Make no mistake: Homosexuals' human right must be protected. It is bigoted to discriminate against people based on their sexual orientation or preferences just as it is to discriminate based on race or religion. Nonetheless there is no justification to promote this lifestyle and pretend that it is normal.
To the extent residency preferences prevent families and senior citizens from purchasing homes because of race, ethnicity or color, the preferences violate federal law and cannot be tolerated.
I think it is difficult to achieve a meaningful political coalition if you have race-based programs that divide members of the coalition. The problem I have, however, is that white people assume an either/or position: Either we have race-based programs or we don't. What I see is comprehensive social reform that includes race-based and race-neutral programs.
During the canvass in the State of Mississippi, I traveled into different parts of that state, and this is the doctrine that I everywhere uttered: that while I was in favor of building up the colored race, I was not in favor of tearing down the white race.
In an era when America is still too divided by race and by riches, Judge [Samuel] Alito has not written one single opinion on the merits in favor of a person of color alleging race discrimination on the job: in 15 years on the bench, not one.
People need to stand up hold hands, talk about alternatives. Alternatives, alternatives, alternatives. And people united will never, ever be defeated.
We all have inherited so many types of fears, whether they're race-based, culture-based, gender-based, age-based, family-based. And then we get comfortable with these fears.
There are a few instances that arise in the unique context of domestic equal-protection challenges to governmental actions that are facially neutral but produce substantial discriminatory impacts on groups of people, based on such suspect classifications as race, nationality, ethnic origin, etc. This doctrine has never been used in foreign affairs.
Democrats single out glaring examples of tax preferences or spending priorities that favor the wealthy and Republicans cry 'class warfare!'
It is still in the lap of the gods whether a society can succeed which is based on "civil liberties and human rights" conceived as I have tried to describe them; but of one thing at least we may be sure: the alternatives that have so far appeared have been immeasurably worse.
I do not decide cases based on personal or policy preferences.
My favorite meal is I'll make like a three-bean soup and I freeze half of it. But I'm also a big fan of meat alternatives, so I can still have my chicken and mashed potatoes and green beans, but I just have the chicken from a plant-based thing.
Peace is not the absence of conflict but the presence of creative alternatives for responding to conflict - alternatives to passive or aggressive responses, alternatives to violence.
I mean, we all carry some form of that bias, right? I mean, it might be based on age, it might be based on gender, it might be based on sexuality, and it's certainly based on race.
A favor tardily bestowed is no favor; for a favor quickly granted is a more agreeable favor.
The marriage-based society...discourages all the competing alternatives to marriage. You can't have a marriage-based society and a social value of sexual freedom. They don't work together