concerned with. My earliest memory is of wanting freedom and resenting authority, so freedom is sort of my thing. Again, this is beside the point of loving others and judging people based on their characters – all good stuff – but being good is meaningless when it is forced.


(Written 31 October 2012)

Blan B is Racialist

From Mother Jones:

"The European manufacturer of a pill identical to Plan B says its product won't work for women who weigh more than 176 pounds. Will American pharma companies warn women of weight limits?"

The abortion pill* NorLevo (Levonorgestrel - the same drug sold in the United States as Plan B) is completely ineffective in women who weigh more than 176 pounds (how did they come up with that number? Why not 175 or 177? Why not just round to 170 or 180?), and has greatly diminished effectiveness in women over 165 pounds. Weight data from the CDC indicates that the average American woman weighs 166 pounds and is therefore too fat to use Plan B.

I think the important point to take away from this story is not that American women are too fat. The point to take, at least for me, is that the makers of Plan B are racialist. From the article: "The average weight of non-Hispanic black women aged 20 to 39 is 186 pounds, well above the weight at which these pills are completely ineffective." [Italics added]

The average black woman in America is too fat to use Plan B. Only those skinny white (I'm guessing) women can use it. Isn't that racialist? They make a pill black women can't take to save themselves from bad decisions. Making something for one race and not for black people is racialism, plain and simple.



*The definition of "abortion," like the definition of "marriage," was changed by the quack medical establishment to be "the termination of pregnancy," and of course "pregnancy" is redefined as "beginning with implantation of the zygote [the new human being, fictitious referred to as a "fertilised egg" so it sounds like a tumor or a turd and not something alive with unique DNA]. Since Levonogestrel cannot destroy the zygote once it has implanted itself in the uterine lining it is, by the new magic definition, not causing an abortion. The drug supposedly works by preventing or delaying ovulation (it is admitted that no one knows how it really works, and it is still sold over the counter without having to show ID), however the drug may thin the uterine lining, making implantation more difficult. While not "technically" an abortion, it is still ending the life of a brand new human being with unique DNA who is in no way part of the mother's body. Not "technically" an abortion, it is still homicide.