Whatever ever happened to the little sign ‘We have a right to refuse service’?

[P@triot]

no liberals is trying to take your right to have a gun ... they just want to make sure you can't buy one if your are a felon or out right nuts... where you two moron can't get that thought through that numb skull of yours

Once again I had to address this separately just so your insane stupidity isn't buried in a longer post. There are liberals all over USMB demanding guns be outlawed (JoeB right here in this thread is among them).

Furthermore, Michael Bloomberg has called for the guns to be made illegal over and over and over. So has Jan Schakowsky. Andrew Cuomo. Diane Feinstein. Ed Koch. Eric Holder.

[ame=http://youtu.be/1_LaBJvI0BI]Diane Feinstein on Gun ban in 1995 -Mr. and Mrs. America, turn your guns in! - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://youtu.be/BVz2lHODQvs]Rep. Jan Schakowsky: Assault Weapons ban 'Just the Beginning' - YouTube[/ame]

Oops...tell me @billyerock1991, how dumb do you feel right now?

We're still waiting on an answer here @billyerock1991, how dumb do you feel right now?

• Sen. Feinstein said after getting her assault weapons ban passed said, “If I could have banned them all – ‘Mr. and Mrs. America turn in your guns’ – I would have!”
  
  
• NY Governor Andrew Cuomo said in a radio interview in late December, “Confiscation could be an option…mandatory sale to the state could be an option.”
  
  
• Illinois Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky says that “an assault weapons ban is just the beginning.’ She also says that “a complete ban on handguns could be possible through state and local action.”
  
• Former top Democratic mayor Ed Koch said he wants to “ban all guns for everyone except law enforcement.”
  
  
• Iowa state Rep. Dan Muhlbauer said “governments should start confiscating semi-automatic rifles and other firearms.”

No one is asking you to give up your guns? | Pesky Truth

 

[bodecea]

[

Well, that was a different America, before we were discussing how the Constitution was written by rich white slave owners and how the country needed to be fundamentally changed. So that's gone, sorry.

Rather than doing the heavy lifting of working on changing hearts and minds, the narcissistic Left has chosen to instead go with intimidation, conformity and "consequences" for anyone who (currently) thinks differently.

You will conform or else.

.

I'm sort of amused that you are all upset that the shoe is on the other foot.

I had a co-worker who was fired after working for our company for 14 years because she brought her girlfriend to the holiday party. Her girlfriend wore a man's suit just so nobody missed the point.

So now the tables have turned and it's the homophobes who find themselves in the minority, and you guys are whining because, oh my gosh, laws are actually being enforced.

Sorry, dude, Public Accommodation Laws have been on the books since the 1960's.

But it's all the gays' fault!

 

[Wildman]

I'm wondering if Rottie would be so understanding if someone said, "We don't serve Christians here."

how the fuck is a business going to know who is Christian or what ever ? ? ? ?

you are so fucking stupid i am amazed you even know how to turn on your Mommies computer, or does she do it for you....? please do not reply, you will only confirmmy suspicions.

Gee, maybe if that person came in talking about "The Lord" every other sentence, you might know he or she is a Christian.

And you should still provide her excellent customer service. Beccause that's the job.

gimme a fuckin break asshole, i was a partner in a firearms store for 5 years and i never had anyone come in and act or or even , it just does not happen in real life as you suggest "The Lord" every other sentence," have you by any chance observed such actions ?



ooooh

 

[Missourian]

The gay community and the liberals have lost their little Nazi minds. A privately owned business has the right to refuse to conduct business with anybody they want. Period. It's not even open for debate.

Further still, the 1st Amendment affords you the right to practice your religious belief. And the little liberal/gay Nazi community is working so hard to trample on that right as well.

All I can say is that I hope these companies deliver the most dreadful products and services when they are unconstitutionally forced to by the liberal Nazi's. If you're a bakery and you're forced to bake a cake for a gay wedding, I hope you put 70lbs of salt in the cake and make the frosting primarily out of vinegar so that they vomit when they eat it. Then maybe word will spread in their little gay circles that your bakery isn't any good and you can be left the hell alone to conduct your private business as you see fit.

*Note - desperate Nazi liberals will try to spin this as "homophobia" because they need to justify their anti-constitutional Nazi beliefs. However, it is not. I couldn't care less if someone is gay. What I do care about however is when they unconstitutionally force someone to do their bidding because they think being gay makes them special and entitled.

It's an agenda of reeducation

We reserve the right to serve refuse to anyone.

Didn't like the cake? I'll be happy to refund your money.

 

[candycorn]

I'm sort of amused that you are all upset that the shoe is on the other foot.

I had a co-worker who was fired after working for our company for 14 years because she brought her girlfriend to the holiday party. Her girlfriend wore a man's suit just so nobody missed the point.

