Ace’s declaration of real civil rights as opposed to just swapping out one set of rules “we all” have to follow for another.
As evidenced by the anger with which Ace reacts to the anger of Bill Quick’s original response, this is actually a fault line between Boomers and Gen-Xers. Ace’s argument goes like an explosive shell right at the cornerstone of the edifice started in the 50s and completed in the 60s such that civil rights is not just the equal treatment of all by the State, but a State imposed equal treatment of everyone by all institutions, public and private. While perhaps laudable, this definition has actually become a moniker for policies that attempt to crush differences of opinion and so, to slowly and surely dissolve freedom of association.
In fact, here’s an even more radical thought: was the civil rights movement really necessary:
That is: By valorizing Martin Luther King’s intentional (albeit nonviolent) lawbreaking (rather than the less photogenic grunt work of lawmaking, we granted tacit permission to future, inferior individuals to do the same (and worse) for increasingly faddish and socially corrosive causes. If Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat on the bus, why can’t a butch tranny—his wedding tackle still intact—insist on using the ladies’ room in Parks’ name? And sue if he doesn’t get his way?
And here we are with that.