It is the picnic to celebrate Steven and it has been said that anyone wanting to celebrate knowing Steven and his life is invited to come to the picnic. As we are joining together, there is a knock at the door. It is George Walker Bush! Along with him is a Federal attorney and they have a copy of a federal law that states that you can not refuse G.W. Bush to come in and join you. You can not refuse to allow him to eat any of the food even. It is not a matter of Bush being hungry and there is no where else for him to eat. It is that he simply wants to eat at your house and you have no right to deny him or refuse to allow him to come in.
Does the Federal Government, and should it have, the power to tell you who or what you can not refuse to allow into your private property? Do they have a right to tell you who you have to be tolerant to?
Where does your civil rights ends and those of everyone else start?
It could be argued that your bias toward Bush is not based on real and factual issues, that you hate him enough to deny him access because of your perceptions of what he has done. What kind of person he is and what he may do while on your property.
That is the kind of issue that Paul was trying to point to as being Government intrusion into your property and life.
This is focusing only on one issue but Woolworths was not refusing to feed blacks when they were hungry and there was no where else they could go eat. If the Federal Government has not funded the lunch counter or the food being served should they have a say on who is served or not served? Likewise if the Government is not paying for the picnic or the food there do they have the right to tell you that G.W. Bush should be allowed to come?
These issues are a part of the Libertarian believe system and is a reason I am not a Libertarian though have some leaning towards its stances.