So now the tables have turned and it's the homophobes who find themselves in the minority, and you guys are whining because, oh my gosh, laws are actually being enforced.

Sorry, dude, Public Accommodation Laws have been on the books since the 1960's.

Sorry dude, the government has zero authority to force private institutions to conduct business with anyone. It's a private business on private property and they have the right to refuse service to anyone. Period.

And that might cost them tons of business (to the point where they might have to close their business). That is the natural counter-balance and the beauty of the free market.

sorry DUUUUUUUDe, its a business that serves the public ... it's not a private business ... if you serve the public then you have to accept all of the public not just the public you like... thats the law... where you get this idea thats its a private business is beyond me ... you have no Idea what you are saying or talking about when it come to doing business with the public

When it comes to services; I think the conservatives have a point; when it comes to goods, they have no point. What if every pharmacy decided they wouldn't sell heart medicine to blacks? This is what the hateful conservatives see as a "tough shit" proposition.

However, when you are talking about services such as photography for a wedding or a sitting or someone to do write resumes or what have you, unless you have a contract and THEN decide you don't want to work with blacks, you should have a right to simply refuse to do business in my view. I mean, I may want Taylor Swift to play at my graduation party. If I came up with her asking price, would she be bound to play? I hope not.

 

[Iceweasel]

This cake thing is only one subject. What if a Christian or Muslim college refused an openly gay person? What if a Christian, or Muslim, who owned a motel refused service to openly gay couple? What if a Muslim decided that he didn't want to carry a fare that had alcohol?

There is no federal law that specifies sexual orientation but food and lodging is covered for race, gender, etc. As said, there may be state or local laws to accommodate sexuality.

But we are getting side tracked a little. To serve a person food
does not mean you are sanctifying their choice of life style. Nor does selling gas do the same. BUT, making a cake more or less is accepting that to which can be against a person's sincerely held religious belief, like them or not. Isn't that really what the wedding cake is all about? Kind of the center piece of the celebration. To argue from the absurd it would hardly be different then if a neo-Nazi requested a cake with Hitler's image and with words putting down Jews. Would it be acceptable for any baker to refuse such a commission?

I certainly would say yes because the baker's belief would be different then that of the neo-Nazi. Is there anyone on this board who will argue differently? (comparison between Nazis and gays is absurd and only used for discussion)

What is curious is that those who argue in behalf of the gay couple do it with such vitriol language. I don't think they realize that their argument for is no different then the argument against.

I agree that making a baker make a themed cake isn't the same as serving food. I don't see a federal law for it, that's the reason some local laws address it. If they go to court it often comes down to a judges personal opinion and hopefully he isn't sitting on the bench with a dildo up his butt.

 

[P@triot]

In other words no liberal is going to say you MUST let gays into your bedroom.

Really?!? What world do you live in?!? Liberals say the government should come into my home and steal my firearms. Liberals say that government should take my money and redistribute it to other people (ever hear of Communist Party U.S.A.?). Liberals say that eugenics should be legal. Hell, liberal asshat Elliot Rodger's insane manuscript just said that women should not be allowed to decide for themselves who they "mate" with.

These people are bat-shit crazy control freaks who have no morals. And you really think they wouldn't say I must allow gays into my house to have sex? How naïve are you exactly?!? I guarantee you some libtard is making that case right now somewhere in America. They will say it's necessary to expose Americans to all sexual cultures to end discrimination. Good God are you frighteningly naïve.

 

[Bfgrn]

First of all, it doesn't say SEXUAL ORIENTATION genius...

Second, that "law" violates the U.S. Constitution (and is thus null and void). The Supremacy Clause establishes the Constitution as the highest law in the land and it trumps any and all state and local laws.

now the dick weed thinks he's a constitutional lawyer

In other words, junior here had never heard of the Supremacy Clause before my post. Shocking that this illiterate buffoon has never read the document which affords him his right to be lazy, illiterate, and pop-off at the mouth from a place of ignorance...

The Supremacy Clause would mean that the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which is now FEDERAL law take precedence over state laws, and even state constitutions.

 

[P@triot]

Sorry dude, the government has zero authority to force private institutions to conduct business with anyone. It's a private business on private property and they have the right to refuse service to anyone. Period.

And that might cost them tons of business (to the point where they might have to close their business). That is the natural counter-balance and the beauty of the free market.

sorry DUUUUUUUDe, its a business that serves the public ... it's not a private business ... if you serve the public then you have to accept all of the public not just the public you like... thats the law... where you get this idea thats its a private business is beyond me ... you have no Idea what you are saying or talking about when it come to doing business with the public

When it comes to services; I think the conservatives have a point; when it comes to goods, they have no point. What if every pharmacy decided they wouldn't sell heart medicine to blacks? This is what the hateful conservatives see as a "tough shit" proposition.

