Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: N3WBI3

"Ive seen suit for dumber things and so have you."

No argument there; put it this way: had there been a legitimate reason why the family could not use the pool (maintanance, etc) then yes, they could have *tried* to sue, but it's highly unlikely that they would have won - at least, not on the grounds of discrimination.


146 posted on 08/11/2005 4:44:49 PM PDT by NASBWI
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]


To: NASBWI
I am not saying the family was being deceitful, I am sure one way or the other they felt discriminated against. They see every day on TV people telling them that there are roadblocks keeping blacks from voting so why should this be any different? The see that terrible case of the Black man dragged to death in Texas but I am sure they did not hear about the exact same thing happening to a white guy as well.

but it's highly unlikely that they would have won - at least, not on the grounds of discrimination.

They did not win anything this was a settlement! For one of two reasons...

1) They really did discriminate and knew they would lose

2) They did not want Jessie Jackson and his thugs coming down there and hurting business..

257 posted on 08/13/2005 8:15:27 AM PDT by N3WBI3 (If SCO wants to go fishing they should buy a permit and find a lake like the rest of us..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson