I have been kicking this around in my head for quite a while and would like some genuine feedback.
What is the difference between THIS:
A sign excluding black people from a future business is enraging some people in a small town. Now, the man who put it up is speaking out.
Federal and State law says if the business is open to the public, prohibiting people based on race is illegal. If the man’s proposed gentlemen’s club was going to be a private club, then an African American historian says he could discriminate. Legalities aside, his is a sign that many say is appalling.
“If I’ve got a problem with you it’s going to be on the front of my store,” says Mark Prior.
Prior posted his ‘No Negros Allowed’ sign after he says he had some problems with black people in the past and needed to make a policy against them.
Other concerns Nass has about the UW System, according to Mikalsen, relate to a “touchy-feely admissions process that is more worried about diversity than academic quality” and the idea that some universities are more concerned about “indoctrination than education.”
I know one is straight to the point and the other uses nice code words, but in the end aren’t they saying the same thing?