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

[JakeStarkey]

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.

There are many more, unfortunately, than a few, and they are all Republicans.

And the Constitution rules, not "public tolerance."

 

[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.

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.

You must have been the prized student, at your Drama Queen school.

 

[Freewill]

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

I realize you know what you posted is not truth but for those who may not know the term you used appears in no legal documents that I can find. Especially the Sexual orientation part. Yes, that is what liberals would like people to believe that appears somewhere but it is just another of their revision of history, to be polite.

 

[Kondor3]

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.

There are many more, unfortunately, than a few, and they are all Republicans.

And the Constitution rules, not "public tolerance."

All it takes is a re-interpretation of the Constitution, in this narrow context.

Hell, it (such re-interpretations) have been done before, time and again.

Everything according to The Law.

Using The Law, to change The Law, or to change how The Law is interpreted.

That's the beauty of it.

 

[rightwinger]

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

I realize you know what you posted is not truth but for those who may not know the term you used appears in no legal documents that I can find. Especially the Sexual orientation part. Yes, that is what liberals would like people to believe that appears somewhere but it is just another of their revision of history, to be polite.

I am not a legal expert, but I do watch Judge Judy every day

That qualifies me to make legal pronouncements on Internet message boards

 

[Jroc]

Government run amok? How long before "Re-education Camps" open up for not conforming?


Baker forced to make gay wedding cakes, undergo sensitivity training, after losing lawsuit

Mental institutions for fundamentalist Christians and rightwing loons are not re education camps

Right wing loon? and who decides? Liberals just don't get it

Miami Dolphins safety Don Jones was fined an undisclosed amount Sunday and will undergo educational training after sending negative tweets about Michael Sam, the first openly gay player to be selected in the NFL draft.

NFL Player Fined After Posting Negative Tweets about Michael Sam ? But That?s Not All the Team Is Demanding | Video | TheBlaze.com

 

[P@triot]

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.

I guarantee you I would respect and defend their right to hate Christians. And then I would tell Christians that I know that they hate Christians so that those people could decide for themselves whether or not they want to do business with someone like that.

Freedom and choice....incomprehensible concepts to little Nazi liberals.

 

[P@triot]

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

Not according to your initial post. According to you - refusal is legal so long as their is a "little sign" (your words chief). I blinded them in red above. You keep contradicting your own position.

Furthermore, I will note your belief that poor children should die in the street because they can't afford shoes so that they can enter McDonald's.

Typical greedy/heartless liberal....

 

[P@triot]

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.

So you support child molestation then CCJ? If not, you are clearly "hateful", and "ignorant".

Oops....looks like the only hateful and ignorant one here is you...

 

[Mac1958]

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.

I guarantee you I would respect and defend their right to hate Christians. And then I would tell Christians that I know that they hate Christians so that those people could decide for themselves whether or not they want to do business with someone like that.

Freedom and choice....incomprehensible concepts to little Nazi liberals.

Amazing that you'd even need to say this.

But I'll guarantee you, it does not register with them.

.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

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.

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.

True.

It was liberals who extinguished the last manifestation of Jim Crow: segregation (Brown v. Board of Education (1954)), where conservatives fought to retain the heinous practice.

In fact, conservatives continued to fight in defense of segregation and discrimination throughout the 1950s and 1960s, where liberals successfully defeated their efforts in the courts. See, e.g., Cooper v. Aaron (1958), Heart of Atlanta Motel v, US (1964), Loving v. Virginia (1967).

And liberals today continue to fight against conservative efforts to deny gay Americans their civil liberties (Romer v. Evans (1996), Lawrence v. Texas (2003), US v. Windsor (2013)).

History teaches us that this is to be expected, of course, where reactionary conservatives are motivated by their unwarranted fear of change, diversity, and expressions of individual liberty.

 

[rightwinger]

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

Not according to your initial post. According to you - refusal is legal so long as their is a "little sign" (your words chief). I blinded them in red above. You keep contradicting your own position.

Furthermore, I will note your belief that poor children should die in the street because they can't afford shoes so that they can enter McDonald's.

Typical greedy/heartless liberal....

There is a difference in the eyes of the law

A person cannot help being black or gay. They are born that way. But Redneck Conservatives are that way by CHOICE. So "No Shirt, no Shoes, no Service" signs are a legal and effective way of keeping them out of your establishment
Besides, paying customers find it objectionable being forced to dine with them. You know how they are

 

[Moonglow]

What ever happened to the signs; No ******* allowed here, No Injuns served here, No women allowed??

 

[NYcarbineer]

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.

What part of the word 'anyone' don't you understand?

 

[P@triot]

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.

I guarantee you I would respect and defend their right to hate Christians. And then I would tell Christians that I know that they hate Christians so that those people could decide for themselves whether or not they want to do business with someone like that.

Freedom and choice....incomprehensible concepts to little Nazi liberals.

Amazing that you'd even need to say this.

But I'll guarantee you, it does not register with them.

The funny part is, I wouldn't even try to convince my Christian friends not to do business with the anti-Christian establishment. I would simply tell them so that they had the information and then they would be free to decide for themselves.

Meanwhile, a Dumbocrat would be losing their fucking minds trying to convince their friends and family to boycott the business. They have some sick form of inferiority complex which causes them to want to control everything and everyone.

 

[P@triot]

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

Not according to your initial post. According to you - refusal is legal so long as their is a "little sign" (your words chief). I blinded them in red above. You keep contradicting your own position.

Furthermore, I will note your belief that poor children should die in the street because they can't afford shoes so that they can enter McDonald's.

Typical greedy/heartless liberal....

There is a difference in the eyes of the law

A person cannot help being black or gay. They are born that way. But Redneck Conservatives are that way by CHOICE. So "No Shirt, no Shoes, no Service" signs are a legal and effective way of keeping them out of your establishment
Besides, paying customers find it objectionable being forced to dine with them. You know how they are

Dude, what are you talking about?!? There are tons of children out there who can't afford shoes. They can't help that. But you think they should be denied food and die in the streets?

You keep contradicting yourself. I feel sorry for you (when I'm not laughing at you )

 

[P@triot]

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?

Actually...yes

America was founded on the premise that you could chose for yourself how you wanted to live, what you wanted to believe, and what you wanted to pursue.

But I know that's completely incomprehensible for you. After all, if we're not all Nazi goose-stepping in matching uniforms, you'll have a stroke. The mere idea of independent thought is utterly horrifying to you, uh?

 

[kaz]

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.

You must have been the prized student, at your Drama Queen school.

Now that's funny, I repeated your post back to you and you saw it in the mirror but didn't recognize it was your own reflection.

Liberals, no one could make you people up. LOL.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Your religion is not a special privilege that exempts you from obeying the law.

 

[DiamondDave]

What ever happened to the signs; No ******* allowed here, No Injuns served here, No women allowed??

Those are behaviors?? No...

nice try