It is Time to Redefine Civil Rights Laws

The state of Texas is currently involved in two court cases that raise questions about the theory and practice of civil rights laws. Since 1968, the Civil Rights laws have claimed to protect Hispanics, other minorities, and women from discrimination while helping them enter the mainstream of society.

However, these laws have not promoted equal opportunity, but rather they have created a sense of entitlement among groups, and encouraged reverse discrimination. They have also had a detrimental effect on the integration of American society.  Affirmative action and Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act are two examples of how promoting civil rights turned upside down.

In the recent case of Fisher vs. University of Texas, two students who were denied admission in 2008, hope to over turn the 2003 Supreme Court ruling that allows race to be considered in college admissions.  These two white students are victims, yes victims, of reverse discrimination, otherwise known as affirmative action.

Affirmative action refers to policies that take race and other physical features into consideration in order to benefit an underrepresented group or “protected class”. The justification for affirmative action is that it helps to compensate for past discrimination, persecution, or exploitation by the ruling class of a culture, and to address existing discrimination.

So is it good to discriminate against one group to make up for discrimination against another group? And how long does this policy have to exist? How do we determine when equality is reached?

The other example of civil rights becoming civil wrongs is Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. This Act forces Texas and certain other states with a history of discrimination to pre-clear their election laws with the Justice Department. It covers any attempt by these specific states to change “any voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure with respect to voting…” in any “covered jurisdiction. Texas has to demonstrate that a proposed voting change does not have the purpose and will not have the effect of discriminating based on race or color.

The problem is that these other states are presumed guilty without any trial or specific allegation. Liberal Hispanic groups have challenged the redistricting of Texas based on the assumption that all Hispanics vote for Democrats, and therefore districts with Democrats should be protected. Since when have Democrats become a protected class or synonymous with Hispanics?  When will Democrats allow Hispanics be integrated into society politically and socially? Also, why pick on certain states and not apply this law to all states? Isn’t that discriminatory and selective enforcement?

Considerations of race, ethnicity, color, national origin, gender, and sexual orientation have no place in a constitutional republic. There should be equal opportunity for all with individual responsibility for growth and achievement.  We have been drifting toward a system where the government determines who participates and to what degree for 45 years, and it’s time to stop and reverse the trend. No one should get special privileges or protections.

George Rodriguez is president of the San Antonio Tea Party.

Categories: Uncategorized
George Rodriguez

Comments are closed.