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

[Freewill]

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!

A Christian would not do that.

 

[rightwinger]

So if I walk in without a shirt and/or shoes, do you have the right to deny me service? Oops....hypocrite.

(Give a liberal 5 seconds and they will defeat their own argument every time)

Absolutely.......see how well those little signs work?

Just like those little......"No smoking permitted" and "Employees must wash hands" signs

Another ploy to keep out redneck conservatives

Well that's DISCRIMINATION winger....

First of all, those "little signs" say "we have the right to refuse service"

Second, what if I can't afford a shirt? What if I can't afford shoes? I shouldn't be allowed to eat? I should have to die because I can't afford the shoes to walk I to McDonald's for the substance to sustain life?

Once again RW - you contradict your own position.

You fail to understand the law

If your refusal to serve is based on race, color, sex, creed or sexual orientation you are breaking the law

But if your "shirts and shoes required" or "employee must wash hands" signs keep out a disproportionate number of redneck conservatives, it is too bad for them

 

[Freewill]

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?

I think liberals are safe unless a sign is posted: "No Sense, No Service."

 

[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!

A Christian would not do that.

That's OK.

The Homosexual Mafia is always throwing rocks at Christians anyway, saying how backwards and primitive and foolish their belief-system is, and what Neanderthals they are.

Salt-for-sugar falls under the category of mischief-making... a venial sin at best, rather than a mortal one...

With a finger alongside the nose, a wink and a nod... in a good cause.

 

[Bfgrn]

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.

Some on this board have made it perfectly clear...

Jesus used physical force and beat the crap out of people that offended him, would you prefer that approach?

No, we're defending THE RIGHT to discriminate.

 

[Kondor3]

Absolutely.......see how well those little signs work?

Just like those little......"No smoking permitted" and "Employees must wash hands" signs

Another ploy to keep out redneck conservatives

Well that's DISCRIMINATION winger....

First of all, those "little signs" say "we have the right to refuse service"

Second, what if I can't afford a shirt? What if I can't afford shoes? I shouldn't be allowed to eat? I should have to die because I can't afford the shoes to walk I to McDonald's for the substance to sustain life?

Once again RW - you contradict your own position.

You fail to understand the law

If your refusal to serve is based on race, color, sex, creed or sexual orientation you are breaking the law

But if your "shirts and shoes required" or "employee must wash hands" signs keep out a disproportionate number of redneck conservatives, it is too bad for them

All it takes is changing the law to strip-out the Sexual Orientation piece, and it's all Golden again.

This can be done through a judicial finding that homosexuality is perverse and unnatural and contrary to the best interests of the Nation and its People.

Once formally declared (or RE-established as) dangerous and offensive to the public morals and common decency, the legal basis materializes, for reversing various recent rulings and legislation.

A two- or three-hop sequence, at best, with everything else falling into place, if-and-when that first 'foundation-level' ruling can be accomplished.

A Conservative turn to the country's politics might very well accomplish such a thing.

The Homosexual Mafia has been changing and using The Law to get what they want.

Their opponents are entitled to do the same.

And, given the 'turn' in sympathies of the American Public in recent years, away from the Liberal Standard-Bearer - which translates into a turning away from Liberalism, after 6-8 exhausting and draining years and expensive, and many unhappy and unfortunate outcomes, it seems well within the realm of possibility, even probability - at least with respect to serious attempts to challenge what's been accomplished on behalf of the Homosexual Mafia in recent years.

And, if not, there are other ways to skin that cat, and those will firm-up, as time goes by.

Where there's a will, there's a way.

The 3% cannot continue to force their will against the 97% indefinitely.

It is un-sustainable, in the long term.

Even a sizable percentage of today's younger and straight Gay-supporters will flinch and begin to 'turn' when they have children of their own and decide that they do not want their beloved and precious children corrupted or polluted by such filth.

Time fixes everything.

 

[Freewill]

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.

Most conservatives want what they believe just as important as what liberals believe, like what each believe or not.

 

[Bfgrn]

Well that's DISCRIMINATION winger....

First of all, those "little signs" say "we have the right to refuse service"

Second, what if I can't afford a shirt? What if I can't afford shoes? I shouldn't be allowed to eat? I should have to die because I can't afford the shoes to walk I to McDonald's for the substance to sustain life?

Once again RW - you contradict your own position.

You fail to understand the law

If your refusal to serve is based on race, color, sex, creed or sexual orientation you are breaking the law

But if your "shirts and shoes required" or "employee must wash hands" signs keep out a disproportionate number of redneck conservatives, it is too bad for them

All it takes is changing the law to strip-out the Sexual Orientation piece, and it's all Golden again.

A Conservative turn to the country's politics might very well accomplish such a thing.

And, if not, there are other ways to skin that cat, and those will firm-up, as time goes by.

Where there's a will, there's a way.

The history of mankind has been a struggle between those who want to increase freedom, opportunity and rights to all people and those who want to restrict them. The people who have always fought to increase freedom, opportunity and rights are liberals. The people who have fought to restrict them are conservatives.

Your ignorance and bigotry will ultimately lose.

 

[Katzndogz]

The solution is very simple. Christian bakers should do what muslim bakers do. Stop making wedding cakes unless the person is known to them. If wedding cakes are not offered to the general public as a service, gays will not be able to say they are victims of discrimination.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Rottweiler reveals his constitutional illiteracy with Whatever ever happened to the little sign… ‘We have a right to refuse service’?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The solution is very simple. Christian bakers should do what muslim bakers do. Stop making wedding cakes unless the person is known to them. If wedding cakes are not offered to the general public as a service, gays will not be able to say they are victims of discrimination.

