Comments on: Public vs. Private Discrimination http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/07/public-vs-private-discrimination/ Life. Liberty. Property. Defending individual freedom and liberty, one post at a time. Wed, 28 Jul 2010 22:26:47 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Chris Byrne http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/07/public-vs-private-discrimination/#comment-3986 Chris Byrne Thu, 07 Dec 2006 18:56:24 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/07/public-vs-private-discrimination/#comment-3986 I applaud this decision; I only regret that it will not be followed as proper precedent the next time someone tries to set up an all male, or all white school. Private individuals, and private institutions should have the right to support, and associate with whoever they want to; even if we find that discrimination repugnant; because they are PRIVATE. I applaud this decision; I only regret that it will not be followed as proper precedent the next time someone tries to set up an all male, or all white school.

Private individuals, and private institutions should have the right to support, and associate with whoever they want to; even if we find that discrimination repugnant; because they are PRIVATE.

]]> By: KipEsquire http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/07/public-vs-private-discrimination/#comment-3982 KipEsquire Thu, 07 Dec 2006 18:07:51 +0000 http://www.thelibertypapers.org/2006/12/07/public-vs-private-discrimination/#comment-3982 If it were any other state or "private" party, then I would be cheering you on. But Hawaii is sui generis and not a good starting point for policy extrapolations. The "private" trust was in fact from the old Hawaiian monarchy, which was at times rather oppressive toward its people and expressly agreed as part of becoming a "U.S. territory" (and later the statehood process) to accept certain financial restrictions, land diverstitures, etc. Take a Honolulu tour and they'll drive by the Kamehameha School and tell you the history of its exclusionary policy. It's like federal-Indian relations: all bets are off. If it were any other state or “private” party, then I would be cheering you on. But Hawaii is sui generis and not a good starting point for policy extrapolations. The “private” trust was in fact from the old Hawaiian monarchy, which was at times rather oppressive toward its people and expressly agreed as part of becoming a “U.S. territory” (and later the statehood process) to accept certain financial restrictions, land diverstitures, etc.

Take a Honolulu tour and they’ll drive by the Kamehameha School and tell you the history of its exclusionary policy.

It’s like federal-Indian relations: all bets are off.

]]>