However, when you are talking about services such as photography for a wedding or a sitting or someone to do write resumes or what have you, unless you have a contract and THEN decide you don't want to work with blacks, you should have a right to simply refuse to do business in my view. I mean, I may want Taylor Swift to play at my graduation party. If I came up with her asking price, would she be bound to play? I hope not.

And an exceptional point on Taylor Swift. In JoeB's view, Taylor Swift has a "contract with the public" and thus should be forced to play at your graduation party.

 

[Iceweasel]

When it comes to services; I think the conservatives have a point; when it comes to goods, they have no point. What if every pharmacy decided they wouldn't sell heart medicine to blacks? This is what the hateful conservatives see as a "tough shit" proposition.

I've never seen one make that point. But a pharmacy is in the medical field and they do have to abide by licensing restrictions and guidelines. I'm sure race is covered since ethnicities are all considered human.

However, when you are talking about services such as photography for a wedding or a sitting or someone to do write resumes or what have you, unless you have a contract and THEN decide you don't want to work with blacks, you should have a right to simply refuse to do business in my view. I mean, I may want Taylor Swift to play at my graduation party. If I came up with her asking price, would she be bound to play? I hope not.

If she and you had an agreement her ass better be there.

 

[P@triot]

now the dick weed thinks he's a constitutional lawyer

In other words, junior here had never heard of the Supremacy Clause before my post. Shocking that this illiterate buffoon has never read the document which affords him his right to be lazy, illiterate, and pop-off at the mouth from a place of ignorance...

The Supremacy Clause would mean that the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which is now FEDERAL law take precedence over state laws, and even state constitutions.

You're right. But the Constitution trumps federal law. You can't pass a federal law banning free speech because the Constitution trumps it.

 

[Freewill]

Sorry dude, the government has zero authority to force private institutions to conduct business with anyone. It's a private business on private property and they have the right to refuse service to anyone. Period.

And that might cost them tons of business (to the point where they might have to close their business). That is the natural counter-balance and the beauty of the free market.

sorry DUUUUUUUDe, its a business that serves the public ... it's not a private business ... if you serve the public then you have to accept all of the public not just the public you like... thats the law... where you get this idea thats its a private business is beyond me ... you have no Idea what you are saying or talking about when it come to doing business with the public

When it comes to services; I think the conservatives have a point; when it comes to goods, they have no point. What if every pharmacy decided they wouldn't sell heart medicine to blacks? This is what the hateful conservatives see as a "tough shit" proposition.

Not selling to blacks is against the law so that will not happen, you argue the absurd. You also diminish your point, if there was one, with your hate filled rhetoric, interestingly enough by saying someone else is hateful.

However, when you are talking about services such as photography for a wedding or a sitting or someone to do write resumes or what have you, unless you have a contract and THEN decide you don't want to work with blacks, you should have a right to simply refuse to do business in my view. I mean, I may want Taylor Swift to play at my graduation party. If I came up with her asking price, would she be bound to play? I hope not.

Discrimination because of RACE is against the law you can not do so, period. I think you, and others need to quit making that argument. But refusing services due to religious beliefs, or any beliefs really, is not. I should not be able to force my beliefs onto YOU any more so then you can force YOUR beliefs onto ME. That is the whole point of this thread, in my opinion.

 

[Freewill]

In other words no liberal is going to say you MUST let gays into your bedroom.

Really?!? What world do you live in?!? Liberals say the government should come into my home and steal my firearms. Liberals say that government should take my money and redistribute it to other people (ever hear of Communist Party U.S.A.?). Liberals say that eugenics should be legal. Hell, liberal asshat Elliot Rodger's insane manuscript just said that women should not be allowed to decide for themselves who they "mate" with.

These people are bat-shit crazy control freaks who have no morals. And you really think they wouldn't say I must allow gays into my house to have sex? How naïve are you exactly?!? I guarantee you some libtard is making that case right now somewhere in America. They will say it's necessary to expose Americans to all sexual cultures to end discrimination. Good God are you frighteningly naïve.

Has any liberal actually told you that you must allow gays into your bedroom?

 

[kaz]

I'm wondering if Rottie would be so understanding if someone said, "We don't serve Christians here."

I'd bet big money he'd support a private business's right to do that. Big money...

Liberals don't understand the concept of not being a hypocrite.

 

[Kondor3]

Didn't like the cake? I'll be happy to refund your money.

What? I used salt instead of sugar, when baking that cake? Whoops! My bad!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Whatever ever happened to the little sign… ‘We have a right to refuse service’?

Nothing.

