The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
11 Points

Why the Civil Act of 1964 unconstitutional?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/1/2013 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,010 times Debate No: 37236
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)




I am against the saying that the Civil Acts of 1964 is unconstitutional. What businesses did is violate the 14th amendment, stating under the eyes of the law, everyone is equal. So the federal government should have the power to interfere with discrimination. What if you were denied a job just because of your race or gender? The federal government has declared a state law unconstitutional through Brown vs. Topeka Board of Education. And this law gives the blacks to vote. Any objections BrighamYoungConservative?


I believe the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is not only unconstitutional, but a threat to our personal liberty. The federal government has no legitimate authority to infringe on the rights of private property owners to use their property as they please.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave the federal government unprecedented power over the hiring, employee relations, and customer service practices of every business in the country. The result was a massive violation of the rights of private property and contract, which are the bedrocks of free society.

The founding fathers imagined a very limited and small federal government that respected property rights and unfortunately, we no longer have such a government. I am sad to admit it, but that government died a very long time ago. If it were up to me, i would repeal every law passed after 1913 (especially the Revenue Act of 1913 and the creation of the fed) and completely start over.
Debate Round No. 1


For debate

"I believe the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is not only unconstitutional, but a threat to our personal liberty."

First of all, you can't have 100 percent safety and 100 percent privacy.

Second of all, without this law then there would still be discrimination against minorities. I am a minority race myself.

Third of all, we can't be free without "drawing a line".

Fourth of all, that "weak" government the Founding Fathers first imagined failed.

Fifth of all, without the law, although certain people will be free, minorities, women and others will not be free.

Why is the Civil Rights Act of 1964 unconstitutional? State the amendment that it violates.


What does this have to do with privacy? Now you are just pulling liberal quotes out of your butt. As for the weak government the founding fathers imagined, you're right. It has failed. Activist courts and progressive presidents such as FDR and Obama have transformed this country into a welfare, nanny state that Thomas Jefferson wouldn't recognize.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 violates two constitutional amendments.

1. The 10th amendment. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Voting rights and civil rights are clearly a state issue and the federal government has no authority to rule on such issues.

2. The 14th amendment. Section 1 of the amendment states: "....No STATE shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any STATE deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Denial of those civil rights by private persons is not mentioned in this amendment. The Supreme Court held in the Civil Rights Cases (1883) that the amendment was limited to "state action" and, therefore, did not authorize the Congress to outlaw racial discrimination by private individuals or organizations.

Debate Round No. 2


Eliteninja forfeited this round.


My Opponent forfeited.
Debate Round No. 3


Some states, especially the former Confederate States misused their power and discriminate between blacks and whites. And yes, while voting rights is the state's power, you can get the US Supreme Court to override the state's decision. The former Confederate States did not comply to equal voting rights. Not only that, they violated the 15th Amendment, which says that you won't be denied voting based on your race. And mostly they were denied voting in the South. Literacy tests are one way to bar blacks from voting. The law did not eliminate those tests but did make it fairer. Oh, and the police brutality is also common against blacks, arresting them even when they did not do it. I know a case when a woman was doing her thing but was beaten up. Then the police arrested her for being "drunk." But she wasn't. We are still not equal today...
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of laws." States had made laws making it LEGAL for whites to do stuff like murder or theft against blacks but vice versa in terms of race, then blacks will be severely punished. According to Wikipedia, it actually attempt to ENFORCE the 14th and 15th amendment.
FDR is very successful with the welfare system. The government gave some money to the poor to try to get them to the middle class. FDR's plans did great and our economy recovered at 1941 when US declared war on Japan. The US was barely spanked by its enemies on its own soil. I hope Obama's plans work. Compare to Hoover, who said that it was the charities' responsibility to get the economy running again. What, you want the economy to FAIL????
I am liberal, I hate the conservative's philosophy, especially far right groups such as Nazi Party, which hates my race (Asians). If I would live in Nazi Germany, I would attempt to overthrow it no matter the cost (I would be dead anyways.) I'm proud to be liberal because governments should ensure safety among groups.
Read this and hope you'll understand. (

P.S. Sorry I missed Round 3, I am busy.


Liberals are among the most racist people in America. You said literacy tests prevented blacks from voting. What is exactly is that supposed to mean? Are you saying black people are too stupid to read? That sounds pretty racist to me.

Unlike Liberals, conservatives don't put people of color in a box and tell them they will never be any good. We don't tell them that in order to succeed, you need the government. I believe a black person is just as qualified as anyone else to vote. Blacks don't need to rely on the government to become successful. What they need is a little thing called self reliance. For too many years, liberals have been holding back black people by forcing them in failing school districts in order to keep them dependent on welfare so they can count on their vote.

So excuse me for having faith in people of color to empower themselves. God forbid they think for themselves and leave your little box you put them in.
Debate Round No. 4


Liberals are not racist. Conservatives are.
Nazis are racist. And they are conservatives.
The government's job is to serve the people by protecting them, not vice versa.
Literacy tests are the ways that it's main purpose to prevent blacks from voting.
I want blacks to be treated the same way as whites so we can be stronger. Conservatives will use tradition and religion to push us back.
How will conservatives "empower" blacks.
I am opposing literacy tests.
You may not need to rely on the government but the government MUST MAKE LAWS TO STOP DISCRIMINATION even at the risk of privacy.
Everyone should have the right to vote, this includes blacks.


I don't believe you can compare conservative Germans to conservative Americans. I don't know much about todays conservatives in Germany, but i do know that the Nazis were about complete government control. Conservatives in america are all about small, limited government. If you ask me, I would tell you that Nazis were far, far leftists. (also, they did have many socialist views.)

In closing, I believe We should have freedom of association in America and if a private business wants to discriminate, it ought to be their right to do so.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by funwiththoughts 3 years ago
The Nazis had pretty much no SOCIAL freedom, but moderate economic freedom, much like Republicans in America today.
Posted by Sitara 4 years ago
BYC is the typical crybaby CONservative. Mommy, Mommy, the mean liberals are pointing out my bigotry!
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by TeaPartyAtheist 4 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con got way too far off track, turning this into a debate about Conservatives vs. Liberals, rather than what it should have been.
Vote Placed by leojm 4 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: ff. My vote goes to Pro. FF will never be accepted in my case.