#1 means the white separationists get what they want. #2 still hasn't happened, despite decades of activism. So would you father have respected someone who kep

#1 means the white separationists get what they want. #2 still hasn't happened, despite decades of activism. So would you father have respected someone who kept his word and judged a man by his color by not selling a house to him? Or would he have respected someone who willfully broke an unforceable agreement to discrimintate on the basis of race? I couldn't tell from your answer. If I sign a contract with a non-compete clause in CA, where it's unenforceable, then move to TX with the same job, is that clause now enforceable? If so, then how is it unethical to sign the contract? EDIT: if it's little unfair to judge a 1950s person on modern ethical standards, then is not not also a little unfair to judge a modern person on your father's ethical standards?