The problem is that there are those so ignorant and hateful that they feel the need to go to such lengths to discriminate.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The solution is very simple. Christian bakers should do what muslim bakers do. Stop making wedding cakes unless the person is known to them. If wedding cakes are not offered to the general public as a service, gays will not be able to say they are victims of discrimination.

Or you could stay in the wedding cake business by just growing the fuck up and baking the stupid cake. That's always an option.

 

[Kondor3]

You fail to understand the law

If your refusal to serve is based on race, color, sex, creed or sexual orientation you are breaking the law

But if your "shirts and shoes required" or "employee must wash hands" signs keep out a disproportionate number of redneck conservatives, it is too bad for them

All it takes is changing the law to strip-out the Sexual Orientation piece, and it's all Golden again.

A Conservative turn to the country's politics might very well accomplish such a thing.

And, if not, there are other ways to skin that cat, and those will firm-up, as time goes by.

Where there's a will, there's a way.

The history of mankind has been a struggle between those who want to increase freedom, opportunity and rights to all people and those who want to restrict them. The people who have always fought to increase freedom, opportunity and rights are liberals. The people who have fought to restrict them are conservatives.

Your ignorance and bigotry will ultimately lose.

Classic Liberal Counterpointing...

Publicly oppose their particular brand of Social Engineering, and be labeled as Ignorant and Bigoted...

Your concerns are noted...

I will not, however, engage in name-calling against you, despite your deserving it, for having initiated a personal attack.

Those who oppose the Homosexual Mafia must have the courage to take those brickbats, sift them for merit or lack thereof, and press forward, with confidence and sense of mission and purpose.

Most Americans are all for continued vigilance and expansion of liberties, insofar as these may be practicable and in the best interests of The People and The Nation.

It's just that a great many Americans do not believe that recent pro-Homosexual legislation and rulings meet the criteria of being in the best interests of The People and The Nation.

Your kind of change is not an increase in freedom.

Other than increasing freedom to publicly manifest contemptible, unclean, corrupt, unnatural, perverse sexual practices, and related lifestyle and behavioral oddities.

You have always been free to be a pervert.

What has changed is that that perversion is now publicly tolerated.

That may yet change once again.

And, in order to accomplish that goal, considerable learning, logic and imagination will be required, in order to set aside a fait accompli.

Which is all a far cry from a state of ignorance.

But you go right on believing it.

That sort of arrogance and complacency will make the legal take-down all the easier and all the more deliciously enjoyable, if-and-when the time comes, after January 20, 2017.

 

[bodecea]

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

A Christian would not do that.

That's OK.

The Homosexual Mafia is always throwing rocks at Christians anyway, saying how backwards and primitive and foolish their belief-system is, and what Neanderthals they are.

Salt-for-sugar falls under the category of mischief-making... a venial sin at best, rather than a mortal one...

With a finger alongside the nose, a wink and a nod... in a good cause.

For your kind of christian, of course it is.

 

[NYcarbineer]

While we're on the subject, whatever happened to Jim Crow?

Republicans got that abolished a long time ago.

Liberal Republicans. Conservatives are still fighting to bring it back, as is evidenced by this thread.

 

[Kondor3]

While we're on the subject, whatever happened to Jim Crow?

Republicans got that abolished a long time ago.

Liberal Republicans. Conservatives are still fighting to bring it back, as is evidenced by this thread.

Nonsense.

You will find very few people who identify as Republicans, as being in favor of discrimination on the basis of skin color.

You will, however, find a great many people, who identify as Republicans, and Independents, and even Democrats, who are not in favor of public tolerance for sexual perverts.

Big difference.

 

[auditor0007]

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

Of course businesses should not be forced to serve black people, gays, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, or anyone who doesn't have a full set of teeth. They should be permitted to post a sign stating that they only serve white bigoted Christians. Honestly, it is every American's right to discriminate against anyone they do not like or want to be associated with. This is what America was founded on, right?

 

[kaz]

Republicans got that abolished a long time ago.

Liberal Republicans. Conservatives are still fighting to bring it back, as is evidenced by this thread.

Nonsense.

You will find very few people who identify as Republicans, as being in favor of discrimination on the basis of skin color.

You will, however, find a great many people, who identify as Republicans, and Independents, and even Democrats, who are not in favor of public tolerance for sexual perverts.

Big difference.

LOL, once again, liberals demonstrate they can't grasp the difference between what a private business does and government laws, like Jim Crow.

 

[kaz]

The solution is very simple. Christian bakers should do what muslim bakers do. Stop making wedding cakes unless the person is known to them. If wedding cakes are not offered to the general public as a service, gays will not be able to say they are victims of discrimination.

Or you could stay in the wedding cake business by just growing the fuck up and baking the stupid cake. That's always an option.

Or you could grow the fuck up and go to a baker who wants to bake the cake you want to buy instead of running to government to use guns to force people to do your bidding.

 

[Freewill]

While we're on the subject, whatever happened to Jim Crow?

Republicans got that abolished a long time ago.

Liberal Republicans. Conservatives are still fighting to bring it back, as is evidenced by this thread.

Liberal Republicans, not in the dictionary.

BTW, you do understand that Jim Crow was instituted by liberal democrats and effect blacks? It had nothing to do with gays. Unless you are doing what liberals do and equating the two.