I Apologize to My Fellow Americans

[Bob Butler 54]

(01-29-2017, 09:38 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: My primary social activity is playing role playing games at two game stores, and with Jorge's group.  There are a few women, blacks and latinos that play in the same games I play.  I have absolutely no problem with that.  Most of them are fine players who make the game more fun.  Some of the games are closed, invitation only.  Some of them are public.  The store owner wants business and welcomes anyone who walks in off the street wanting to learn a game.  I have no problems with religion, skin color, culture etc...  Thus, while in abstract I don't want the government deciding who one might date, who one might befriend, etc...  I can't think of any examples where I have personally rejected social contact due to race, religion, gender, etc... 

With further thought, OK, I might have some discrimination here.  I play in four game circles.  One is a public Pathfinder Society game where anyone can walk in off the street, plop a few dollars on the counter, and join the game.  Three are closed invitation only games.  If the players think the game would be improved by inviting in new members, they will consult with each other and invite people in.  I suspect the store owner might get in trouble if he posted a 'whites only' sign on his public game.  I don't think there would be trouble if the private groups never issued invitations to minorities.

I hope not.  All three private games I play in are all white, all male.  (This includes Jorge's group of MITSGS veterans.)  My sisters make quilts as a hobby.  Their sewing circles are all female.  Certain hobbies and interests attract different sorts of people.  To some degree prejudice might be involved, but in the case of my private game circles we're just looking for very experienced players (10 years plus in the hobby) who play a certain style of game.  We like people who do more role playing, a little less hack - n - slash combat, and are able to absorb the somewhat complex rules systems without difficulty.

This might illustrate in real life my perspective.  Freedom of association in a private setting, no prejudice in a public setting.  I don't want to see the government knocking on the door of Jorge's apartment demanding that we include minorities in a game group that has been playing together since the late 1970s.  I do seem to play in segregated groups, but if a lady or other sort of minority who plays the right style of game wants to join in, I really wouldn't object.  I have had no trouble working with minorities in the public game.

While Jorge's group is dominated by former MIT students and employees, the other two invitation only groups are dominated by former military types who spent a lot of time when they were younger playing barracks games.  The language can get rather salty.  This might or might not be a factor in bringing in outsiders.

(01-29-2017, 09:38 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(01-29-2017, 07:29 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: I'm pretty sure you didn't come out in favor of prohibiting gays from discriminating against straights when accepting dates, and vice versa, either.

Correct.  Freedom of association is a fine principle in a private setting.  The Civil Rights Act of 1964 does a decent job of drawing the line between public and private settings.

The above two sentences seem a good brief summary of my position.  I believe most blues would agree with it.  If I understand the libertarian position correctly, they would like to apply freedom of association to both the public and private sector.  In the extreme, this could involve repealing the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and all similar legislation.

How many would want to go that far?  If not, how does one go less far?