Business owners are at liberty to refuse service to potential patrons provided those restrictions don’t violate Federal, state, or local public accommodations laws.

Services can be refused to someone not wearing shoes, for example, provided such a policy is applied to everyone equally.

In jurisdictions where prohibited, business owners may not refuse service to patrons because of race, religion, or sexual orientation; business owners do not have a ‘right’ to discriminate against gay patrons.

Public accommodations laws are Constitutional as authorized by the Commerce Clause (Heart of Atlanta Motel v. US (1964)), where government has a compelling interest to ensure the integrity of local markets and all other interrelated markets (Wickard v. Filburn (1942)).

Public accommodations laws have nothing to do with ‘liberals,’ just as it’s ignorant idiocy to reference ‘Nazis,’ where business owners are subject to all manner of necessary and proper regulatory measures, public accommodations laws among them.

That most conservatives seek to realize an America that endorses ignorance, hate, and intolerance is both sad and telling, as that is not the America intended by the Framers, and it is not the America in which Americans wish to live.

 

[P@triot]

In other words no liberal is going to say you MUST let gays into your bedroom.

Really?!? What world do you live in?!? Liberals say the government should come into my home and steal my firearms. Liberals say that government should take my money and redistribute it to other people (ever hear of Communist Party U.S.A.?). Liberals say that eugenics should be legal. Hell, liberal asshat Elliot Rodger's insane manuscript just said that women should not be allowed to decide for themselves who they "mate" with.

These people are bat-shit crazy control freaks who have no morals. And you really think they wouldn't say I must allow gays into my house to have sex? How naïve are you exactly?!? I guarantee you some libtard is making that case right now somewhere in America. They will say it's necessary to expose Americans to all sexual cultures to end discrimination. Good God are you frighteningly naïve.

Has any liberal actually told you that you must allow gays into your bedroom?

What an immature response. Because something didn't happen yesterday, it means it can't happen tomorrow in your mind?

Just because they haven't told me that yet doesn't mean they won't? Liberals don't drop bombshells for their bat-shit crazy agenda. They know it will blow up in their face. So they "nudge" until something has become the norm or acceptable. Then they "nudge" again for the next step.

Did you ever think a liberal would say that women shouldn't have the right to chose their own partners in bed? Well, Elliot Rodgers just did that.

If you had asked Abraham Lincoln if there would ever be a Communist Party U.S.A. in America, he would have laughed in your face. How funny is it now FW?

You're naïve beyond words...

 

[Freewill]

Quote: Originally Posted by JoeB131 View Post
I'm wondering if Rottie would be so understanding if someone said, "We don't serve Christians here."

I guarantee he would be just as understanding.

In my opinion he would denounce the person, refuse to do business with the person and tell his friends not to do business with them. But he would respect their right to their beliefs. He wouldn't try and get a law passed to stop the person from believing what they believe. But that is just my opinion.

 

[rightwinger]

Whatever ever happened to the little sign… ‘We have a right to refuse service’?


It was replaced with a sign that says "Shirts and Shoes required"

To keep out redneck conservatives

You are still a retarded liberal who has no brain, shut the hell up idiot.

You get turned away at a lot of restaurants don't ya?

 

[Freewill]

Really?!? What world do you live in?!? Liberals say the government should come into my home and steal my firearms. Liberals say that government should take my money and redistribute it to other people (ever hear of Communist Party U.S.A.?). Liberals say that eugenics should be legal. Hell, liberal asshat Elliot Rodger's insane manuscript just said that women should not be allowed to decide for themselves who they "mate" with.

These people are bat-shit crazy control freaks who have no morals. And you really think they wouldn't say I must allow gays into my house to have sex? How naïve are you exactly?!? I guarantee you some libtard is making that case right now somewhere in America. They will say it's necessary to expose Americans to all sexual cultures to end discrimination. Good God are you frighteningly naïve.

Has any liberal actually told you that you must allow gays into your bedroom?

What an immature response. Because something didn't happen yesterday, it means it can't happen tomorrow in your mind?

Just because they haven't told me that yet doesn't mean they won't? Liberals don't drop bombshells for their bat-shit crazy agenda. They know it will blow up in their face. So they "nudge" until something has become the norm or acceptable. Then they "nudge" again for the next step.

Did you ever think a liberal would say that women shouldn't have the right to chose their own partners in bed? Well, Elliot Rodgers just did that.

If you had asked Abraham Lincoln if there would ever be a Communist Party U.S.A. in America, he would have laughed in your face. How funny is it now FW?

You're naïve beyond words...

Sorry, friend, as I said you argue from the absurd which is OK with me. But saying that anyone is going to force you to let gays into your bedroom is true is absurd. After all that is the subject of the thread, not gun control and the other stuff.